Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-jbqgn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-22T12:23:06.820Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Measuring the Desire for Control: a Spanish Version of Burger and Cooper's Scale

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 January 2013

Jesús María De Miguel Calvo ,
Noemy Martín Sanz ,
Iván Sánchez-Iglesias  and
Miguel Ángel Ruiz Díaz
Jesús María De Miguel Calvo*
Affiliation:
Universidad Autónoma de Madrid (Spain)
Noemy Martín Sanz
Affiliation:
Universidad Autónoma de Madrid (Spain)
Iván Sánchez-Iglesias
Affiliation:
Universidad Complutense (Spain)
Miguel Ángel Ruiz Díaz
Affiliation:
Universidad Autónoma de Madrid (Spain)
*
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Jesús María de Miguel Calvo. Departamento de Psicología Social y Metodología, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid. C/ Ivan P. Pavlov, 6. 28049-Madrid (Spain). Phone +34-914973260. Fax: +34-914975215. E-mail: jesus.demiguel@uam.es
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The following study will present findings on the validity of the adaptation of the Burger and Cooper's Desirability of Control Scale into Spanish. Two samples are present: the first involving 1,999 people to study their psychometric properties. In the second sample, 111 people were included to estimate test/ retest reliability. Cultural adaptation was performed using the translation & back-translation method. Item analysis, internal consistency and test/re-test reliability were assessed, then evidence of the validity of the internal structure was determined by using exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis. Subject recruitment was performed to gather the 1,999 subjects stratified by age, gender quotas as designed in the sampling plan. Of the subjects, 51% were female, average age of 45 years old (SD = 17.5). All items from the original scale were understood correctly, while five items presented ceiling effect. Cronbach's alpha = .736 and a test-retest correlation r = .713 were obtained. The factor structure indicated the presence of four dimensions: forecast, autonomy, power and influence and reactance which were reassured in the confirmatory analysis (x2/df = 4.805, CFI =.932, TLI =.954, RMSEA = .062). The basic dimensions of the scale have shown to be stable and well-defined, though not perfect. The scope, possible applications of the scale and further research are later proposed and discussed.

Se presenta la adaptación y validación al español de la Escala de Deseo de Control de Burger y Cooper. Se emplearon dos muestras. Para estudiar las propiedades psicométricas de la escala se contó con una primera muestra de 1999 (Medad = 45 años, DS = 17,5; 51% mujeres). Para estimar la fiabilidad test-retest se contó con una segunda muestra de 111 personas. La adaptación cultural se llevó a cabo mediante el procedimiento de traducción–retrotraducción. Se presentan las evidencias de validez de la estructura interna de la escala mediante los resultados de sendos análisis factoriales, exploratorio y confirmatorio. El análisis de ítems reveló que todos los elementos presentaron unos valores aceptables, aunque cinco de ellos mostraron efecto techo. El Alfa de Cronbach fue de .736 y la Fiabilidad test-retest fue de .713. La estructura factorial indicó la presencia de cuatro dimensiones: previsión, autonomía, poder e influencia y reactancia. La estructura fue corroborada en el análisis confirmatorio (x2/df = 4.805, CFI = .932, TLI = .954, RMSEA = .062). Las dimensiones de la escala son estables y específicas, aunque no perfectas. Se discute el alcance y posibles aplicaciones de la escala y se proponen futuras investigaciones.

Keywords

desire for controladaptationreliabilityvaliditydeseo de controladaptaciónfiabilidadvalidez
Type
Research Article
Information
The Spanish Journal of Psychology , Volume 15 , Issue 3 , November 2012 , pp. 1432 - 1440
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2012

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aarnio, K., & Lindeman, M. (2004). Magical food and health beliefs: A portrait of believers and functions of the beliefs. Appetite, 43, 65–74. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016%2Fj.appet.2004.03.002CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Abad, F., Olea, J., Ponsoda, V., & García, C. (2011). Medición en ciencias sociales y de la salud [Assesment in social and health sciencies]. Madrid, Spain: Editorial Síntesis.Google Scholar
Abdullatif, H., & Hamadah, L. (2005). The factor structure of the desirability of control scale among Kuwaiti subjects. Social behavior and personality, 33, 307–312. http://dx.doi.org/10.2224/sbp.2005.33.3.307Google Scholar
Alain, M. (1989). Traduction fracaise de léchelle de désir de controle [French translation of desire for control scale]. (Unpublished document). Montreal, Canada: Universite du Quebec a Trois-Rivieres.Google Scholar
Bauman, Z. (2007). Tiempos líquidos [Liquid times]. Barcelona, Spain: Tusquets.Google Scholar
Burger, J. M., & Cooper, H. M. (1979). The desirability of control. Motivation and Emotion, 3, 381–393. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00994052Google Scholar
Burger, J. M. (2009). Replicating Milgram: Would people still obey today? American Psychologist, 64, 1–11. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0010932CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Braukman, W. (1981). Darstellung eines Bezugsrahmens zum Konzept der Kontollmotivation und Entwicklung einer deutschsprachigen Version der “Desire of control scale” von Burger and Cooper [Representation of a framework for the concept of Control motivation and development of a German version of “Desire for Control Scale” of Burger and Cooper.]. Forschungsbericht Projekt Entwicklungspsychologie des Erwachsenenalters, 12. Trier, Germany: Universität TrierGoogle Scholar
Brehm, J. W. (1966). A Theory of Psychological Reactance. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In Bollen, K. A. & Long, J. S. (Eds.), Testing structural equation models. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Campbell, J. P., Dunnette, M., Lawler, E., & Weick, K. Jr. (1970). Managerial behavior, performance and effectiveness. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Carmines, E. G., & McIver, J. P. (1981). Analyzing models with unobserved variables. In Bohrnstedt, G. & Borgatta, E. F. (Eds.), Social measurement: Current issues. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Chang, P. Y. (1997). Dependability of anchoring labels of Likert-type scales. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 57, 800–807. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0013164497057005005Google Scholar
Chau, P. Y. (1997). Reexamining a model for evaluating information center success using a structural equation modeling approach. Decision Sciences, 28, 309–334. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5915.1997.tb01313.xGoogle Scholar
Dantzer, R. (2004). Previsión [Forecast]. In Doron, R. & Parot, F.. (Dir.), Diccionario Akal de Psicología [Akal's dictionary of Psychology]. Madrid, Spain: Akal.Google Scholar
De Miguel, J. (1999). Autonomía [Autonomy]. In Fernández-Ríos, M. (Dir.), Diccionario de recursos humanos. Organización y dirección [Dictionary of human resources. Organization and direction]. Madrid, Spain: Díaz de Santos.Google Scholar
Egrigozlu, E. (2002). Hemsirelerde is kontrolü, kontrol istegi ile tükenmislik ve fiziksel saglik arasindaki iliskiler [Nurses is control, control with the request of the relationship between burnout and physical health.]. Yayinlanmamis Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Ankara: Hacettepe Üniversitesi, Psikoloji Bölümü.Google Scholar
Green, T., Gidron, Y., Frige, M., & Almog, Y. (2005). Relative-assessed psychological factors predict sedation requirement in critically ill patients. Psychosomatic Medicine, 67, 295–300. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/01.psy.0000156928.12980.99Google Scholar
Gebhart, W. A., & Brosschot, J. F (2002). Desirability of control: Psychometric properties and relationships with locus of control, personality, coping, and mental and somatic complaints in three Dutch samples. European journal of personality, 16, 423–438. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/per.463CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hamadah, N. L., & Abdullatif, I. H. (2000). Psychological hardiness and the desirability of control for college students. Derasat afseyah, 12, 229–272.Google Scholar
Hambleton, R. K., Merenda, P., & Spielberger, C. (2005). Adapting educational and pscyhological test for cross-cultural assesment. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence S. Erlbaum Publishers.Google Scholar
Heft, L., Thoresen, C., Kirmil-Gray, K., Wiedenfeld, S. Eagleston, J., Bracke, P., & Arnow, B. (1988) Emotional and temperamental correlates of type A in children and adolescents. Journal of youth and adolescence, 17, 461–475. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF01537825Google Scholar
Karasek, R. (1979). Job demands, job decision latitude and mental strain: Implications for job redesign. Administrative Science Quarterly, 24, 285–306. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2392498Google Scholar
Lancaster, H. O., & Hamdan, M. A. (1964). Estimation of the correlation coefficient in contingency charts with possibly nonmetrical characters. Psychometrika, 29, 383–391. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02289604Google Scholar
Langer, E. J. (1983). The Psychology of Control. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Logan, H. L., Baron, R. S., Keeley, K., Law, A., & Stein, S. (1991). Desired and felt control as mediators of stress in a dental setting. Health psychology, 10, 352–359. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0278-6133.10.5.352Google Scholar
Mayer, J. D., Faber, M. A., & Xu, X. (2007). Seventy-five years of motivation measures (1930–2005): A descriptive analysis. Motivation and Emotion, 31, 83–103. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11031-007-9060-2Google Scholar
McCutcheon, L. E. (2000). The desirability of control scale: Still reliable and valid twenty years later. Current research in social psychology, 5, 225–235.Google Scholar
Merluzzi, T. V., & Martínez, M. A. (1997). Perceptions of coping behaviors by persons with cancer and health care provides. Psycho–Oncology, 6, 197–203. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-1611(199709)6:3<197::AID-PON270>3.3.CO;2-JGoogle Scholar
Michener, H. A., & Suchner, R. (1972). Tactical use of social power. In Tedeschi, J. (Ed.), The Social influence processes. Chicago, IL: Aldine.Google Scholar
Miller, S. M., Combs, C., & Stoddard, E. (1989). Information, coping and control in patients undergoing surgery and stressful medical procedures. In Steptoe, A. & Appels, A. (Eds.), Stress, personal control and health. New York, NY: Wiley.Google Scholar
Moulding, R., Kyrios, M., Doron, G., & Nedeljkovic, M. (2009). Mediated and direct effects of general control beliefs on obsessive compulsive symptoms. Canadian Journal of Behavioral Science, 41, 84–92. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0014840Google Scholar
Muthén, B. O. (2007). Mplus. Statistical Analysis With Latent Variables. [Software]. Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.Google Scholar
Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (2007). Mplus User's Guide. 5th Ed. Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.Google Scholar
Myers, D. (2000). Psicología social 6ª Ed. [Social Psychology. 6th Ed.]. Bogotá, Colombia: McGrawHill.Google Scholar
Nunnally, J. C. (1981). Psychometric theory. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
O'Connor, B. P. (2000). SPSS and SAS programs for determining the number of components using parallel analysis and Velicer's MAP test. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 32, 396–402. http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/BF03200807Google Scholar
Ogle, R., & Clements, C. (2007). A comparison of batterers to nonbatterers on behavioral and self-reports measures of control. Journal and applied social psychology, 37, 2688–2705. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2007.00276.xGoogle Scholar
Olsson, U. (1979). Maximum likelihood estimation of the polychoric correlation coefficient. Psychometrika, 44, 443–460. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02296207Google Scholar
Pardo, A., & San Martín, R. (2001). Análisis de datos en psicología II [Data analysis in Psychology II]. Madrid, Spain: Pirámide.Google Scholar
Parker, S., Jimmieson, N., & Amiot, C. (2009). The Stress-buffering effects of control on task satisfaction and perceived goal attainment: An experimental study of the moderating influence of desirability of control. Applied psychology, 58, 622–652. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-0597.2008.00367.xGoogle Scholar
Pierro, A., Lavinia, C., & Raven, B. (2008). Motivated compliance with bases of social power. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 38, 1921–1944. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2008.00374.xGoogle Scholar
Rodin, J. (1986). Aging and health: Effects of the sense of control. Science, 233, 1271–1276. http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.3749877Google Scholar
Ruiz, M. A. (2000). Introducción a los modelos de ecuaciones estructurales [Introduction to structural equation models]. Madrid, Spain: UNED Ediciones.Google Scholar
Schreiber, J. B., Nora, A., Stage, F. K., Barlow, E. A., & King, J. (2006). Reporting structural equation modeling and confirmatory factor analysis results: A review. The Journal of Educational Research, 99, 323–338. http://dx.doi.org/10.3200/JOER.99.6.323-338Google Scholar
Skinner, E. A. (1996). A guide to constructs of control. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 549–570. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.71.3.549Google Scholar
Smith, R. A., Wallston, B. S., Wallston, K. A., Forsberg, P. R., & King, J. E. (1984). Measuring desire of control of health care processes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47, 415–426. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.47.2.415Google Scholar
Wise, S. L., Roos, L. L., Leland, V. L., Oats, R. G., & McCrann, T. O. (1996). The development and validation of a scale measuring desirability of control on examinations. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 56, 710–718. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0013164496056004012Google Scholar
Woodward, N. J., & Wallston, B. S. (1987). Age and health care beliefs: Self-efficacy as a mediator of low desirability of control. Psychology and Aging, 2, 3–8. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0882-7974.2.1.3Google Scholar