Locus of Control and Human Sexuality Education

Abstract

In a review of the research on the dimension Locus-of-Control, Phares (3) concluded that internal subjects are superior to external subjects in efforts to gain control over their environment. Similarly, MacDonald ( 2 ) reported that among sexually active female college students, 62% of the internal subjects utilized some form of contraceptive method compared with 37% of the external subjects. One of the tenets of Health Education is that through education for personal health one becomes motivated toward assuming responsibility for personal health. This should apply to courses on human sexuality within Health Education curricula Taking such a course would be expected to promote a shift in students' locus-of-control toward greater internality. This paper repons results of such an exploratory investigation, based on students who were enrolled in an undergraduate course in human sexuality. Students (N = 50) , enrolled in the 15-wk. course as a general education elective, represented a cross section of major fields of undergraduate concentration at the University. The course is designed to introduce students to fundamental concepts concerning sexual behavior in modern society. Ethical issues and personal decision-making skills are emphasized. To control for evolution of locus-of-control over time, 25 students not enrolled in a human sexuality course were randomly selected as a comparison group ( 4 ) . Locus-of-control was measured on Levenson's scale ( 1 ) . All the students completed the instrument during the first week of classes and again during Week 14. At the pretest the mean scores and SDs for the subjects in the sexualicy course were -10.6, 5.5; 6.02, 6.7; and 6.22, 6.7; for the Internal, Powerful Others, and Chance parameters, respectively. Pretest mean scores and SDs for the comparison group were -10.0, 5.0; 6.30, 6.7; and 6.50, 6.7, respectively. At Week 14 the means and SDs for the sexuality course were -12.32, 5.1; 3.98, 6.7; and 5.48, 7.0, while the comparison group's scores were -9.50, 5.0; 5.30, 6.7; and 6.0, 6.9. At the pretest, z for the differences between the sexuality classes and comparison group were -.43, -.17, and -.I7 for the Internal, Powerful Others, and Chance parameters, respectively. None of these values of z are statistically significant ( p = .05). At the posttest, the zs were -2.24, -.79, and -3.0, respectively. The Internal dimension z was statistically significant ( p < .05) and represents a change toward greater internality. At the end of the term, then, students in the course on sexuality differed from the comparison group in one aspect of their locus-of-control orientation. The shifts toward greater internality may indicate that the course does in fact influence students toward reporting greater control over their sexual behavior. However, the stability of this phenomenon in this and other areas should be assessed. It is not known whether the shifts reflect the process of Ode-mystification of sexual response, the instructional method which emphasized ethics and decision-making, or something else. The primary unresolved issue, however, is whether shifts in locus-of-control are related to subsequent sexual behavior. Replication of this study and further investigation are needed.