Nature Of Control And Its Effects On The Way Individuals...

Research has shown that there is significant variability in the way individuals perceive and interpret events. Frequently, individuals encounter and are exposed to situations in their environment where causation tends to be subjectively inferred. Due to these instances where one is able to nonchalantly assume the causality between certain events or situations that occur, gives rise to the phenomenon of illusory control. Langer (1975) introduced the concept ‘illusion of control’ as the expectancy of a personal success probability which is inappropriately higher than the objective probability would warrant. Even though the objective odds are evident, the remaining subjective expectation of success is thought to be dependent on factors†¦show more content†¦Previous research has suggested that there are certain individuals who are more prone to an illusion of control than others (e.g. Alloy Abramson, 1979; Biner et al., 1995; Delfabbro LeCouteur, 2009; Friedland e t al., 1991; Langer, 1975; Rudski, 2004). Rotter (1966) proposed that ones’ locus of control, which refers to an individual’s generalised expectancy of success based on their previous experience, will influence ones predisposition to illusory control. However, the issue with this notion is the reliance on multiple forms of perception at once, and it is likely individuals will differ in these each of these aspects (e.g. personal, social and political beliefs). Therefore, to understand and measure how beliefs about events occur in the world while considering these differences, application of scales measuring principles like superstitions (Matute, 1995; Wiseman Watt, 2004), paranormal beliefs (Peters et al. 1999) luck, chance and how these might impact activities like gambling (Friedland et al., 1991; Wood Clapham 2005), will be valuable. Studies have shown that those more likely to develop an illusion of control are correlated with their desire for control (Biner et al. 1995), superstitious or paranormal beliefs (Rudski 2004) as well as their delusory beliefs (Balzan et al. 2013). Therefore, it is evident that certain individuals appear more inclined to make connections from