This paper presents a critique of the following article:
Chapman, M., Skinner, E.A. & Bates, P.B. (1990).Interpreting correlations between children's perceived control and cognitive performance: Control, agency, or means-end beliefs? Developmental Psychology, 26(2), 246-253.
The components of the theory (an alternative theoretical explanation for existing research's repeated findings of correlations between locus of control measures and cognitive performance) is well explained provided the reader is already somewhat knowledgeable about locus of control theory. The authors seem to recognize this fact and in their delineation of problematic aspects of locus of control theory (as well as their proposed alternative view) they repeatedly refer the reader to citations providing fuller explanations of various concepts and constructs.
Since the article is in a professional journal, this reference to citations may be sufficient explanation for the various professionals reading the journal. However, if more background information was provided about locus of control, it would have been easier to follow the authors' logic and rationale for conducting the study.
In addition to delineating their theoretical views, the authors backed up both their criticisms of locus of control theory and their proposed alternatives with a wealth of citations of existing research supportive of their claims. This added power to their introductory section and gave the impression that the alternative view was well grounded in existing empirical research. However, in order to really determine whether claims were grounded, it would be necessary to read the cited articles.
The authors measured cognitive performance and perceived control (as conceptualized by their alternative theory which replaced the locus of control concept with a set of three beliefs said to underlie locus of control phenomena, namely beliefs related to control perceptions).
Cog...