The Mediating Role of Perceived Social Support in the Relationships Between General Causality Orientations and Locus of Control With Psychopathological Symptoms

Causality orientations, as proposed in Self Determination Theory (SDT), differ from Rotter’s locus of control in respect to their emphasis on the causality of behaviors. Locus of control, which was proposed by Rotter (1966) and implemented in social learning models, is one of the prominent concepts in understanding the cognitive processes of behavior (Rotter, 1966; Skinner, 1996). According to the locus of control concept, individuals are motivated to behave in a specific pattern when they feel that pattern of behaviors will be subsequently reinforced. When these individuals acknowledge the positive or negative outcomes of self-behaviors, they tend to expect similar outcomes from similar behaviors in advance, and so these behaviors become generalized. Consequently, individuals might gain a set of expectations (belief systems) about the origin of reinforcements, which are either dependent solely on themselves or are external in origin, such as chance, fate, or other external forces. While the first situation is considered as an internal locus of control, the second situation is taken considered as representing an external locus of control.

As the appearance of locus of control coincides with self-determination theory, Heider (1958) and deCharms (1968) described the source of behaviors’ as being internal, external, and impersonal. In the following years, Deci and Ryan (1985) studied these terms along with causality orientations, describing them as autonomous, control, and impersonal, respectively. General causality orientations are considered as a set of concepts accounting not only internal processes, but also external processes and motivational states. Individuals who follow autonomous orientations initiate or modify their behavior according to their own motives and objectives. These individuals behave through their own choice and tend to acknowledge the origin of their behaviors as the self. The control orientation can be initiated or modified, externally like awarding or internally as “I should do” or “this should be done”. While these individuals seek to find external control, they also acknowledge their surrounding environment as controlling. Conversely, in impersonal orientations, initiation and modification of behaviors are under the control of another individual. These individuals do not possess a set of beliefs allowing them to think that they can accomplish objectives and goals by themselves; their behaviors are defined as non-motivated and non-determined (Deci & Ryan, 1985).

It is important to point out the distinction between the causality orientations of self-determination theory and the locus of control concept proposed by Rotter (1966). According to locus of control, the source of behavior is dependent on the pattern of reinforcement (Rotter, 1966, 1975, 1990). On the other hand, deCharms (1968) proposed that either the source is internal cognitive processes and personal choices, or external pressure or force are the determining factors. In short, while Rotter (1966) focused on the outcome of behavior deCharms pointed out the importance of priming factors on behaviors. There are several publications in the literature about the importance of locus of control within psychopathologies (Baydoğan & Dağ, 2008; Cheng et al., 2013; Dağ, 1992; Gülüm & Dağ, 2014). However, there are few studies about the priming factors of behavior and their relation to psychological symptoms (Brockelman, 2009; McGregor, McAdams, & Little, 2006). Studying the origin of behaviors through a combination of both viewpoints (locus of control and causality orientations) which provide different explanations is very important in broadening current understanding and increasing clarification.

Several important studies point out the importance of the genotype-environment relationship with respect to psychological symptoms. Despite similar environments, behaviors have been shown to vary greatly among individuals. As the behavioral tendencies and motivational states of individuals who experience similar environments cannot be assessed without an internal and external concept of control (Deci & Ryan, 1985, 2000; McAdams & Olson, 2010; Pelletier et al., 1999; Ryan, Deci, & Grolnick, 1995), the environmental impacts on psychological symptoms, such as positive and negative social support, cannot be separated from the personal concept of control, or motivational states (Deci & Ryan, 1985; Yıldırım, 2004a). In this respect, we have acknowledged social support as variable in order to understand the perception of environment in our study.

One purpose of every society is to convey its thought system and values to young people (Yörükoğlu, 1992). Although the expected behavior patterns of young people are evident in every culture, these expectations may differ due to differences between each culture (Akbağ, Sayıner, & Sözen, 2005). The young people involved in our study are thought to be shaped by their culture, and their perceptions of themselves and their environment are shaped the societal expectations that they grew up with and the environment in which they current live. In this sense, Turkey has a rich cultural structure in terms of shaping young people’s perception of social support. Procidano and Heller (1983) defined social support as an individual’s own subjective judgment about whether they have enough social support to function. Social support has been studied extensively from different perspectives (Caplan, 1973; Lewin, 1951). In following studies, psychological symptoms and well-being have been investigated with regard to social support, and social support has been found to significantly decrease psychological symptoms (Wight et al., 2006; Yıldırım, 2004a). Self Determination Theory also proposes that with social support, personal well-being is expected to improve (Deci & Ryan, 1985). However, the tendency to show psychological symptoms in individuals with different personalities has not been studied so far in respect to role of social support. Within this framework, the perception of social support is going to be studied in relation to psychological symptoms with general causality orientations and locus of control. Until now, discussion of the distinctions and similarities between general causality orientations and locus of control has been very limited in the literature. In this study, while the distinction between causality orientations and locus of control has been emphasized, the relationship of these concepts with psychological symptoms is going to be investigated, with social support as a mediating factor. Moreover, clarification of the role of social support — acknowledged as external factor — is thought to be an important mediator between the tendency for psychological symptoms with locus of control and general causality orientations in which motivational state and internal/external control which lie in the base of both locus of control and causality orientations.

Turkey is known as comprising both Western (personal) and Eastern (community) psycho-cultural values (Kağıtçıbaşı, 2005; Sayın, 1987). Owing to the socio-cultural diversity of Turkey, getting data from different region of the country will provide breadth of understanding in cultural aspect. The period of adolescence is the period when the perception of social support goes from family to friend. It is important for the adolescents to support from both family and friends in Turkish culture (Yörükoğlu, 1992). For this reason, our study has been conducted with participants who have were bachelor students with an age range of 17 to 37 in order to best observe the effect of social support. In this study, participants are assessed for emerging psychological symptoms along with general causality orientations and locus of control, with social support being a partial mediator. In order to expand the scope of study and investigate different cultural backgrounds, students from 10 different Turkish Universities have been incorporated into the study.

Methods

Results

Firstly, the data was examined to check the basic assumptions of multivariate statistics, namely: normality, linearity, and homogeneity of variance. Once these assumptions had been verified, data analysis progressed to the next stage. Descriptive statistics for male and female subscale, PSSS, LOCS, and GCOS are shown in Table 2.

Otherwise, the correlations for general causality orientations, locus of control, perceived social support, depressive symptoms, psychological symptoms, and obsessive-compulsive symptoms are presented in Table 3.

In the first model based on GCOS, three indicator variables (autonomous, control and impersonal orientation) were constructed using the parcel method based on exploratory factor analysis to show the latent variable (see Hall et al., 1999 for more information on the parcel method). In the second model on which the locus of control is based, two indicator variables (internal and external locus of control) were constructed using the parcel method based on exploratory factor analysis to illustrate latent variables. Analyzes were made using the maximum likelihood method and based on the model testing. When assessing compliance indices, it was used in the compilation of Hooper, Coughlan, and Mullen (2008). Analyzes were made using structural equation models.

Baron and Kenny (1986) proposed a set of concept to be examined for analysis of mediating role; which was used to investigate the mediating role of perceived social support in the relationship between locus of control and general causality orientations with psychological symptoms. Baron and Kenny (1986) laid out 4 step requirements that must be met to form a true mediation relationship. Accordingly, whether a variable act as a mediator variable depends on whether it encounters a four-digit list of criteria. A number of regression analysis and Sobel tests are required to test these criteria. Using this method, path analysis was conducted to ascertain the mediating role of perceived social support in the relationship between locus of control and general causality orientations with psychological symptoms (Depressive symptoms, OCD symptomology, and general psychological symptoms). Detailed information of the analysis can be seen in Table 4, Results of the analysis for male and female can also be seen in Table 5.

According to the analysis, the measurement model was found to have adequate fit indices, resulting in no need for correction. In this case, the identical structural model and measurement overlap. In relation to the tested structural models, the relationships between locus of control and overall psychological symptoms, OCD symptomology, and depressive symptoms were tested with AMOS 23, and the explained variance values are shown in Figure 1. When the model solely was tested for females, a fit index (χ²(27, N = 558) = 569.059, p < .001, GFI = 0.94, AGFI = 0.93, NFI = 0.90, CFI = 0.92, RMSA = 0.066). The tested structural model’s relationship in terms of locus of control for males is shown in Figure 1. When the model alone is tested, it was found to have a fit index (χ²(64, N = 192) = 325.667, p < .001, GFI = 0.97, AGFI = 0.94, NFI = 0.84, CFI = 0.91, RMSA = 0.071) for psychological symptoms (Depressive symptoms, OCD symptomology, and general psychological symptoms). Fit indices of the measurement model for locus of control and psychological symptoms (Depressive symptoms, OCD symptomology, and general causality orientations) are shown in Table 6, for females and males separately.

According to the tested structural models, the relationships between general causality orientations and overall psychological symptoms, OCD symptomology, and Depressive symptoms were tested with AMOS 23 and the explained variance values shown in Figure 2. When the model alone is tested, it was found to have a fit index (χ²(27, N = 558) = 469.987, p < .001, GFI = 0.96, AGFI = 0.93, NFI = 0.91, FCI = 0.94, RMSA = 0.069). The tested structural model’s relationships between general causality orientations and overall psychological symptoms, OCD symptomology, and depressive symptoms were tested with AMOS 23 and the explained variance values for males are shown in Figure 2. When the model is examined in relation to psychological symptoms, it was found to have a fit index (χ² = 80.325, SD = 33, p < .001). Given the significant value (χ²(30, N = 192) = 469,987, p < .001, GFI = 0.97, AGFI = 0.94, NFI = 0.92, FCI = 0.94, RMSA = 0.078). Fit indices of the measurement model for general causality orientations and psychological symptoms (Depressive symptoms, OCD symptomology, and general causality orientations) are shown in Table 6 for females and males separately.

According to our results, when perceived social support from family has a partial mediating role in the relationship between autonomous orientation, impersonal orientation, and psychological symptoms (general psychological symptoms, OCD symptomology, and depressive symptoms), control orientations do not play a significant role in any psychological symptoms. The variance explained by the mediating role of perceived social support from family ranges from 10% to 15% When perceived social support from friends has a partial mediating role in the relationship between autonomous orientation, impersonal orientation, and psychological symptoms (general psychological symptoms, OCD symptomology and depressive symptoms), the variance explained by the mediating role of perceived social support from friends ranges from 3% to 18%. However, while perceived social support from friends has a partial mediating role in the relationship between control orientation and depressive symptoms, general psychological symptoms have a partial mediating role. On the other hand, it does not have a mediating role in the relationship between control orientations and OCD symptomology.

According to the results, when perceived social support from family has a partial mediating role in the relationship between internal locus of control and psychological symptoms (general psychological symptoms, OCD symptomology, and depressive symptoms), external locus of control does not have a significant role in any psychological symptoms. The variance explained by the mediating role of perceived social support from family ranges from 4% to 8%. When perceived social support from friends has a partial mediating role in the relationship between internal locus of control, depressive symptoms, and general psychological symptoms, but it does not have any mediating roles in external locus of control and OCD symptomology. As a partial mediator, perceived social support from friends has a role in the relationship between external locus of control and psychological symptoms. The explained variance of perceived social support from friends as a mediator ranges from 4% to 10%.

Analysis among both genders revealed that while perceived social support from family plays a partial role in respect to the relationships of internal locus of control with OCD symptomology, depressive symptoms, and general psychological symptom levels for female, in the case of support received from friends, locus of control has taken solely a partial role in depressive symptoms and general psychological symptoms. Moreover, friends' support data did not show any significant relationships with OCD symptomology. When it comes to female, perceived social support from family has no significant mediating roles relating to external locus of control; but as a mediator, perceived social support from friends has a partial mediating role in the relationship between external locus of control and general psychosocial symptoms. In relation to men, perceived social support from family had no mediating role in the relationships of internal locus of control; however, as a mediator, perceived social support from friends has a partial mediating role in the relationship between internal locus of control and depressive symptoms. On the other hand, perceived social support from friends has a partial mediating role in the relationship between external locus of control and depressive symptoms, OCD symptomology, and general psychological symptoms.

Discussion

In our study, the relationship between general causality orientations and locus of control with psychological symptoms was analyzed while perceived social support was accounted as partial mediator. This kind of model has been studied for the first time in Turkey. The confusion about general causality orientations and locus of control, which has been discussed in the literature extensively (Soenens et al., 2005; Vansteenkiste & Sheldon, 2006), was clarified in our study. To underline the distinctive properties between these variables, each variable was analyzed separately and collectively as a partial mediator (Figure 1 and 2Figure 2), and those analyses provided valuable insights about this distinction.

The proportions of female and male participating in the study are not equal. In this respect, data was sub-categorized according to gender and displayed separately. Analysis via structural equation modeling provided very well fitting indexes for both genders. Data obtained in this study was first analyzed according to general causality orientations, then locus of control variables have been discussed in respect to sub-categories of social support; support of family and friends. Moreover, the impact of culture was also evaluated in our study.

Obtained data about general causality orientations in this study support and confirm the previous findings of Deci and Ryan (1985). In both studies, autonomous individuals showed a reduced tendency to experience psychological symptoms. Moreover, the finding of an increased tendency toward psychological symptoms in impersonal individuals is also consistent with previous literature (Deci & Ryan, 1987, 2008; Brockelman, 2009; Sadabadi et al., 2011). In addition to this finding, social support, which has never been studied in this context as partial mediator, was demonstrated to decrease psychological symptoms in autonomous and impersonal individuals. However, social support was not completely unnoticeable in individuals who are control oriented. In control oriented individuals, the source of social support was proven to be important. While social support was not a partial mediator when received from family, support from friends significantly improved psychological well-being and decreased depressive symptoms. The reason behind this result might be owing to the escalation of distance between generations in nuclear-families (Kağıtçıbaşı, 1970), lack of communication and problem solving among family members (Cerit, 2007), increased clashes among family members during adolescence (Özgüven, 2001), and variations of support, interest, and communication of family depending on their socio-economic status (Genez Muluk, 2004; Kağıtçıbaşı et al., 2001; Ulusavaş, 1990). Moreover, since 84% of the individuals who participated in the study are bachelor students who are living with friends instead of family, the shift of social support from family to friends is considered to be an important factor about this finding (Hortaçsu et al., 1991; Lee, 2011).

The impact of social support for individuals with an internal or external locus of control on psychological symptoms was emphasized in our study. Support coming from family to individuals with internal locus of control exerted its effect on well-being by decreasing psychological symptoms. On the other hand, family support did not show any significant effect on individuals with external locus of control. This finding leads us to question whether social support from family is suitable as a partial mediator because there are several studies showing that individuals with an external locus have a higher tendency to experience psychological symptoms (Baydoğan & Dağ, 2008; Dağ, 1992; Daniels & Guppy, 1994; Erol et al., 2000; Ryff, 1989). These circumstances indicate that an individual's perception of their family’s social support directly regulates psychological status as a partial mediator. Moreover, the mediating roles of families' and friends' support between locus of control and psychological symptoms (depressive symptoms, OCD symptomology, and general psychological symptoms) was investigated via pathway analysis, and interpreted with reference to the previous literature. Although the theory is not in accordance with our study, we advise following studies to test alternative models in which the roles of variables are switched for mediator role. Sub-categorical analysis of gender showed that only females demonstrated significant partial mediating roles for family social support in relationship between locus of control and psychological symptoms. We think that this finding can be interpreted through the nature of internal locus of control. Internal locus of control combined with the beliefs of self-control might have diminished psychological symptoms (Dağ, 1992; Meijer et al., 2002). In traditional Turkish families, female’s beliefs about self-control and prolongation of well-being are thought to be highly correlated with families' social support.

Cumulative analysis of families' social support revealed significant correlations between autonomy orientation, impersonal orientation, and internal locus of control with psychological symptoms. However, no significant correlation was found between control orientation and external locus of control with psychological symptoms. Despite significant correlations reported in western literature about general causality orientations and locus of control (Deci & Ryan, 1985, 1987; Williams et al., 1996), findings about impersonal orientations and external locus of control emphasize the importance of the distinction between these two personality types. Self Determination Theory, as it states initiation, regulation, and continuation of behavior are not only affected by external stimuli, but more importantly influenced from internal motivations. This provides important clues to clarify this our findings. Because impersonal orientation is affected by both consequences of behaviors and motivation (Deci & Ryan, 1985; Hagger & Chatzisarantis, 2011; Olesen, 2011; Olesen, Thomsen, Schnieber, & Tønnesvang, 2010). Especially, the conclusion, that external locus of control, which emphasizing external stimuli (social support) and showing no significant correlation, and impersonal orientations, pointing out the importance of motivation and internal stimuli and demonstrate significant correlation of interactive connection between internal and external processes. Moreover, the validated contributions of family support might be based on motivation triggered by external processes (Deci & Ryan, 1985; Koestner & Zuckerman, 1994). Discouraging children’s independence is frequently observed in families in Turkey, and more seriously, the independent personal development of children does seem to pose a threat to families (Kağıtçıbaşı, 1984). Owing to these phenomena, families will try to raise an obedient child having strong ties to family, even when they settle to a new location. However, this kind of parenting does not guarantee a strong attachment to family. As Kağıtçıbaşı (1970) stated, acting scrutinizing behaviors toward children cannot be accounted as loving or being supportive in Turkish family structure and these two notions are totally separate from each other. Especially for girls in Turkey, this securative behaviors show themselves as conservative and in Turkish culture, this effect is more noticeable compared to boys. Data obtained in this study also strongly support these notions.

Social support coming from friends has shown significant effects on the relationships between autonomous and impersonal orientations and depressive symptoms, OCD symptomology, and general psychological symptoms. However, the impact of social support was not similar to control oriented individuals. Those individuals experienced increased general psychological symptoms and depressive symptoms, but not OCD symptomology. Control orientation was not significant for both gender. An important feature of the GCOS is that each subscale does not sub-categorize or separate individuals. This lies in the nature of general causality orientations being more dimensional than categorical. At each subscale, rather than a separation, each individual should be considered to take a place on an axis; to illustrate, control oriented individuals should be considered and analyzed on an autonomous and impersonal axis (Deponte, 2004). The investigation of individuals with an internal or external locus of control (with the partial mediator of friends’ social support) disclose significant relationships between internal locus of control, depressive symptoms, and psychological symptoms, but not with OCD symptomology. Moreover, gender-based analysis illustrated significant relationships between internal locus of control and psychological symptoms solely in males. This kind of difference is thought to be the result of variations in sub-dimensions of locus of control. In the literature, there are discussions about variations in sub-dimensions of control individuals, and they review the expansion of female’s social networks and how they might have an impact on these variations (Sherman et al., 1997). However, since we investigated internal and external locus of control in two dimensions only, this kind of analysis could not be inferred from our study. It is well known that individuals at university level initiate distant relations with family, at which point perceived support shifts from family to friends (Lee, 2011). Our study supports this notion but it does not explain the gender difference.

Our study illustrates that suitable independent variables for depressive symptoms are impersonal orientation, autonomous orientation, and external locus of control. While increasing impersonal orientation and locus of control causes elevated depressive symptoms levels; increased autonomous orientation related to declining depressive symptoms levels. Moreover, when social support is accounted for as a partial mediator, the perceived social supports showed distinct results. Perceived support coming from friends was shown to be much more effective in reducing depressive symptoms levels, rather than family. Previous research on the topic shows that students who are living far away from family require more psychological support (İmamoğlu & Yasak-Gültekin, 1993), and decreased family support is correlated with increased psychological symptoms (Armsden & Greenberg, 1987; Bayram, 1999; Wentzel, 1998). There are also some studies which point out the importance of family toward the progression of depressive symptoms (Chou, 1999; Juang & Silbereisen, 1999) while some other studies relate importance of elevated friends support on declined depressive symptoms (Wentzel, 1998). Moreover, Chou's (1999) research showed that friend’s support has independent effects on personal well-being and an increased number of friends are associated with positive emotions. Since all of these findings are covered in our study, new analyses were established, and those analyses revealed that the majority of students were senior university students (78%). Accordingly, our study showed that junior and senior university students give more importance to friends than freshman (sophomore) university students. Previous studies of depressive symptoms that describe social support as an important factor for treatment, showed that lack of perceived social support is recognized as an initiator and maintenance factor for depressive symptoms, and found that depressive symptoms increase without social support (Paykel, 1994). Moreover, perceived social support was found to be critical for depressive symptoms treatment in the early phases (Brugha et al., 1997). In our study, most of the participants were far away from their hometown and living with friends in other cities. Especially, while assessing the risk factors and managing protective measures for psychological well-being of freshman and sophomore students, different effects of perceived social support should not be neglected and must be implemented as critical factors.

Suitable independent variables for OCD symptomology were impersonal orientations, control orientation, and external locus of control. An increase in each of these variables was associated with elevated OCD symptomology levels. While social support has partial mediator effects, symptoms for both impersonal orientation and external locus of control were decreased. However, this effect has not been observed for OCD symptomology when control orientation has a mediating role, and neither perceived support of family nor friends has an effect on OCD symptomology levels. Control orientation was studied as an independent variable while conducting pathway analysis combined with literature. However, another study (Neighbors et al., 2006) in which these variables were in a different order and different theories were tested, showed that control orientation has significant contributions as a partial mediator. We advise to future studies to include control orientation as a partial mediator as well. When perceived social support is considered as a partial mediator, the source of support is proven to be important. While perceived social support is a partial mediator, and received from family, individuals having an external locus of control experienced reduced OCD symptomology Although this situation might have arisen because of the probable co-existence of depressive symptoms and OCD symptomology (Andrews et al., 2002; Pigott et al., 1994), it might have happened due to the impact of depressive symptoms on cognitive functions, leading to vulnerability for OCD symptomology, or statistically masking symptoms of depressive symptoms toward OCD symptomology (Rachman, 1998).

According to the findings of our study, the most suitable independent variables for general psychological symptoms are impersonal orientations and external locus of control. In most cases where both perceived support from family and friends are partial mediators, a significant decrease in psychological symptoms was observed. Only in the situation where social support from family is a partial mediator, reduced psychological symptoms were detected in individuals having an external locus of control. In our study, the most applicable dependent variables are depressive symptoms, general psychological symptoms level, and OCD symptomology, respectively.