Locus of control moderates the association of COVID-19 stress and general mental distress: results of a Norwegian and a German-speaking cross-sectional survey.

BACKGROUND: An internal locus of control (LoC I) refers to the belief that the outcome of events in one's life is contingent upon one's actions, whereas an external locus of control (LoC E) describes the belief that chance and powerful others control one's life. This study investigated whether LoC I and LoC E moderated the relationship between COVID-19 stress and general mental distress in the general population during the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: This cross-sectional survey study analysed data from a Norwegian (n = 1225) and a German-speaking sample (n = 1527). We measured LoC with the Locus of Control-4 Scale (IE-4), COVID-19 stress with a scale developed for this purpose, and mental distress with the Patient Health Questionnaire 4 (PHQ-4). Moderation analyses were conducted using the PROCESS macro for SPSS. RESULTS: The association between COVID-19 stress and general mental distress was strong (r = .61 and r = .55 for the Norwegian and the German-speaking sample, respectively). In both samples, LoC showed substantial moderation effects. LoC I served as a buffer (p < .001), and LoC E exacerbated (p < .001) the relation between COVID-19 stress and general mental distress. CONCLUSIONS: The data suggest that the COVID-19 pandemic is easier to bear for people who, despite pandemic-related strains, feel that they generally have influence over their own lives. An external locus of control, conversely, is associated with symptoms of depression and anxiety. The prevention of mental distress may be supported by enabling a sense of control through citizen participation in policy decisions and transparent explanation in their implementation.

Work-related, socio-cultural, and personal factors associated with locus of control among Australian general practitioners.

BACKGROUND: Locus of control (LoC) is a social cognition, that relates to the level of self-control that people have over their personal environment that influences their life. In this context, LoC is frequently associated with work-related behavioral outcomes, ranging from job attitudes, career behaviors, stress, and burnout. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the association between LoC, and work-related behavioral factors, socio-cultural factors, and personal factors among Australian General Practitioners (GPs). METHODS: This study utilized data from the 2010 Medicine in Australia: Balancing Employment and Life (MABEL) survey of doctors. Locus of control (LoC) was measured by a 7-point Likert scale based on Pearlin-Schooler Mastery/Self-efficacy 7-item Scale. Higher score indicated lower internal LoC. Multivariate linear regression model was performed to determine the independent predictors of LoC. RESULTS: Of 3,664 GP participants, LoC did not differ by gender. Poor/fair self-rated health, working in urban location, running a stressful practice, poor balance of professional and personal commitments, poor support network, financial circumstances after retirement, and perception of unrealistic expectation by patients were significant predictors for a lower Internal LoC in a multivariate linear regression model. Adjusted R2 explained 22.4% of variation in predicting the LoC in our models. CONCLUSIONS: LoC of Australian GPs is negatively affected by poor work-life balance, inadequate support, and unrealistic patient expectation. These work-place specific factors could be targeted by interventions to improve GPs wellbeing.