A theoretical model for the relationship among: stress, locus of control, and longevity.

Time/budget constraints and the need to reduce costs affect decision making (Mautz and Sharaf 1961). These pressures can cause considerable stress and result in job dissatisfaction, reduced quality of work, and personnel turnover (Collins 1993; Kelley and Cook 1982; Margheim and Pany 1986; Pearson et al. 1985). Kelley and Seiler (1982) found that "The ability to live with ... pressure may be a prerequisite to a long career" when time budgets are imposed.

Stress has been noted as a factor for switching careers (Carcello et al. 1991; Trapp et al. 1989) and locus of control (Rotter, 1966) has been considered in participative budgeting (Murray, 1990; Licata et al. 1986; Brownell, 1981, 1982). While there has been no accounting research that links stress participative budgeting and locus of control, there is extensive research in psychology linking locus of control and stress management. This study theoretically expands the research into stress (Rebele and Michaels 1990) using Snead and Harrell's (1991) job satisfaction model as a structural guide (Figure One).

Theory Development

Motivation and Locus of Control

Psychological Locus of Control (hereafter referred to as locus of control or LOC) conceptualizes how individuals see their own actions affecting the events that surround their lives (Lefcourt, 1982). Locus of control represents individuals' range of beliefs concerning personal control over their environment; the range extends from strong personal control (internal locus of control) to weak or no personal control (external locus of control). External locus-of-control individuals believe that "reinforcements are not under their control but rather are under the control of powerful others, luck, chance, fate, etc." (Rotter, 1966; 618). On the other hand, internal-locus-of-control individuals believe that "reinforcements are contingent upon their own behavior, capacities, or attributes" (Rotter, 1966; 618).

Internal-locus-of-control people accept responsibility for events (Davis and Davis, 1972), and external-locus-of-control individuals blame their environment for failures (Phares et al. 1971). Because internal locus-of-control individuals ("internals") believe they control the events in their lives, they recognize that experiences are related. Given this, internals believe that the probability of goal attainment is directly proportional to their efforts and their ability to learn from repeated experiences (Lefcourt, 1982) and also set more difficult goals for themselves (Yukl and Latham, 1978), which reflect their perception of control (Murray, 1990). Externals do not see the relationship between their efforts and the ultimate results of these efforts (Lefcourt, 1982). External-locus-of-control subjects ("externals") attributed a high probability to luck as a determinant for significant events (Friedland, 1992).

Age, Gender, and Locus of Control

The data in Table One are provided to show that the research cited represents data taken from large-to-very-large samples. Differences in locus of control and in age are correlated. Research shows that locus of control consistently becomes more internal through the seventh grade (Payne and Payne, 1989; Young and Shorr, 1986). Locus of control becomes most internal level at about age 14 to 16 and then reverts to a more external level by age 18 (Crandall et al. 1965; McNulty and Borgen, 1988).

Comparing data for adult age groups, most research finds that locus of control remains relatively constant for some period of time after high school. Evaluating teenagers through 50 year olds, Morganti et al. (1988) and Jensen et al. (1990) found that an individual's locus of control becomes more external as he/she gets older. So that, one would expect that locus of control would gradually become more external as an individual continues in a profession (i.e., becomes older) unless other factors such as stress intervene.

Although both males and females are concerned about their careers, females experience more job-related stress (Collins, 1993). Females indicate that the conflicting responsibilities of home and work magnify the intensity of other time demands. For females, fifty percent of the variation in reported anxiety can be explained by the effect of work on home life and job-performance (Kahn and Cooper, 1992). While the effects of work on home life and job-performance are also important to males, locus of control was a more significant factor when explaining stress for males. This difference may be explained by research that indicates that women are more external in their locus of control than men (Jones and Page, 1986; Linder, 1986; Doherty and Baldwin, 1985; and Roodin et al. 1974).

Stress and Behavior

Multiple job assignments and time/ budget pressures cause stress for both male and female accountants (Pearson et al. 1985). Time pressures can also cause dysfunctional behavior (Kelley and Margheim, 1990; Raghunathan, 1991). Kelley and Margheim (1990) note that the number of quality reduction acts increases significantly when there is time pressure. Tight budgets can also affect perceptions of personal competence. For example, dysfunctional behavior could occur if a time-budget overrun is perceived as being caused by a personal inefficiency (Lightner et al. 1982) or a tight budget (Margheim and Pany, 1986). Time pressure is more prevalent at the lower employment levels than at the upper levels (Kelley and Seiler, 1982). In fact, thirty-two percent of the lower level employees reported dysfunctional behavior, which was associated with their efforts to meet time budget (Kelleyand Seiler, 1982).

Stress and Locus of Control

Table Two shows that several studies link stress and locus of control. Chan, (1977, 93) suggests that when an individual perceives that they are in control of a situation "the probability is that he will be less likely to perceive the situation as threatening or stress-inducing". Ivancevich and Matteson (1980) also believe that the type of locus of control and adaptation to stress are related. Jennings (1990) finds associations among overall stress, locus of control and nonwork stress (e.g., environmental stressors such as finances or parenting). Externality (i.e., more fate, chance, luck, or powerful others oriented) is positively correlated with general life stress (DiMatteo et al. 1993) and job stress (Evans and Coman, 1993). Since internal-locus-of-control individuals ("internals") experience lower anxiety (Torestand et a]. 1989; Jones and Page, 1986), internal locus of control may act as a stress buffer (Daniels and Guppy, 1992).

Some individuals are either not affected by or thrive in an environment of stress. While more internally-oriented individuals are challenged by stressors, externals are more likely to be threatened by these stressors (Vitaliano et al. 1987). One's sense of locus of control affects the degree of perceived stress (Pilisuk et al. 1993; Schafer and McKenna, 1991). For example, while internal-locus-of-control students are able to work despite attempts at distracting them, the performance of external-locus-of-control students de creases when the same stressors are present (Wolk and Bloom, 1978).

How individuals deal with stress (i.e., cope with the stress in their lives) also affects their perceptions of stress. As an example, while internal-locus-of-control individuals use solution oriented coping, external-locus-of-control individuals tend to either ignore or to give in to problems (Rees and Cooper, 1992; Schill and Beyler, 1992; Wells-Parker et al. 1990). Smith and Everly (1990) find that individuals who practice adaptive coping report lower levels of environmental stress; so these accountants are demonstrating the type of behavior one would expect from an internal-locus-of-control individual. Grannis (1992) finds that internal locus of control acts as a stress moderator; students reporting lower levels of stress have had higher grade point averages. Stress management and adaptive coping can be learned. After participating in a stress-management program, students' sense of control was not only more internal, but they also took greater responsibility for their academic achievement, were more confident, and reported more appropriate coping skills (Henderson et al. 1992).

Participation, Satisfaction, and Accomplishments

External locus of control is negatively correlated to feelings of personal accomplishment (Lunenburg and Cadavid, 1992) and job satisfaction is negatively correlated to stress (Blegen, 1993). Therefore, it is not surprising that a positive correlation exists between external locus of control and emotional exhaustion (St.-Yves et al. 1989). By contrast, internal locus of control has been shown to be positively associated with job satisfaction and lower perceived stress (Rees and Cooper, 1992; Schafer and McKenna, 1991). This is because internals feel they have input into their work environment, perceive less emotional exhaustion, and receive higher job satisfaction (Fuqua and Couture, 1986; Whitebook et al. 1982).

Proposed Model