What is a locus in biology. Alleles, loci and markers: what are they? Human genetic feature

The concept of locus of control is one of the concepts of modern psychology, which was introduced into science by Julian Rotter. Working on the concept of human behavior in society, he came to the conclusion that each individual perceives events occurring in his life in completely different ways. Some believe that they control their lives, others, on the contrary, are sure that life or fate is controlled by a person. The concept he introduced was called Rotter's locus of control. In the understanding of modern psychology, this quantitative relationship is of great importance in the formation of a person’s personality. In this material we will consider the main types and their relationship with the individual’s existing self-esteem.

In other words, locus of control is a certain property of a person, his personal characteristic, which helps explain the reasons for his victories and defeats. It is generated by a lot of research in various areas of psychology. This design is applicable in areas such as educational psychology, clinical psychology, and health psychology.

What is locus of control in psychology?

In psychology, the concept of locus of control refers to the extent to which people believe that they can control the events that affect them. The word "locus" is translated from Latin as "place" or "locality". In other words, we can say that this is the place where a person directs his mental energy. This characteristic can be external and internal. This is a general idea of ​​what locus of control is, to go deeper you need to know some facts.

In 1954, psychologist Julian Rotter proposed that our behavior is controlled through rewards and punishments, and that it is the resulting emotions from these consequences that greatly influence a person. In 1966, Rotter published a scale designed to measure and assess external and internal locus of control. The scale was based on a forced-choice analysis between two alternatives, asking respondents to choose only one of two options for each item. While the scale was widely used, the psychologist itself was the subject of considerable criticism from those who believed that Rotter's locus of control could not be fully understood and should not be measured on such a simplistic scale.

Types of loci of control

In modern psychology, two types or types of locus of control are distinguished: internal (or internal) and external (or external). Types of locus of control are responsible for various areas of psychological activity.

Internal locus of control is characteristic of people who believe that they can control and manage their lives. Such people believe that all events in their lives come mainly from their own actions: for example, when receiving test results, people with an internal locus of control will praise or blame their abilities and themselves. People who identify as having an internal locus of control tend to take more responsibility for their actions, no matter what the outcome. They do not pay attention to external influences on their activities, it is difficult for them to work in a team, they trust only themselves and their feelings.

People with an external locus of control believe that their decisions and lives are controlled by environmental factors that a person has no control over, or in other words, these people rely on fate. If we consider their behavior in the previous example, then in this case they will praise or blame some external factors, for example, the test itself, the teacher, the favor of fate or other divine intervention, etc. Such individuals view everything around them as part of their success or failure. In many ways, they trust others more than they trust themselves. People with an external locus of control are very good at working in teams.

It is important to note that locus of control is an ongoing process. No person has 100% only external or only internal locus of control. Instead, most people fall somewhere on a continuum between these extremes.

The relationship between locus of control and self-esteem

It should be noted that the concepts of external and internal locus of control of an individual can be interchanged. For example, there are categories of people whose internal or external locus of control is very clearly expressed. But there are also individuals for whom this property can change depending on the circumstances. For example, at home they can be alone, for example, with an internal locus of control, but in society, completely different, with a pronounced external one.

Let us consider whether there is a relationship between locus of control and self-esteem when comparing individuals of one and another type. People who have a predominant internal factor of self-control are more likely to exhibit the following behavior:

• they are ready to take responsibility for their actions and actions;
• they are not dependent on the opinions of others;
• have high self-esteem and a strong sense of self-efficacy;
• they are usually always physically healthy, happy and successful.

Holders of external locus of control are characterized by the following distinctive features:

• they blame external circumstances for all their failures;
• do not believe in their own capabilities and have low self-esteem;
• feel physically overwhelmed, powerless and hopeless in difficult situations;
• need help (helpless in performing difficult tasks).

To determine what the relationship is between a person’s locus of control and his self-esteem, a group of people was asked to participate in an experiment, as a result of which it was found that an increase in the level of a person’s self-esteem directly affects the level of his subjective locus of control, which is one of the most important characteristics of self-awareness. Depending on what type of locus of control an individual belongs to, it can be stated how developed his self-esteem is. In general, the level of self-esteem is important element human self-awareness. Psychologist Rotter assigned this concept one of the central positions in his theory.

Multichannel number Surgut. Multi-channel telephone Surgut.

Schematic representation of a chromosome: Chromatid, one of the two identical parts of a chromosome after S phase.
Centromere, the place where chromatids are connected to each other and to microtubules.
Short shoulder.
Long shoulder.

Example of chromosome breakdown

Locus in biology means a fixed position on a chromosome, such as the position of a gene. A variant of the DNA sequence at a given locus is called an allele. An ordered list of loci for a genome is called a genetic map. Gene mapping is the identification of a locus for a specific biological trait.

Diploid or polyploid cells that carry the same alleles at any locus are called homozygous for that locus, and those that carry different alleles are called heterozygous.

Nomenclature

An example of a locus designation: “6p21.3”.

A longer section is designated in a similar way. For example, the gene locus "11q1.4-q2.1" means that it is located on the long arm of chromosome 11, the region between sub-band 4 of band 1 and sub-band 1 of band 2.

locus (lat. locus place, position)

the location of the gene on a chromosome, plasmid, or other genetic structure of the cell; sometimes the term is used to mean "gene".

Encyclopedic Dictionary, 1998

locus

LOCUS (lat. locus) is the location of a particular gene on the genetic map of a chromosome.

Locus

(from Latin locus ≈ place) chromosomes, a linear section of a chromosome occupied by one gene. Using genetic and cytological methods, it is possible to determine the localization of a gene, that is, to establish on which chromosome a given gene is located, as well as the position of its gene in relation to the family of other genes lying on the same chromosome (see Genetic maps chromosomes). As has been shown in some microorganisms, genes that control a certain sequence of biochemical reactions are located in neighboring L., and L. are located in the same order in which biosynthetic reactions occur; For higher organisms this rule has not been established. The term "L." in genetic literature the terms gene and cistron are sometimes used synonymously.

Wikipedia

Locus (award)

Locus Award- a literary prize in the field of science fiction and fantasy, awarded annually since 1971 based on the results of voting by readers of Locus Magazine.

Locus

Locus in genetics means the location of a specific gene on a genetic or cytological map of a chromosome. A variant of the DNA sequence at a given locus is called an allele. An ordered list of loci for a genome is called a genetic map.

Gene mapping is the determination of a locus for a specific biological trait.

Diploid or polyploid cells that carry the same alleles at any locus are called homozygous for that locus, and those that carry different alleles are called heterozygous.

Locus (disambiguation)

Locus(pl. loci) - translated from Latin means “place”.

• Locus - in genetics means a fixed position on a chromosome, such as the position of a gene.
• Locus is an American monthly magazine with the subtitle "A Magazine About the Science Fiction and Fantasy Genres."
• Locus is a literary prize in the field of science fiction and fantasy, awarded annually since 1971 based on voting by readers of Locus Magazine.
• Locus of control is a concept in psychology that characterizes a person’s ability to attribute their successes or failures to internal or external factors.
• Locus Plethore is the first Canadian supercar.

Examples of the use of the word locus in literature.

Being a place of transition from the external to the internal, the mouth generally turns out to be locus transformation, inversion of bodies, and consequently their combination into grotesque conglomerates.

The mouth turns out to be locus special chimerical tension not only in the grotesque of Rabelais, dismantled by Bakhtin, but also in other cases when several bodies form a conglomerate or when a body bifurcates.

This legend is recorded in the vicinity of the Eildon Hills, in the county of Snowdown, in Cadbury in Somerset, the most authentic locus legendary Camelot, in the Neath Valley in South Wales, and in many, many other places.

Dark Forces are establishing locus, - for example, the well-known Despicable Tower - and, having installed it, they place their special assistants around them so that they devastate or, conversely, protect the chosen place or point.

They usually create such creatures after they choose locus, and when locus is liquidated, the creatures disappear.

The works of my father, a scientist, fueled a certain locus information field of the Universe.

I have to go into that one locus universal memory, where everything is already debugged - carefully codified, sorted into shelves, united by a precise logical and subject concept.

The week was coming to an end, and then, on one of the difficult evenings, when the magician looked longingly at Locus, Scott unexpectedly contacted him.

Unfortunately, locus Australian aborigines should be considered practically extinct, as well as locus Kalahari and Pygmies in Africa.

Jerro looked longingly at the emerald ring locus, flickering in a bottomless sky full of stars.

Oswald into the elements of madness and the defeat of his mother in the fight against the house as locus memory155

The muse did not delve into Kabbalah in her practical ideas, but, like Sergeev, believed that the main thing was to encourage her patient to find one common locus information field with a personality capable of having a positive impact.

It was difficult for her to trample alone in this locus memory - she was tormented by memories of Sergeev, Sabrina, and she tried to quickly distribute the oppressive psychological burden among the heirs.

But in every locus The earths are different, so is it worth organizing difficulties with vanity for ourselves, for our native microflora, for our children.

Unfortunately, the matrix itself has the property of displacement, transferring the beam of cosmic influence to others loci Earth.

Locus (location) – Psychological Dictionary

Widely used as follows: in perception – a point in space; in genetics - the position of a gene on a chromosome; in physiology – a limited area on an organ, etc.

Locus (location) – Psychological Encyclopedia

Locus of Control – Political dictionary

Locus of Control – Psychological Dictionary

(Locus of control). A term used by Rotter to describe a person's generalized expectations about the extent to which reinforcements are dependent on his own behavior (internal locus) and to what extent they are controlled by forces outside him (external locus of control).

Locus of Control – Psychological Dictionary

(English locus of control) - American term. psychologist Julian Rotter (Rotter, 1966) to refer to the ways (strategies) by which people attribute (attribute) causality and responsibility for the results of their own and others' activities. It is assumed that different people there is a tendency (preference) towards a certain type of attribution of causation and responsibility. In other words, people can differ greatly in what attributions they give to their own and/or others’ successes and failures. There are 2 polar ways of attributing causality and responsibility (L.c.). In one case, causality and responsibility are attributed to the acting personality itself (her efforts, abilities, desires) - this strategy is called “internal” (“internal L. k", “subjective L. k.”), in the other case, “responsibility is assigned” on factors independent of the individual - external circumstances, accidents, luck, the mystical factor of fate, the fatal effect of heredity, etc.; the second method is called “external physical therapy.” People are classified according to the degree of propensity for these two personal traits. into internals and externals. More precisely, these are the names of individuals who receive extreme indicators on the scale of internality. The terms “internals” and “externals” should not be confused with the consonant terms “introverts” and “extroverts.” In Russian literature, the term “L. k." is often replaced by the "locus of subjective control", and the modified Rotter questionnaire is called the "Subjective Control Level Questionnaire" (abbr. "USK Questionnaire"). (B.M.)

Locus of Control – Psychological Encyclopedia

(from Latin locus - place and controle - check) - theoretical concept of J. Rotter's personality model -. The individual's belief that his behavior is determined primarily either by himself (internal locus of control) or by his environment and circumstances (external locus of control). Formed in the process of socialization, it becomes stable personal quality. Literature. Kondakov I.M., Nilopets M.N. Experimental study of the structure and personal context of the locus of control // Psychological Journal, N 1, 1995.

Locus of Control – Psychological Dictionary

(LOCUS OF CONTROL) . A term used by Rotter that refers to whether people believe that reinforcers depend on their own behavior or are controlled by external forces. (J. Frager, J. Fadyman, p.)

Locus of Control – Psychological Dictionary

(Locus of control). The extent to which people perceive their lives as controlled "internally" by their own efforts and actions or controlled "externally" by chance or external forces.

Locus of Control – Psychological Dictionary

An individual psychological concept that characterizes what a given person sees as the main reasons for his own behavior and the actions of other people (with internal LC, these reasons are located in the person himself, in his psychology, and with external LC, they are located outside of this a person, for example in the external objective circumstances of his life).

Locus of Control – Psychological Dictionary

(Locus of control). A term used by Rotter that refers to whether people believe that reinforcements depend on their own behavior or are controlled by external forces.

Locus of Control – Psychological Dictionary

Word formation. Comes from Lat. locus - place and controle - check. Category. Theoretical concept of J. Rotter's personality model. Specificity. The individual's belief that his behavior is determined primarily either by himself (internal locus of control) or by his environment and circumstances (external locus of control). Formed in the process of socialization, it becomes a stable personal quality. Literature. Kondakov I.M., Nilopets M.N. Experimental study of the structure and personal context of locus of control // Psychological Journal, No. 1, 1995

Locus of Control – Psychological Dictionary

The tendency of people to view the source of control that determines the nature of their behavior and relationships with others as external or internal to themselves. Individuals characterized by an internal locus of control tend to believe that the results of their actions and the developing relationships between them and the people around them are determined primarily by the characteristics of their own behavior. Individuals characterized by an external locus of control perceive the events that happen to them and the nature of relationships with other people as a result of the influence of factors external to them and beyond their control.

Locus of Control – Psychological Dictionary

A stable personality trait formed in the process of socialization. If a person mostly takes responsibility for the events occurring in his life, explaining them with his behavior, character, abilities, then this shows that he has an internal locus of control. If he tends to attribute responsibility for everything to external factors, finding reasons in other people, in environment, in fate or case, then this indicates the presence of an external (external) locus of control.

Locus of Control – Psychological Dictionary

the tendency of an individual to attribute responsibility for the failure of his actions to external forces or his personal characteristics.

Locus of Control – Psychological Dictionary

The tendency of the subject to attribute responsibility for the negative results of his activities to external forces or his personal characteristics.

Locus of Control – Psychological Dictionary

A concept characterizing the localization of the reasons with which a subject explains his own behavior and the behavior of other people, introduced by the American psychologist Yu. Rotter. A quality that characterizes a person’s tendency to attribute responsibility for the results of his activities to: 1) external forces - external, external locus of control; corresponds to the search for reasons for behavior outside oneself, in one’s environment; the tendency to an external locus of control manifests itself along with such traits as lack of confidence in one’s abilities, imbalance, the desire to postpone the implementation of one’s intentions indefinitely, anxiety, suspicion, conformity and aggressiveness; 2) own abilities and efforts - interval, internal locus of control; corresponds to the search for the causes of behavior within oneself; it has been shown that people with an internal locus of control are more self-confident, consistent and persistent in achieving their goals, prone to introspection, balanced, sociable, friendly and independent; Internal locus of control has also been shown to be a socially endorsed value; the ideal self is always attributed an internal locus of control; - a stable property of an individual, formed during his socialization. To determine the locus of control, a special questionnaire was created and a set of techniques was developed to identify the natural connection between it and other personal characteristics.

Locus of Control – Psychological Dictionary

(locus of control) The term "L. to." serves to denote a group of subjective opinions or beliefs regarding the relationship between behavior and its consequences in the form of rewards or punishments. A more precise formulation of these opinions about LK sounds like the opposition of internal and external control of reinforcement (I-E). When a specific person perceives reinforcements (both positive and negative) as the result of his own behavior, his efforts, or his relatively constant characteristics, we have before us an example of internal beliefs. External beliefs, on the contrary, are associated with the perception of reinforcement as a consequence of luck, a happy accident, fate, the intervention of influential people, or simply an unpredictable (due to complexity) combination of circumstances. Of course, people's opinions about L.K. (or about I-E) are not limited to a dichotomy, but are represented by points of a continuous continuum along an axis with the poles formed by internal and external beliefs, respectively. The concept of I-E was first proposed and introduced by J. Rotter. He not only defined this concept, but also formulated the basic. provisions of the theory of social teaching, which could be included in the composition. In addition, Rotter made available to the scientific community a significant amount of psychometric data and research results. construct validity I-E scales, designed to measure this concept. Theoretical basis I-E concepts Mn. Of those who use the concept of physical behavior in their research, they do so without paying attention to how it fits into the broader scheme of factors that influence behavior. This simplistic approach has sometimes led to erroneous predictions, disappointment with the small proportion of variance explained by the I-E factor, or serious obstacles to the generalization of data from a number of studies. Indeed, from the very beginning, the concept of I - E was formulated as one of several. variables in the broader system of social theory. learning, which, interacting with each other, causes this or that behavior in each specific situation. These variables include: a) expectations; b) the comparative value of reinforcements; c) psychol. situation. I-E is viewed as a generalized expectation regarding how best to categorize situations presented to people. a problem that needs to be solved. Thus, L.K. is a generalized expectation or belief regarding the optimal, from the point of view. a specific person, a way of looking at the connection between his behavior and the subsequent occurrence of reward or punishment. In any given situation, the expectation that a specific behavior will lead to specific results is determined by three variables. Firstly, these are specific expectations for the success of this behavior, fundamentally. on previous experience of actions in the same situation. Secondly, these are generalized expectations of success, basic. on generalizing the experience of actions in all similar situations. Thirdly, these are generalized expectations associated with experience in solving numerous problems, of which the I-E problem is only a particular example. The interaction of all three variables determines people's expectations. regarding the success of the behavior in question. And previous experience with a given situation determines the relative strength of influence of each of these three variables. I-E measurement The most widely used instrument for measuring personality traits as a generalized personality characteristic is the I-E scale. This scale consists of 23 pairs of statements (with forced choice) along with six “filler statements” that help hide the purpose of the test from the subjects. Rotter's own data provided little evidence that his scale had more than one dimension. Since that time, however, evidence in favor of the multidimensional nature of I - E began to accumulate, and to date a fair amount of it has already been collected. In addition, there was a development many additional scales for measuring beliefs in specific areas of I - E (health, politics, etc.). Most of these scales are designed for adults, but over time, children's versions of the I-E scales have also appeared. Links between I-E and personal control An orientation toward internal beliefs would seem to imply that the individual should take a more active and controlling position in relation to the external environment . Indeed, there is ample evidence to support this assumption. Their accumulation no less indicates the validity of the I-E scale, since the main. part of the research was carried out using this particular measuring instrument. In the field of health and personal hygiene, the above assumption is confirmed by a number of studies. In one of the earliest cycles of research. I - E has been shown that internal patients with tuberculosis are more informed about their physical health. condition and are eager to receive more such information. from doctors and nurses than similar external patients. In addition, it was observed that internal smokers seemed to be more attentive to warnings to quit the habit compared to external smokers. Similarly, there are connections between internal beliefs and behavior aimed at preventing diseases of teeth and gums; effective participation in weight loss programs; favorable attitude towards vaccinations; participation in physical education and recreational activities and compliance with various types of regimens recommended by doctors. Even the use of seat belts is more common among internals than among externals. What is impressive is that such a general, non-specific personality variable as I - E shows similar connections with the above forms of behavior, especially when we take into account the complex, multi-factorial nature of the latter. In plural In relationships, internals appear to be more competent than externals. Perhaps this impression arises from their more active attempts to acquire information that will allow them to influence the external environment, since they are confident that they are capable of exerting such an influence. In cases where others attempt to exert interpersonal influence, internals are typically expected to be more persistent than externals; at the very least, their consent should be more deliberate and logical than just a reflex action. A number of studies confirmed this assumption. Basically, such data were obtained in research. conformity, implicit influence and other similar phenomena. To the extent that verbal conditioning represents a situation of implicit influence, the data accumulated here can also be considered to confirm the assumption made above, since we find that externals develop conditioned responses of this type more easily than internals. Similar results are found when considering changes in attitudes. Externals seem to be unusually susceptible, especially when they encounter information. from authoritative sources. Research results in the field of achievements are extremely ambiguous. For children, academic success is directly related to internalizing beliefs, while for college students this relationship is noticeably weaker or reversed. Likewise, when it comes to studying the connections between achievement needs and variable I-E, the data are quite contradictory and, moreover, are often noisy due to the influence of gender differences. In a related area of ​​research. It was found that internalizing children are more able to delay immediate gratification in order to obtain delayed rewards. Likewise, because externalizers are more likely to attribute the results of their performance to external factors, they are unable to fully experience the sense of pride and satisfaction caused by achievements, which is, as such, an integral part of the “achievement syndrome.” Relatively recent research. were focused on the possibility that certain externalities choose their beliefs as a defensive reaction. That is, “in reality” they do not believe in the external organization of the world. Rather, their externalizing beliefs represent a kind of defensive rationalization so that they can explain (justify) the failure that has occurred or the expected failure. This is the direction of research. suggests that the beliefs of some externalists are “congruent” with their previous experience or reinforcement dynamics, while the beliefs of others are only “defensive” steps taken to minimize the consequences of failure, which could otherwise undermine vitality "loser". Origin of I-E Perhaps the most serious lag in publications on the problem of L. is observed in the field of systematic research. development of I - E beliefs. And yet, certain relationships were noted here, at least in general outline. For example, parents, giving their children warmth and love, giving them a sense of security and a positive emotional charge, helping to form a variety of skills, thereby contribute to the development of their internal orientation. The consistency of parental reinforcements, behavior and standards is also associated with the development of internality in children. In addition, data from a number of studies. talk about the compatibility of external beliefs with low socioeconomic status. Racial and ethnic groups that have little or no access to power and mobility exhibit more externalized belief systems. There are even some reasons to believe that certain cultures can more or less explicitly teach an external position. See also Field Dependence, Internally and Externally Directed Behavior, Obedience E. J. Fares

Locus of Control – Psychological Dictionary

A general term that social psychology used to denote the perceived source of control over one's own behavior. It is assessed according to the dimension - from high internal to high external. Internals are those people who tend to accept responsibility for their own actions and view themselves as having control over their own destinies, while externals are those who tend to view the source of control as permanently located elsewhere and attribute success or failure to external factors. forces. Note that reality is not measured here; the question is not whether real control comes from exogenous or endogenous sources, but how the individual perceives it. See attribution theory, internality-externality scale.

Locus of Control – Sociological Dictionary

A concept that reflects a person’s tendency to attribute the causes of events to external or internal factors. In the original version of the theory of subjective localization of control by J. Rotter (1954), only two types of personal control were distinguished: internal and external, which were considered as global characteristics of personality. The three-dimensional L.K. scale was then developed. (K. Wallston), in which externality was measured using two scales: “Attributing control to other people” and “Attributing control to fate.” Besides, in empirical studies it was shown that type L.K. depends on the specific situation. J. Rotter's theory belongs to the class of “expected benefit” theories, that is, it states that a person’s behavior is determined by how he evaluates the opportunity to achieve the desired result. It is assumed, in particular, that individuals with internal L.K. behave purposefully and consistently, carefully collect information necessary for successful actions, persistently overcome difficulties and tend to comply with social norms. Quite a lot of critical comments have been made against this concept, primarily related to the insufficient definition of the concept of “L.K.” itself. Basically, they contain indications of the impossibility of contrasting internal and external causes without their additional clarification, as well as the high social desirability of internal L.K., which can distort both the respondents’ answers and their interpretation. F. Haider, along with external and internal type attribution of responsibility, suggests taking into account such parameters as stability/variability of causes, the ability to foresee the result of actions, and the individual’s intentions. Stable reasons include the subjectively assessed difficulty of the task and a person’s abilities, while variable reasons include effort and chance. B. Weiner developed Heider's ideas by creating a four-dimensional model of causes. Nevertheless, even with these significant clarifications, the theory of L.K. cannot capture all the features of causal attribution. In addition, the positive meaning attributed in most works to the inner L.K. is questionable. Despite the introduction of two dimensions of externality by K. Wallston, when interpreting empirical data it, as a negative characteristic of a person, is often contrasted with “useful” internality. This type of external attribution of responsibility, such as “Fate,” has been little studied, and its influence on behavior has not been precisely determined. However, there is a significant difference between attributing the causes of events to fate unique to each person or to blind chance. In addition, defining the type of attribution of responsibility as internal does not yet allow us to answer the question of why a person came to such a conclusion and through what mechanisms control is exercised. The everyday understanding of strength and confidence differs significantly from the scientific interpretation of these terms. Many people believe that the ability to manage emotions, desires and immediate impulses is one of the most important characteristics of a strong personality. As a rule, in such cases, in order to achieve a sense of control, they resort to suppressing spontaneous impulses through muscle effort. Therefore, to more accurately assess the influence of perceived control on behavior, it is necessary to consider the methods by which it is established and maintained. Often, perceived control is achieved through actions that are dangerous to the individual, by suppressing other people, or by openly opposing all social norms. Moreover, the less ability a person has to actually control the situation, the greater the likelihood of such behavior. There are some empirical grounds for considering individuals with a strong internal attribution of responsibility to be nonconformists who actively resist any outside influence. According to O. Rank, such behavior is characteristic of the lowest stage of will development - “anti-will”. In order to establish control, a person can actively influence a situation, trying to change it if it does not suit him, but the effectiveness of such behavior depends on the individual’s ability to differentiate situations that are under his control from situations that cannot be changed. Nowadays, more and more often, instead of the term "L.K." The term "perceived control" is used. In this last concept, at least two components can be distinguished: a) consistency of behavior and its consequences. Reflects subjective assessment the likelihood that actions will lead to the desired result; b) competence, that is, an assessment of one’s own ability to carry out such actions. This aspect of perceived control is very close to the concept of self-efficacy. Consistency is essential for psychological well-being and life satisfaction. M. Seligman's theory of learned helplessness describes Negative influence on the behavior, mental and physical health of a person in those stressful situations in which the individual cannot establish a connection between his actions and changes in the environment. The state of learned helplessness is close in its characteristics to chronic depression; it is expressed not only in passivity, but also in the suppression of physiological functions. It is not surprising that learned helplessness is considered one of the components of “type C behavior,” which, according to some experts, can contribute to the onset of cancer. S. Carver and S. Harris point out the importance of the ability to predict the result, taking into account not only personal control, but also the external situation. What matters most is not personal responsibility, but a person’s confidence in the ability to achieve the goal. Awareness of one's responsibility is important in the case when the desired result can be achieved through active actions, through the application of significant efforts. In situations where the outcome is not determined by a person's behavior, perceived control is undesirable. It is important to understand that in the theory of J. Rotter and in other similar theories we are talking specifically about perceived control. However, a person's assessment of his or her abilities may be inaccurate. There are several reasons that contribute to misperceptions of control. The desire for control can be considered one of the most important. The ability to manage one's own life provides the individual with a certain degree of independence from social and biological reality. People strive to feel in control of a situation even when its outcome is clearly determined by chance. Sometimes, to maintain a sense of control, it is enough to be aware of your ability to predict the occurrence of an event, which, in principle, can no longer be considered as control over it. The erroneous perception of subjective control as high contributes to neglect of possible danger, as well as the formation of inflated expectations regarding the effectiveness of one’s own actions. As a result, the person either finds himself unprepared for a stressful situation or experiences deep disappointment regarding his abilities. SOUTH. Frolova