UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Mediating and moderating effects of locus of control and appraisals of control on burglary victim coping Mackoff, Randy 1992

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-ubc_1992_fall_mackoff_randy.pdf [ 5.75MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0103799.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0103799-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0103799-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0103799-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0103799-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0103799-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0103799-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0103799-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0103799.ris

Full Text

MEDIATING AND MODERATING EFFECTS OF LOCUS OF CONTROL AND APPRAISALS OF CONTROL ON BURGLARY VICTIM COPING by RANDY MACKOFF BA, The U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Columbia, 1984 MA, The U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Columbia, 1988 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF EDUCATION  in THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES (Department o f C o u n s e l l i n g  Psychology)  We a c c e p t t h i s t h e s i s as c o n f o r m i n g to the required  TKÊ^miV^ËBSrfY  standard  OF BRITISH COLUMBIA  August, 1992 ©  Randy M a c k o f f , 1992  In  presenting  degree at the  this  thesis in  partial  University of  fulfilment  of  of  department  requirements  British Columbia, I agree that the  freely available for reference and study. I further copying  the  by  his  or  her  representatives.  an advanced  Library shall make  it  agree that permission for extensive  this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted or  for  It  is  by the  understood  that  head of copying  my or  publication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission.  Department  of  Cc)sjfxî,<^\\ \VN<k ^ N K p r ^ l > 0 ^  The University of British Columbia Vancouver, Canada  Date  FVj(Kv)t>\:  C5  DE-6 (2/88)  W .m  ?  ABSTRACT The  purpose of t h i s study was  r o l e i n t h e d i f f e r e n t ways v i c t i m s conducted. I n t h e  t o examine c o n t r o l b e l i e f s and cope w i t h b u r g l a r y . Two  f i r s t study, p a r t i c i p a n t s were c o l l e g e  had  been b u r g l a r i z e d  w i t h i n the p r e v i o u s y e a r . The  and  women between the ages of 19 and  37  their  studies students  were who  v o l u n t e e r s were  (N=61). The  men  participants  completed Levenson's (1981) l o c u s of c o n t r o l s c a l e . The  f o l l o w i n g week,  i n o r d e r t o a s s i s t r e c a l l , the p a r t i c i p a n t s viewed a 2-minute v i d e o  that  d e p i c t e d a r e s i d e n t i a l b u r g l a r y i n p r o g r e s s . Immediately f o l l o w i n g v i d e o , t h e y completed a c o p i n g measure, s i t u a t i o n a l a p p r a i s a l s c o n t r o l measure, and  importance of outcome measure. The  a c o n c e p t u a l r e p l i c a t i o n of the f i r s t study and  the  of  second s t u d y  therefore followed  the  same p r o c e d u r e s . However, i n o r d e r t o a s s e s s l o c u s of c o n t r o l p r i o r v i c t i m i z a t i o n , p a r t i c i p a n t s were male and (N=102) who  had  never been b u r g l a r i z e d  female c o l l e g e  regression  to  students  (experimentally induced v i c t i m s ) .  Zero-order c o r r e l a t i o n s , discriminant multiple  was  a n a l y s i s , and  hierarchical  were used t o examine the main, m e d i a t i n g ,  and  m o d e r a t i n g e f f e c t s of l o c u s of c o n t r o l , importance o f outcome, s i t u a t i o n a l appraisals  of c o n t r o l , and  gender on c o p i n g  Because p r e v i o u s r e s e a r c h has  found gender d i f f e r e n c e s  c r i m i n a l v i c t i m i z a t i o n , i t was  hypothesized that the  gender has  I t was  l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and  influence  c o p i n g r e l a t i o n would be by how  influenced  that  control  by  much importance he o r she  v i c t i m i z a t i o n e x p e r i e n c e . In b o t h the v i c t i m group and i n d u c e d v i c t i m group, emotion-focused c o p i n g was  an  attached to  situational significantly  by gender, l o c u s of c o n t r o l , importance of outcome,  and  of c o n t r o l f o r the v i c t i m group o n l y . Locus o f  influence  the gender and  the  experimentally  of c o n t r o l . However, p r o b l e m - f o c u s e d c o p i n g was  s i t u a t i o n a l appraisals  the  s i g n i f i c a n t l y predicted  by gender, l o c u s of c o n t r o l , importance of outcome, and  c o n t r o l d i d not  to  a l s o expected t h a t the d i r e c t i o n o r s t r e n g t h o f  i n d i v i d u a l ' s gender and  predicted  in reaction  on c o p i n g r e s u l t s from an i n d i v i d u a l ' s l o c u s of  orientation.  appraisals  functions.  c o p i n g r e l a t i o n . The  results  i n d i c a t e d t h a t i n b o t h groups men who h e l d s t r o n g p o w e r f u l o t h e r s  locus  o f c o n t r o l b e l i e f s used l e s s emotion-focused c o p i n g . I n c o n t r a s t , i n t h e b u r g l a r y v i c t i m group, women who h e l d s t r o n g p o w e r f u l  others locus of  c o n t r o l b e l i e f s used more emotion-focused c o p i n g . However, t h e r e was no r e l a t i o n s h i p between p o w e r f u l o t h e r s l o c u s o f c o n t r o l b e l i e f s and e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d c o p i n g f o r women i n t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l l y i n d u c e d  victim  group. F o r e x p e r i m e n t a l l y induced v i c t i m s , b o t h men and women w i t h  high  chance l o c u s o f c o n t r o l b e l i e f s used more e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d c o p i n g . I n b o t h g r o u p s , importance o f outcome d i d n o t moderate t h e l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and c o p i n g r e l a t i o n . I m p l i c a t i o n s o f t h e s e r e s u l t s and s u g g e s t i o n s f o r future research are discussed.  TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ABSTRACT  i  i  LIST OF TABLES  viii  LIST OF FIGURES  ix  ACKNOWLEDGMENTS  X  INTRODUCTION  1  Coping Theory  1  G e n e r a l i z e d B e l i e f s About C o n t r o l  3  Importance o f Outcome  5  S i t u a t i o n a l Appraisals of Control  6  Gender D i f f e r e n c e s  7  Summary  8  Methodological Issues  9  REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE  12  Crime V i c t i m Coping  12  C o p i n g Theory  19  G e n e r a l i z e d B e l i e f s About C o n t r o l  24  Importance o f Outcome  33  S i t u a t i o n a l Appraisals of Control  36  Gender D i f f e r e n c e s  40  M e d i a t o r and Moderator V a r i a b l e s  44  Methodological Issues  48  Summary  53  HYPOTHESES  55  METHOD  60  Study 1  60  Participants  60  Procedure  60  Study 2 Participants  62 62  Procedure  62  Video Stimulus  62  Predictor Variables  63  Levenson's I , P, and C S c a l e s  63  S i t u a t i o n a l Appraisals of Control  65  Outcome V a l u e  65  C r i t e r i o n V a r i a b l e s (Coping)  66  Manipulation  67  Check  A n a l y s i s o f Data  68  RESULTS  71  D e s c r i p t i v e C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f t h e B u r g l a r y V i c t i m Sample  71  Manipulation  71  Checks  D e s c r i p t i v e C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the Experimentally Induced V i c t i m Sample  71  Manipulation  73  Checks  D e s c r i p t i v e S t a t i s t i c s of V a r i a b l e s f o r Burglary V i c t i m s  74  D e s c r i p t i v e S t a t i s t i c s of Variables f o r Experimentally Induced V i c t i m s  76  Preliminary Analysis  78  Group D i f f e r e n c e s on Demographic  Data  78  Group D i f f e r e n c e s on Independent and Dependent V a r i a b l e s  78  T e s t o f Main E f f e c t s f o r Study 1 ( B u r g l a r y V i c t i m s )  83  T e s t o f M e d i a t o r Hypotheses f o r Study 1 ( B u r g l a r y V i c t i m s )  86  T e s t o f Moderator Hypotheses f o r Study 1 ( B u r g l a r y V i c t i m s )  88  Q u e s t i o n o f T h e o r e t i c a l I n t e r e s t f o r Study 1 ( B u r g l a r y T e s t o f Main E f f e c t s f o r Study 2 ( E x p e r i m e n t a l l y  Victims)..89  Induced  Victims) T e s t o f M e d i a t o r Hypotheses f o r Study 2 ( E x p e r i m e n t a l l y  92 Induced  Victims) T e s t o f Moderator Hypotheses f o r Study 2 ( E x p e r i m e n t a l l y Victims)  94 Induced 97  Question of Theoretical  I n t e r e s t f o r Study 2  (Experimentally  Induced V i c t i m s )  98  DISCUSSION  101  Implications  f o r Counselling  112  Limitations  113  Future Research  114  REFERENCES  116  APPENDICES  126  Appendix A  126  Informed Consent  127  Demographic Q u e s t i o n n a i r e  128  Locus o f C o n t r o l Measure  130  Appendix B  134  D e s c r i p t i o n of Video  135  V i d e o V i e w i n g I n s t r u c t i o n s f o r V i c t i m and  Experimentally  Induced V i c t i m Group  136  COPE f o r V i c t i m and E x p e r i m e n t a l l y Situational Appraisals Experimentally  of Control  Induced V i c t i m Group  137  f o r V i c t i m and  Induced V i c t i m Group  142  Outcome V a l u e f o r V i c t i m Group and E x p e r i m e n t a l l y  Induced V i c t i m  Group  143  M - C l ( l O ) f o r V i c t i m and E x p e r i m e n t a l l y  Induced  V i c t i m Group Burglary  E x p e r i e n c e f o r V i c t i m and E x p e r i m e n t a l l y  144 Induced  V i c t i m Group  145  Appendix C  146  I n t e r c o r r e l a t i o n s o f Coping S u b s c a l e s f o r V i c t i m Group I n t e r c o r r e l a t i o n s o f Coping S u b s c a l e s f o r E x p e r i m e n t a l l y V i c t i m Group Appendix D  147 Induced 148 149  C o r r e l a t i o n s o f S o c i a l D e s i r a b i l i t y w i t h t h e Independent and Dependent V a r i a b l e s o f B u r g l a r y V i c t i m s and E x p e r i m e n t a l l y Induced V i c t i m s Appendix E  ,..150 151  M u l t i v a r i a t e and U n i v a r i a t e F-Tests f o r P r e v i o u s V i c t i m i z a t i o n and I n t e n s i t y o f E x p e r i e n c e E f f e c t s Appendix F  152 153  I n t e r c o r r e l a t i o n s o f P r e d i c t o r and C r i t e r i o n V a r i a b l e s o f Combined Sample  154  LIST OF TABLES 1. D e s c r i p t i v e C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f B u r g l a r y V i c t i m P a r t i c i p a n t s and E x p e r i m e n t a l l y Induced V i c t i m P a r t i c i p a n t s  72  2. Means, S t a n d a r d D e v i a t i o n s , and I n t e r c o r r e l a t i o n s o f P r e d i c t o r and C r i t e r i o n V a r i a b l e s o f B u r g l a r y V i c t i m s  75  3. Means, S t a n d a r d D e v i a t i o n s , and I n t e r c o r r e l a t i o n s o f P r e d i c t o r and C r i t e r i o n V a r i a b l e s of E x p e r i m e n t a l l y Induced  Victims  77  4. M u l t i v a r i a t e T e s t s and U n i v a r i a t e F - T e s t s f o r V i c t i m S t a t u s , Gender, and V i c t i m S t a t u s by Gender I n t e r a c t i o n  79  5. S t a n d a r d i z e d D i s c r i m i n a n t F u n c t i o n C o e f f i c i e n t s f o r V i c t i m S t a t u s and Gender  81  6. H i e r a r c h i c a l R e g r e s s i o n A n a l y s i s T e s t i n g Main and M o d e r a t i n g E f f e c t s P r e d i c t i n g Problem-Focused Coping f o r Burglary Victims  84  7. H i e r a r c h i c a l R e g r e s s i o n A n a l y s i s T e s t i n g Main and M o d e r a t i n g E f f e c t s P r e d i c t i n g Emotion-Focused C o p i n g f o r Burglary Victims  85  8. H i e r a r c h i c a l R e g r e s s i o n A n a l y s i s T e s t i n g Main and M o d e r a t i n g E f f e c t s P r e d i c t i n g Emotion-Focused  Coping  f o r E x p e r i m e n t a l l y Induced V i c t i m s  93  9. S t a n d a r d i z e d D i s c r i m i n a n t F u n c t i o n C o e f f i c i e n t s f o r Gender E f f e c t s o f E x p e r i m e n t a l l y Induced V i c t i m s  96  LIST OF FIGURES 1. H y p o t h e t i c a l model o f s i t u a t i o n a l a p p r a i s a l s o f c o n t r o l mediating  the locus of control-coping f u n c t i o n r e l a t i o n  46  2. H y p o t h e t i c a l model o f outcome v a l u e as moderator o f t h e l o c u s of c o n t r o l - c o p i n g f u n c t i o n r e l a t i o n 3. H y p o t h e s i z e d  model o f i n t e r n a l l o c u s o f c o n t r o l ,  47 situational  a p p r a i s a l s o f c o n t r o l , and gender as m e d i a t o r s o f p r o b l e m - f o c u s e d coping 4. H y p o t h e s i z e d  57 model o f chance l o c u s o f c o n t r o l , p o w e r f u l  others  l o c u s o f c o n t r o l , s i t u a t i o n a l a p p r a i s a l s o f c o n t r o l , and gender as m e d i a t o r v a r i a b l e s o f e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d c o p i n g  58  5. M o d e r a t i n g e f f e c t o f gender on t h e p o w e r f u l o t h e r s l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d c o p i n g r e l a t i o n f o r b u r g l a r y v i c t i m s  91  6. M o d e r a t i n g e f f e c t o f gender on t h e chance l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d c o p i n g r e l a t i o n f o r e x p e r i m e n t a l l y induced  victims...99  7. M o d e r a t i n g e f f e c t o f gender on t h e p o w e r f u l o t h e r s l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d c o p i n g r e l a t i o n f o r e x p e r i m e n t a l l y induced v i c t i m s  100  ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I t h a n k my d i s s e r t a t i o n J o h n s t o n , and Dr. S.S.  Lee,  committee. Dr. N. Amundson, Dr. C. f o r t h e i r a d v i c e and c o u n s e l .  I t h a n k my r e s e a r c h s u p e r v i s o r . Dr. B o n i t a Long, f o r her wisdom i n t h e p r e p a r a t i o n o f t h i s d i s s e r t a t i o n . outstanding  extraordinary  t o have had  her  supervisor.  I t h a n k my mother R i v a , f a t h e r A l b e r t , s i s t e r S h e r r y , L e s l i e , f o r t h e i r encouragement and c o n f i d e n c e my  particular,  Dr. Long i s an  p r o f e s s o r and i t i s my f o r t u n a t e e x p e r i e n c e  as my r e s e a r c h  In  and  brother  i n my a b i l i t y t o c o m p l e t e  d o c t o r a l degree. F i n a l l y , I thank my w i f e G a i l , son A l e x a n d e r , and  J a n n e l l e , f o r without t h e i r support,  encouragement, and  daughter love  the  s u c c e s s f u l p u r s u i t o f my academic dream would not have been p o s s i b l e . No p e r s o n c o u l d have a b e t t e r f a m i l y t h a n t h a t o f my own.  Thank  you.  INTRODUCTION R e s i d e n t i a l b u r g l a r y ( b r e a k i n g and e n t e r i n g a d w e l l i n g house w i t h i n t e n t t o commit a c r i m i n a l o f f e n s e , u s u a l l y t h e f t ) i s a common o f f e n s e i n Canada (827 b u r g l a r i e s p e r 100,000 p o p u l a t i o n ; Canadian Crime S t a t i s t i c s , 1989). A l t h o u g h b u r g l a r y o c c u r s  frequently, victims of  b u r g l a r y have n o t r e c e i v e d as much r e s e a r c h a t t e n t i o n as v i c t i m s o f v i o l e n c e and sex o f f e n s e s  (Maguire, 1980). Y e t , t h e way v i c t i m s cope  w i t h t h e burglary experience  d i f f e r s c o n s i d e r a b l y from o t h e r v i c t i m  groups ( F i s c h e r , 1984; Maguire, 1980; Papp, 1981; W a l l e r & O k i h i r o , 1978;  W i r t z & H a r r e l l , 1987). Furthermore, t h e r e i s some e v i d e n c e t o  suggest t h a t men and women cope d i f f e r e n t l y w i t h b u r g l a r y v i c t i m i z a t i o n (Maguire, 1980). B u r g l a r y v i c t i m s r e p o r t a v a r i e t y o f c o p i n g s t r a t e g i e s , some o f t h e s e s t r a t e g i e s a r e b e h a v i o u r i a l l y focused e m o t i o n a l l y focused  and some a r e  ( i . e . , change l o c k s , d e n i a l o f v u l n e r a b i l i t y )  (Agnew, 1985; Maguire, 1980; Paap, 1981). Theory s u g g e s t s t h a t i n an e f f o r t t o r e g a i n a sense o f c o n t r o l t h e c o p i n g  s t r a t e g i e s s e l e c t e d by  v i c t i m s a r e l i k e l y t o be consonant w i t h t h e i r g e n e r a l b e l i e f s about c o n t r o l , b e l i e f s about c o n t r o l t h a t a r e s p e c i f i c t o t h e s i t u a t i o n , and t h e i m p o r t a n c e o f t h e s i t u a t i o n (Lazarus & Folkman, 1984; R o t t e r , 1975; W a l l s t o n , W a l l s t o n , Smith, & Dobbins, 1987). Because c o p i n g  i s connected  with p s y c h o l o g i c a l functioning, the systematic examination of locus o f c o n t r o l , i m p o r t a n c e o f t h e outcome o f t h e b u r g l a r y , and s i t u a t i o n a l a p p r a i s a l s o f c o n t r o l may c o n t r i b u t e t o t h e development o f c o u n s e l l i n g i n t e r v e n t i o n s f o r b u r g l a r y v i c t i m s . Thus t h e purpose o f t h i s s t u d y was t o d e t e r m i n e t h e e x t e n t t o which c o n t r o l b e l i e f s account f o r i n d i v i d u a l d i f f e r e n c e s i n burglary v i c t i m s ' short-term  use o f coping s t r a t e g i e s .  Coping Theory C o p i n g has been addressed from a v a r i e t y o f t h e o r e t i c a l p e r s p e c t i v e s , a l l o f which have l i m i t a t i o n s and s e r i o u s f l a w s Folkman, 1984). L a z a r u s and Folkman p r e s e n t  (Lazarus &  a useful theoretical  framework o f c o p i n g t h a t attempts t o r e c t i f y t h e s h o r t c o m i n g s o f  p r e v i o u s approaches.  Furthermore,  L a z a r u s and Folkman (1984) d e s c r i b e  c o p i n g as a p r o c e s s r a t h e r than a t r a i t , which s u g g e s t s t h a t c o p i n g s h o u l d be s t u d i e d i n l i g h t of a p a r t i c u l a r e v e n t . They d e f i n e c o p i n g  as  " c o n s t a n t l y changing c o g n i t i v e and b e h a v i o r a l e f f o r t s t o manage s p e c i f i c e x t e r n a l and/or i n t e r n a l demands t h a t a r e a p p r a i s e d as t a x i n g o r exceeding the resources of the person"  (Lazarus & Folkman, 1984,  141). From t h i s framework, problem-focused  c o p i n g and  p.  emotion-focused  c o p i n g a r e c o n s i d e r e d t h e two main f u n c t i o n s of c o p i n g . A c o p i n g f u n c t i o n i s t h e purpose a c o p i n g s t r a t e g y s e r v e s . P r o b l e m - f o c u s e d i s d i r e c t e d a t managing t h e problem  causing the d i s t r e s s .  coping  Emotion-  focused coping i s d i r e c t e d at d e a l i n g w i t h the i n d i v i d u a l ' s emotions t h a t a r i s e from t h e problem event  ( L a z a r u s & Folkman,  The d i s t i n c t i o n between problem-focused  1984).  and e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d  i s w i d e l y r e c o g n i z e d and accepted w i t h i n t h e s t r e s s and  coping  coping  l i t e r a t u r e ( E n d l e r & P a r k e r , 1990). In response t o c r i t i c i s m s o f e x i s t i n g measures o f c o p i n g p r o c e s s e s . C a r v e r , S c h e i e r , and W e i n t r a u b (1989) d e v e l o p e d a m u l t i d i m e n s i o n a l c o p i n g i n v e n t o r y i n which  problem-  focused coping i n c l u d e s the subscales a c t i v e coping, planning, s u p p r e s s i o n o f competing a c t i v i t i e s , r e s t r a i n t c o p i n g , and s e e k i n g o f i n s t r u m e n t a l s o c i a l s u p p o r t . Emotion-focused  c o p i n g i s r e p r e s e n t e d by  subscales t h a t i n c l u d e seeking of emotional support, p o s i t i v e r e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , acceptance, d e n i a l , and t u r n i n g t o r e l i g i o n . m u l t i - d i m e n s i o n a l approach problem-focused  This  p r o v i d e s d e t a i l and c l a r i t y t o emotion-  and  c o p i n g and was employed i n t h i s s t u d y t o examine  i n d i v i d u a l d i f f e r e n c e s i n t h e way b u r g l a r y v i c t i m s cope. Based on t h e o r y , L a z a r u s and Folkman (1984) suggested t h a t g e n e r a l i z e d b e l i e f s about c o n t r o l ( p a r t i c u l a r l y l o c u s o f c o n t r o l ) and s i t u a t i o n a l a p p r a i s a l s o f c o n t r o l would i n f l u e n c e an i n d i v i d u a l ' s c h o i c e of coping f u n c t i o n s .  However, i n t h e i r 1980  community sample and t h e i r 1985  study of a  middle-aged  study o f c o l l e g e exam t a k i n g , t h e y  t h a t l o c u s o f c o n t r o l d i d not r e l a t e t o c o p i n g , whereas s i t u a t i o n a l  found  a p p r a i s a l s of c o n t r o l d i d influence coping  (Folkman & L a z a r u s , 1980,  1985). I n g e n e r a l , i n d i v i d u a l s who b e l i e v e d t h e y c o u l d c o n t r o l t h e s t r e s s o r used more problem-focused t h a n e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d c o p i n g . other researchers  However,  have found t h a t i n t e r n a l l o c u s o f c o n t r o l i s  p o s i t i v e l y a s s o c i a t e d w i t h problem-focused coping  (Anderson, 1977;  C a r v e r e t a l . , 1989; P a r k e s , 1984; Solomon, M i k u l i n c e r , & B e n b e n i s h t y , 1989). An e x p l a n a t i o n  f o r t h e s e i n c o n s i s t e n t r e s u l t s may be t h a t t h e  l o c u s o f c o n t r o l c o n s t r u c t was i n t e n d e d s p e c i f i c c o n t r o l expectancies 1975,  t o be used i n c o n j u n c t i o n  as a p r e d i c t o r o f human b e h a v i o u r  with (Rotter,  1990). Thus, t h e i n f l u e n c e o f b o t h s i t u a t i o n a l a p p r a i s a l s o f  c o n t r o l and l o c u s o f c o n t r o l a r e i m p o r t a n t i n u n d e r s t a n d i n g t h e c o p i n g strategies of burglary victims. Generalized B e l i e f s About Control The  b e s t known c o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o n o f g e n e r a l i z e d b e l i e f about  control i s Rotter's  (1966) c o n s t r u c t o f l o c u s o f c o n t r o l .  b e l i e v e s that a reinforcement  i s contingent  When a p e r s o n  upon h i s o r h e r own  b e h a v i o u r o r a c t i o n , t h e n t h i s b e l i e f i s r e f e r r e d t o as an i n t e r n a l c o n t r o l o f reinforcement  o r i n t e r n a l l o c u s o f c o n t r o l ( R o t t e r , 1966).  When a p e r s o n b e l i e v e s t h a t a r e i n f o r c e m e n t  i s not contingent  upon h i s  o r h e r own b e h a v i o u r o r a c t i o n , b u t i s s u b j e c t t o l u c k , chance, o r f a t e , t h e n t h i s b e l i e f i s r e f e r r e d t o as an e x t e r n a l c o n t r o l o f o r e x t e r n a l l o c u s o f c o n t r o l ( R o t t e r , 1966).  reinforcement  From a t h e o r e t i c a l b a s i s  l o c u s o f c o n t r o l has i t s g r e a t e s t i n f l u e n c e on b e h a v i o u r i n n o v e l ambiguous s i t u a t i o n s ( R o t t e r , 1966, 1975).  and/or  Thus, when a p e r s o n has n o t  been p r e v i o u s l y b u r g l a r i z e d , t h e n i n r e l a t i v e t e r m s , t h e b u r g l a r y e x p e r i e n c e i s n o v e l and ambiguous, and l o c u s o f c o n t r o l would be expected t o s i g n i f i c a n t l y influence the v i c t i m ' s coping  behaviour.  Levenson (1981), a l t h o u g h r e t a i n i n g t h e i n t e r n a l o r i e n t a t i o n , has f u r t h e r developed t h e e x t e r n a l locus o f c o n t r o l o r i e n t a t i o n t o include t h e d i m e n s i o n s o f chance and p o w e r f u l o t h e r s . Levenson (1981)  describes  chance and p o w e r f u l o t h e r s as " b e l i e f i n t h e b a s i c u n o r d e r e d and random  n a t u r e o f t h e w o r l d and b e l i e f i n t h e b a s i c o r d e r and p r e d i c t a b i l i t y o f t h e w o r l d , c o u p l e d w i t h t h e expectancy control"  that powerful others are i n  (p. 1 5 ) . A l t h o u g h t h e dimension  of powerful others i s  c o n s i d e r e d an e x t e r n a l o r i e n t a t i o n , i t does have t h e p o t e n t i a l f o r control.  The p o w e r f u l o t h e r s o r i e n t a t i o n i s p a r t i c u l a r l y p e r t i n e n t t o  b u r g l a r y v i c t i m s because i t a l l o w s t h e v i c t i m t o h o l d t h e e x p e c t a n c y t h a t t h e a u t h o r i t i e s ( i . e . . P o l i c e ) may be a b l e t o h e l p a c h i e v e t h e d e s i r e d r e i n f o r c e m e n t . T h e r e f o r e , d i f f e r e n t i a t i n g between p o w e r f u l o t h e r s and chance appears i m p o r t a n t f o r u n d e r s t a n d i n g t h e e x p e c t a n c y b e l i e f s o f p e o p l e when a u t h o r i t i e s may be i n v o l v e d i n t h e p s y c h o l o g i c a l event  (Levenson,  1981), Hence, Levenson's (1981) m o d i f i c a t i o n f u r t h e r  r e f i n e s t h e e x t e r n a l o r i e n t a t i o n o f R o t t e r ' s (1956) c o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o n and i n d o i n g so makes i t r e l e v a n t t o t h e study o f v i c t i m s o f b u r g l a r y . Evidence  s u p p o r t s t h e p o s i t i o n t h a t an i n d i v i d u a l ' s l o c u s o f  c o n t r o l may account  f o r d i f f e r e n t i a l coping i n s t r e s s f u l  situations  ( L e f c o u r t , 1976, 1983; Phares, 1976; R o t t e r , 1966; S t r i c k l a n d , 1978, 1989). S e v e r a l r e s e a r c h e r s s t u d y i n g events d i f f e r e n t from c r i m e v i c t i m i z a t i o n (e.g., h e a l t h - r e l a t e d i s s u e s , n a t u r a l d i s a s t e r s , and war) have found r e l a t i o n s h i p s between l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and c o p i n g . I n g e n e r a l , i n d i v i d u a l s h o l d i n g an i n t e r n a l l o c u s o f c o n t r o l o r i e n t a t i o n use more c o p i n g c o n s i d e r e d problem-focused,  compared w i t h e m o t i o n -  f o c u s e d c o p i n g , whereas i n d i v i d u a l s who h o l d an e x t e r n a l l o c u s o f c o n t r o l u s e more emotion-focused 1977;  t h a n problem-focused  coping  (Anderson,  C a r v e r e t a l . , 1989; P a r k e s , 1984; Solomon e t a l . , 1989;  S t r i c k l a n d , 1978). The r e l a t i o n between p o w e r f u l o t h e r s and c o p i n g f u n c t i o n s has not r e c e i v e d much a t t e n t i o n . B l a n c h a r d - F i e l d s and I r i o n (1988) found t h a t c o l l e g e age s t u d e n t s who h o l d a p o w e r f u l o t h e r s o r i e n t a t i o n u s e l e s s problem-focused  c o p i n g t h a n o l d e r a d u l t s who h o l d t h e same l o c u s o f  control orientation.  From a t h e o r e t i c a l b a s i s , one would e x p e c t t h a t an  i n d i v i d u a l h o l d i n g a h i g h p o w e r f u l o t h e r s o r i e n t a t i o n would u s e more  emotion-focused  c o p i n g than problem-focused  coping, unless t h e  s i t u a t i o n a l a p p r a i s a l s of c o n t r o l i n d i c a t e d t h a t the a c t i o n s o f t h e p o w e r f u l o t h e r s were p r e d i c t a b l e and p o s s i b l e t o m a n i p u l a t e . Importance of Outcome A l t h o u g h t h e r e i s evidence o f a r e l a t i o n s h i p between l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and c o p i n g f u n c t i o n s , much o f t h e r e s e a r c h has been f l a w e d by f a i l i n g t o account 1975;  f o r t h e moderating  e f f e c t o f outcome v a l u e ( R o t t e r ,  S t r i c k l a n d , 1989; W a l l s t o n e t a l . , 1987). R o t t e r (1966) a r g u e s  t h a t a person's  b e h a v i o u r o r a c t i o n s i n a n o v e l o r ambiguous s i t u a t i o n  a r e a f u n c t i o n o f t h a t i n d i v i d u a l s ' s l o c u s o f c o n t r o l , as w e l l as t h e degree o f t h e importance  o f t h e outcome (outcome v a l u e ) t h a t t h e  i n d i v i d u a l a t t a c h e s t o t h e s i t u a t i o n . Thus, u n l i k e l o c u s o f c o n t r o l , w h i c h i s a g e n e r a l i z e d expectancy  b e l i e f t h a t i s h e l d antecedent  to the  e v e n t , outcome v a l u e i s a b e l i e f t h a t must be c o n s i d e r e d i n l i g h t o f a s p e c i f i c encounter.  F o r example, t h o s e who h o l d an i n t e r n a l l o c u s o f  c o n t r o l and who v a l u e t h e i r h e a l t h , g a t h e r more i n f o r m a t i o n about h e a l t h maintenance t h a n t h o s e who do n o t v a l u e t h e i r h e a l t h ( S t r i c k l a n d , 1978; W a l l s t o n e t a l . , 1987). I n t h i s example, t h e b e h a v i o u r  i s gathering  i n f o r m a t i o n and t h e degree t o which a p e r s o n v a l u e s h i s o r h e r h e a l t h i s c o n s i d e r e d t h e outcome v a l u e . I n k e e p i n g w i t h l o c u s o f c o n t r o l t h e o r y , outcome v a l u e s h o u l d be c o n s i d e r e d i n c o n j u n c t i o n w i t h t h e l o c u s o f c o n t r o l c o n s t r u c t , and t h e f a i l u r e t o do so i s c h a r a c t e r i s t i c o f many s t u d i e s (Levenson, al.,  1981; R o t t e r , 1975; S t r i c k l a n d , 1989; W a l l s t o n e t  1987). Parkes  (1984) found t h a t i n t e r n a l and e x t e r n a l female  student  n u r s e s used s i g n i f i c a n t l y h i g h e r l e v e l s o f s u p p r e s s i o n ( s i m i l a r t o emotion-focused  coping) when a s i t u a t i o n was r a t e d as low i n importance  ( i . e . , outcome v a l u e ) . T h i s f i n d i n g s u p p o r t s t h e argument t h a t emotionf o c u s e d c o p i n g may be a more a c c e p t a b l e c o p i n g f u n c t i o n d u r i n g an event i n w h i c h t h e i n d i v i d u a l p e r c e i v e s t h e event as low i n outcome v a l u e . Hence, based on t h e o r y and s u p p o r t e d w i t h e m p i r i c a l e v i d e n c e , outcome  v a l u e i s expected t o moderate t h e l o c u s o f c o n t r o l - c o p i n g f u n c t i o n s r e l a t i o n s h i p . That i s , i t i s e x p e c t e d t h a t t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p between a l l t h r e e dimensions  o f l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and emotion-focused  c o p i n g w i l l be  s t r o n g e r among i n d i v i d u a l s h o l d i n g low outcome v a l u e t h a n among i n d i v i d u a l s h o l d i n g h i g h outcome v a l u e . C o n v e r s e l y , i t i s e x p e c t e d t h a t t h e r e l a t i o n between l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and problem-focused  c o p i n g w i l l be  s t r o n g e r among i n d i v i d u a l s h o l d i n g h i g h outcome v a l u e t h a n among i n d i v i d u a l s h o l d i n g low outcome v a l u e . Situational  Appraisals of Control  R o t t e r (1966, 1990) and Folkman (1984) contend t h a t t o p r e d i c t i n d i v i d u a l d i f f e r e n c e s i n c o p i n g one s h o u l d c o n s i d e r , i n c o n j u n c t i o n w i t h l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and outcome v a l u e , s p e c i f i c c o n t r o l e x p e c t a n c i e s as t h e y a p p l y t o t h e p s y c h o l o g i c a l s i t u a t i o n ( i n t h i s s t u d y t h e p s y c h o l o g i c a l s i t u a t i o n i s coping w i t h b u r g l a r y ) .  W i t h i n L a z a r u s and  Folkman's (1984) t h e o r e t i c a l framework, s p e c i f i c c o n t r o l e x p e c t a n c i e s a r e r e f e r r e d t o as s i t u a t i o n a l a p p r a i s a l s o f c o n t r o l .  Situational  a p p r a i s a l s o f c o n t r o l r e s u l t from t h e i n d i v i d u a l ' s c o n s i d e r a t i o n o f t h e demands o f a s p e c i f i c s i t u a t i o n and t h e degree t o w h i c h t h e i n d i v i d u a l b e l i e v e s he/she can a l t e r t h a t s p e c i f i c s i t u a t i o n . Y e t , s i t u a t i o n a l a p p r a i s a l s o f c o n t r o l may not o n l y a c t as a p r e d i c t o r v a r i a b l e o f c o p i n g f u n c t i o n s , b u t may f u r t h e r s e r v e t o mediate t h e e f f e c t o f l o c u s o f c o n t r o l on c o p i n g f u n c t i o n s ( P a r k e s ,  1984).  R e s e a r c h e r s who s t u d i e d c o p i n g i n a middle-age community sample as w e l l as c o p i n g d u r i n g t h r e e s t a g e s o f a c o l l e g e midterm e x a m i n a t i o n , found a r e l a t i o n s h i p between s i t u a t i o n a l a p p r a i s a l s o f c o n t r o l and c o p i n g f u n c t i o n s (Folkman, A l d w i n , & L a z a r u s , 1981; Folkman & L a z a r u s , 1980,  1985).  I n g e n e r a l , i n d i v i d u a l s who p e r c e i v e d a s p e c i f i c  stressor  as amenable t o change ( t h e i n d i v i d u a l b e l i e v e d he/she c o u l d c o n t r o l t h e s i t u a t i o n ) used more problem-focused  coping than emotion-focused  coping.  I n d i v i d u a l s who b e l i e v e d a s t r e s s o r was beyond t h e i r c o n t r o l , and hence had t o be a c c e p t e d , used more emotion-focused  coping than  problem-  f o c u s e d c o p i n g . Folkman, L a z a r u s , D u n k e l - S c h e t t e r , DeLongis,  and Gruen  (1986) found s i m i l a r r e s u l t s i n a sample o f 85 m a r r i e d c o u p l e s . Moreover, Parkes  (1984) found s i g n i f i c a n t i n t e r a c t i o n s between l o c u s o f  c o n t r o l and s i t u a t i o n a l a p p r a i s a l s of c o n t r o l i n r e l a t i o n t o c o p i n g b e h a v i o u r f o r female student n u r s e s . S p e c i f i c a l l y , i n t e r n a l s  who  a p p r a i s e d a s t r e s s o r as 'could change' (thus c o u l d c o n t r o l t h e s i t u a t i o n ) used g r e a t e r g e n e r a l c o p i n g t h a n s u p p r e s s i o n c o p i n g . However, i n t e r n a l s who  a p p r a i s e d a s t r e s s o r as 'must a c c e p t ' ( c o u l d not  control  t h e s i t u a t i o n ) used g r e a t e r g e n e r a l c o p i n g t h a n s u p p r e s s i o n c o p i n g . Thus, based on t h e o r y and r e s e a r c h i t i s e x p e c t e d t h a t s i t u a t i o n a l a p p r a i s a l s o f c o n t r o l i n f l u e n c e t h e c o p i n g f u n c t i o n s used by b u r g l a r y v i c t i m s and mediate t h e l o c u s o f c o n t r o l - c o p i n g f u n c t i o n s r e l a t i o n s h i p s ( C a r v e r e t a l . , 1989; Folkman e t a l . , 1981; Folkman & L a z a r u s , 1985;  Parkes,  1980,  1984).  Gender Differences L i t t l e i s known about gender d i f f e r e n c e s i n r e a c t i o n t o c r i m e v i c t i m i z a t i o n (Janoff-Bulman & F r i e z e - H a n s o n ,  1987). M a g u i r e (1980), i n  h i s s t u d y o f 322 b u r g l a r y v i c t i m s , found t h a t a d i s p r o p o r t i o n a t e number o f female b u r g l a r y v i c t i m s e x p e r i e n c e d g r e a t e r d i s t r e s s and changed b e h a v i o u r s i n a more d r a m a t i c way t h a n t h e i r male c o u n t e r p a r t s . C o n s i d e r i n g t h a t some females e x p e r i e n c e d g r e a t e r d i s t r e s s t h a n t h e m a l e s , one c o u l d i n f e r t h a t gender d i f f e r e n c e s i n response t o b u r g l a r y a r e a t t r i b u t a b l e t o b e l i e f s a s s o c i a t e d w i t h gender r o l e t h a t a r e l e a r n e d o r c u l t u r a l l y a s s i g n e d ( G r e e n g l a s s , 1982; Vaughter, l i k e l y s e v e r a l u n d e r l y i n g reasons e x p l a i n i n g why  1979). There a r e  t h e r e a r e gender  d i f f e r e n c e s i n t h e way b u r g l a r y v i c t i m s cope. I n t h e l i t e r a t u r e on s t r e s s and c o p i n g t h e r e i s s u p p o r t f o r c o p i n g d i f f e r e n c e s based on t h e male and female d i s t i n c t i o n I r i o n , 1988;  (Blanchard-Fields &  C a r v e r e t a l . , 1989; V i n g e r h o e t s & Van Heck, 1990).  For  example, V i n g e r h o e t s and Van Heck (1990), i n t h e i r community Scunple o f 997 p e o p l e , found t h a t men  used more problem-focused  than  emotion-  f o c u s e d c o p i n g and t h a t women used more e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d t h a n p r o b l e m f o c u s e d c o p i n g . T h e r e f o r e , g i v e n e v i d e n c e t h a t women e x p e r i e n c e g r e a t e r d i s t r e s s t h a n men, I expected t h a t female b u r g l a r y v i c t i m s would u s e more e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d t h a n problem-focused c o p i n g and t h e o p p o s i t e would be t r u e f o r male v i c t i m s . J a n o f f - B u l m a n and F r i e z e - H a n s o n (1987) s u g g e s t t h a t  gender  d i f f e r e n c e s i n r e a c t i o n t o crime may be a r e s u l t o f d i f f e r e n c e s i n w o r l d - v i e w b e l i e f s and s e l f - s c h e m a s . S e l f - s c h e m a s a r e d e f i n e d as " c o g n i t i v e g e n e r a l i z a t i o n s about t h e s e l f t h a t g u i d e t h e p r o c e s s i n g o f s e l f - r e l a t e d i n f o r m a t i o n and p r o v i d e d a framework f o r summarizing, e v a l u a t i n g , and d e s c r i b i n g one's e x p e r i e n c e s and b e h a v i o u r "  (Miller,  1984, p. 1223). S e v e r a l b e l i e f s l i k e l y c o m p r i s e an i n d i v i d u a l ' s  self-  schema, and on a r a t i o n a l b a s i s , l o c u s o f c o n t r o l would appear t o be one of those b e l i e f s .  Locus o f c o n t r o l i s s i m i l a r t o a p e r s o n ' s w o r l d v i e w  (Hersch & S c h e i b e , 1967) and i s p a r t l y d e v e l o p e d t h r o u g h gender v i a s o c i e t a l i n f l u e n c e (Levenson, 1981). A c c o r d i n g l y , l o c u s o f c o n t r o l s h o u l d mediate t h e gender-coping f u n c t i o n s r e l a t i o n f o r v i c t i m s o f b u r g l a r y . Moreover, Hoyenga and Hoyenga (1979) i n t h e i r r e v i e w o f t h e l i t e r a t u r e on sex d i f f e r e n c e s and a t t r i b u t i o n , r e p o r t e d t h a t s e v e r a l s t u d i e s found t h a t women f r e q u e n t l y h o l d an e x t e r n a l l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and men h o l d an i n t e r n a l l o c u s o f c o n t r o l . T h e r e f o r e , gender s h o u l d moderate t h e l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and c o p i n g r e l a t i o n . Summary I n summary, i t was expected t h a t gender would i n f l u e n c e c o p i n g f u n c t i o n s , w i t h females u s i n g more e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d t h a n p r o b l e m - f o c u s e d c o p i n g and males u s i n g more problem-focused t h a n e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d c o p i n g ( B l a n c h a r d - F i e l d s & I r i o n , 1988; C a r v e r e t a l . , Heck, 1990). Moreover,  1989; V i n g e r h o e t s & Van  i t was e x p e c t e d t h a t t h e r e would be a p o s i t i v e  r e l a t i o n s h i p between i n t e r n a l l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and p r o b l e m - f o c u s e d c o p i n g and a p o s i t i v e r e l a t i o n s h i p between chance l o c u s o f c o n t r o l / p o w e r f u l o t h e r s l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d c o p i n g .  However, i t was appraisals  a l s o expected t h a t l o c u s of c o n t r o l and s i t u a t i o n a l  o f c o n t r o l would mediate the gender and  t h a t l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and  situational appraisals  account f o r the r e l a t i o n between gender and  coping r e l a t i o n , i n  of c o n t r o l w o u l d  c o p i n g (Folkman,  1984;  Levenson, 1981). F i n a l l y , gender and  outcome v a l u e were e x p e c t e d t o  a f f e c t t h e d i r e c t i o n and/or s t r e n g t h  of the l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and  f u n c t i o n r e l a t i o n ( P a r k e s , 1984;  Rotter,  1975,  coping  1990).  Methodological Issues I n o r d e r t o t e s t the proposed r e l a t i o n s h i p s i t was d e s i g n two  s t u d i e s . The  (Study 1) and  f i r s t study examined a c t u a l v i c t i m s o f  t h e second study used n o n - v i c t i m s who  being v i c t i m i z e d  (Study 2 ) . T h i s was  burglary  imagined t h e m s e l v e s  done because R o t t e r ' s (1966) t h e o r y  s u g g e s t s t h a t an i n d i v i d u a l ' s l o c u s of c o n t r o l may s i g n i f i c a n t event and  necessary to  change f o l l o w i n g  there i s evidence to support t h i s contention.  example, i n a s t u d y of the t r e a t m e n t of drug a d d i c t i o n . B e r g e r  a For  and  Koocher (1972) found t h a t when the p a r t i c i p a n t s e n t e r e d t r e a t m e n t t h e y h e l d an e x t e r n a l termination  l o c u s of c o n t r o l o r i e n t a t i o n , but upon t r e a t m e n t  t h e i r l o c u s of c o n t r o l o r i e n t a t i o n had  Furthermore, C o l l i n s , Taylor,  and  changed t o i n t e r n a l .  Skokan (1990) found t h a t t h e  o f c o p i n g w i t h v i c t i m i z a t i o n (cancer) r e s u l t e d i n changes i n  process self-view,  w i t h some of t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s f e e l i n g more i n c o n t r o l o f t h e i r l i f e some o f t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s f e e l i n g l e s s i n c o n t r o l o f t h e i r Moreover, i t has been suggested t h a t v i c t i m i z a t i o n may  and  life.  give r i s e to a  n e g a t i v e s e l f - t r u s t schema t h a t makes a v i c t i m v u l n e r a b l e t o p o w e r f u l others, belief  t h u s i n c r e a s i n g the v i c t i m ' s p o w e r f u l o t h e r s l o c u s o f (McCann, Sakheim, & Abrahamson, 1988). T h e r e f o r e , a  victim's  l o c u s of c o n t r o l may  be a l t e r e d by the b u r g l a r y  control  burglary  experience,  c o n f o u n d i n g t h e r o l e of l o c u s of c o n t r o l as a p r e d i c t o r v a r i a b l e c o p i n g e f f o r t s . That i s , f o l l o w i n g the b u r g l a r y i n d i v i d u a l ' s l o c u s of c o n t r o l o r i e n t a t i o n may  experience  of  an  change from i n t e r n a l t o  e x t e r n a l , e x t e r n a l t o i n t e r n a l , o r an i n d i v i d u a l ' s l o c u s of c o n t r o l  may  not change. Consequently, measuring  locus of control a f t e r a b u r g l a r y  e x p e r i e n c e would make i t d i f f i c u l t t o determine whether l o c u s o f c o n t r o l was a p r e d i c t o r o f b u r g l a r y c o p i n g . T h e r e f o r e , i t was o f t h e o r e t i c a l i n t e r e s t t o examine l o c u s o f c o n t r o l as an antecedent v a r i a b l e t h a t s e r v e s as a p r e d i c t o r o f c o p i n g . I n o r d e r t o t r e a t l o c u s o f c o n t r o l as an antecedent v a r i a b l e . 2 i n c o r p o r a t e d a p a s s i v e - i n t e r p r e t i v e d e s i g n (Crano & Brewer,  Study  1986).  Rather t h a n a c t u a l v i c t i m s o f b u r g l a r y , c o l l e g e s t u d e n t v o l u n t e e r s ( e x p e r i m e n t a l l y induced v i c t i m s ) viewed a v i d e o o f a b u r g l a r y and were asked t o v i c a r i o u s l y e x p e r i e n c e t h e v i c t i m i z a t i o n e x p e r i e n c e . P a s s i v e i n t e r p r e t i v e d e s i g n i s c o n s i d e r e d a p p r o p r i a t e when t h e use o f d e c e p t i o n i s u n e t h i c a l and f o r t h e purpose o f t h e o r y development and r e f i n e m e n t (Crano & Brewer, 1986). I t would have been u n e t h i c a l t o d e c e i v e p a r t i c i p a n t s i n t o b e l i e v i n g t h a t t h e y had been b u r g l a r i z e d because o f t h e g r e a t d i s t r e s s t h a t such a d e c e p t i o n c o u l d cause. Combining a p a s s i v e i n t e r p r e t i v e d e s i g n w i t h e x p e r i m e n t a l c o n d i t i o n s may p r o v i d e i n f o r m a t i o n f o r t h e o r y b u i l d i n g (Crano & Brewer, However, e v i d e n c e suggests t h a t recall-memory  1986). involves greater  s e n s o r y and c o n t e x t u a l d e t a i l t h a n imagined-memory and t h a t  imagined-  memory e v e n t s a r e more complex and r e f l e c t i n f o r m a t i o n i d i o s y n c r a t i c t o the i n d i v i d u a l  (Johnson, F o l e y , Suengas, & Raye, 1988). T h e r e f o r e , i t i s  e x p e c t e d t h a t t h o s e who r e c a l l t h e b u r g l a r y e x p e r i e n c e and t h o s e who imagine b u r g l a r y v i c t i m i z a t i o n would d i f f e r on c o p i n g because e x p e r i m e n t a l l y i n d u c e d v i c t i m s ' c o p i n g may r e f l e c t how t h e y b e l i e v e t h e y cope i n g e n e r a l , as opposed t o how t h e y would a c t u a l l y cope w i t h t h e burglary experience. Thus w i t h Study 2, I attempted t o r e p l i c a t e Study 1 u s i n g d i f f e r e n t procedures  f o r measuring  t h e v a r i a b l e s of concern  (Cozby, 1981;  H e n d r i c k , 1991). A l t h o u g h I expected v i c t i m i z a t i o n t o a f f e c t an i n d i v i d u a l ' s l o c u s o f c o n t r o l , i f t h e h y p o t h e s i z e d r e l a t i o n s h i p s were s u p p o r t e d f o r b o t h s t u d i e s , t h e s e r e s u l t s would c h a l l e n g e t h e  t h e o r e t i c a l p r o p o s i t i o n t h a t l o c u s of c o n t r o l i s a f f e c t e d by v i c t i m i z a t i o n e v e n t . P a s s i v e i n t e r p r e t i v e d e s i g n was t o "unconfound" (Amir & Sharon, 1991,  a  used i n an  p. 58) t h e r o l e o f l o c u s  effort of  c o n t r o l as an antecedent v a r i a b l e t h a t i n f l u e n c e s b u r g l a r y v i c t i m coping.  Therefore,  t h e purpose of Study 2 was  to contribute to  t h e o r e t i c a l u n d e r s t a n d i n g of t h e l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and c o p i n g  the  relation.  REVIEW OF THE  LITERATURE  Canadians are at a f a r g r e a t e r r i s k of b e i n g v i c t i m s of c r i m e s against property, rape and  a s s a u l t ( F a t t a h , 1991;  b u r g l a r y may 1984;  such as b u r g l a r y , t h a n c r i m e s a g a i n s t p e r s o n , such Sacco, 1990).  as  Moreover, v i c t i m s o f  e x p e r i e n c e severe p s y c h o l o g i c a l d i s t r e s s ( C l a r k e & Hope,  F r i e z e , Hymer, & Greenberg, 1987;  M a g u i r e , 1980). D e s p i t e  b u r g l a r y v i c t i m s have not r e c e i v e d as much r e s e a r c h of v i o l e n c e and  sex o f f e n s e s  this,  a t t e n t i o n as  (Janoff-Bulman & F r i e z e , 1987;  victims  Maguire,  1980). A l t h o u g h t h e r e are i n d i v i d u a l d i f f e r e n c e s i n t h e way  burglary  v i c t i m s cope w i t h t h e v i c t i m i z a t i o n e x p e r i e n c e ( F i s c h e r , 1984; 1980;  Paap, 1981;  W a l l e r & O k i h i r o , 1978), t h e r e i s a d e a r t h  i n f o r m a t i o n e x p l a i n i n g why v i c t i m coping.  Maguire, of  there i s i n d i v i d u a l v a r i a t i o n i n burglary  From t h e broader l i t e r a t u r e on s t r e s s and  coping,  there  i s b o t h a t h e o r e t i c a l and an e m p i r i c a l b a s i s t o suggest t h a t l o c u s c o n t r o l , outcome v a l u e , s i t u a t i o n a l a p p r a i s a l s of c o n t r o l , and may  have main, m e d i a t i n g ,  b u r g l a r y e x p e r i e n c e (Anderson, 1977; Levenson, 1981;  V i n g e r h o e t s & Van  gender  or moderating e f f e c t s t h a t account, i n p a r t ,  f o r i n d i v i d u a l d i f f e r e n c e s i n t h e way  Folkman, 1984;  of  b u r g l a r y v i c t i m s cope w i t h Brown & H a r r i s , 1989;  P a r k e s , 1984;  the  Lazarus &  Solomon e t a l . , 1989;  Heck, 1990).  What f o l l o w s i s a r e v i e w of what i s known about how  crime v i c t i m s  cope. A summary of r e l e v a n t a s p e c t s o f L a z a r u s and Folkman's (1984) t h e o r y o f s t r e s s and c o n t r o l and  coping  i s p r e s e n t e d . Next t h e r o l e of l o c u s  s i t u a t i o n a l a p p r a i s a l s of c o n t r o l a r e r e l a t e d t o  of  the  b u r g l a r y e x p e r i e n c e and r e l e v a n t r e s e a r c h  i s c r i t i q u e d . An  f o r gender d i f f e r e n c e s i s put f o r w a r d and  f i n a l l y , expected mediated  moderated e f f e c t s are  explanation  explained.  Crime Victim Coping C r i m i n a l v i c t i m i z a t i o n can c r e a t e s h o r t - and  long-term  p s y c h o l o g i c a l d i s t r e s s f o r t h e v i c t i m (American P s y c h o l o g i c a l  and  A s s o c i a t i o n , 1985; F a t t a h , 1987;  N o r r i s , Kaniasty,  1991; G o t t f r e d s o n ,  R e i s e r , & Tsegaye-Spates,  & Scheer, 1990). I t i s not uncommon f o r c r i m e  v i c t i m s t o e x p e r i e n c e a host o f a v e r s i v e emotions i n c l u d i n g anger, depression,  fear, g u i l t , confusion,  d i s t r u s t , dismay, and sadness  & Sangrey, 1986; Cook, Smith, & H a r r e l l , 1987; F a t t a h ,  (Bard  1991; R a n d l e ,  1985). A l t h o u g h t h e c o u n s e l l i n g o f v i c t i m s f a l l s d i r e c t l y w i t h i n t h e mandate o f c o u n s e l l i n g p s y c h o l o g y (Douce, 1988), c r i m e v i c t i m c o p i n g has received  l i t t l e research  psychologists  a t t e n t i o n from c o u n s e l l i n g and c l i n i c a l  (Herrington,  l i t e r a t u r e has r e v e a l e d  1985). The p s y c h o l o g i c a l  and c r i m i n o l o g i c a l  a g r e a t d e a l about s o c i o - d e m o g r a p h i c  c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f v i c t i m s , y e t t h e r e i s a d e a r t h o f i n f o r m a t i o n on p e r s o n a l i t y and p s y c h o l o g i c a l a s p e c t s o f v i c t i m f u n c t i o n i n g  (Fattah,  1991). Stage t h e o r i s t s have f i g u r e d p r o m i n e n t l y i n t h e a r e a o f c r i m e v i c t i m c o p i n g . Bard and Sangrey (1986) contend t h a t v i c t i m d e v e l o p t h r o u g h impact, r e c o i l , and r e o r g a n i z a t i o n s t a g e i s c h a r a c t e r i z e d by t h e v i c t i m e x p e r i e n c i n g disturbances.  stages.  reactions The impact  psychological  D u r i n g t h e r e c o i l s t a g e t h e v i c t i m b e g i n s t o adapt t o t h e  new s i t u a t i o n and b e g i n s t o modify o r n e u t r a l i z e t h e emotions the p s y c h o l o g i c a l disturbances.  The r e o r g a n i z a t i o n  stage f o l l o w s the  r e c o i l s t a g e and i s c h a r a c t e r i z e d by t h e s u b s i d i n g o f i n t e n s e Emotionally  emotions.  and b e h a v i o u r i a l l y t h e c r i m e i s no l o n g e r a c e n t r a l  of t h e v i c t i m ' s l i f e . predictable  causing  feature  The v i c t i m o s c i l l a t e s between s t a g e s f o l l o w i n g no  timetable.  B a r d and Sangrey's (1986) s t a g e approach i s , i n g e n e r a l  terms,  d e s c r i p t i v e o f t h e p a s t - v i c t i m i z a t i o n e x p e r i e n c e , b u t f a i l s t o account for  i n d i v i d u a l d i f f e r e n c e s i n c o p i n g . F u r t h e r m o r e , i t does n o t p r o v i d e  an avenue ( i . e . , p e r s o n a l i t y c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s , s i t u a t i o n a l v a r i a b l e s ) t o e x p l a i n why some i n d i v i d u a l s may not f o l l o w t h e p r e s c r i b e d Several researchers  stages.  have suggested t h a t v i c t i m s o f c r i m e u s e a  v a r i e t y o f d i f f e r e n t c o g n i t i v e , a f f e c t i v e , and b e h a v i o r a l  strategies to  a c h i e v e r e o r g a n i z a t i o n o r p r e v i c t i m i z a t i o n f u n c t i o n i n g (Agnew, 1985; Cohn, 1974; T a y l o r , Wood, & Lichtman, 1983). F o r example, T a y l o r e t a l . (1983) argue t h a t v i c t i m s use f i v e c o g n i t i v e p r o c e s s e s t o n e u t r a l i z e t h e impact o f c r i m e and a c h i e v e r e o r g a n i z a t i o n . V i c t i m s may make s o c i a l comparisons w i t h l e s s f o r t u n a t e o t h e r s , f o c u s s e l e c t i v e l y on a t t r i b u t e s t h a t make one appear advantaged,  c r e a t e h y p o t h e t i c a l worse w o r l d s ,  c o n s t r u e b e n e f i t s from v i c t i m i z a t i o n e v e n t , and/or m a n u f a c t u r e  normative  s t a n d a r d s o f adjustment. I n essence, t h e s e p r o c e s s e s a l l o w t h e v i c t i m an i l l u s i o n o f c o n t r o l over h i s / h e r b e h a v i o u r and/or e m o t i o n s . These c o g n i t i v e p r o c e s s e s a r e s i m i l a r t o Bard and Sangrey's  (1986) s t a g e s i n  t h a t t h e y d e s c r i b e v i c t i m c o p i n g but t h e y do n o t a c c o u n t f o r o r e x p l a i n d i f f e r e n t i a l responses t o v i c t i m i z a t i o n . Furthermore, t h e r e i s e m p i r i c a l evidence t h a t suggests t h a t not o n l y are t h e r e i n d i v i d u a l d i f f e r e n c e s i n t h e way c r i m e v i c t i m s cope w i t h v i c t i m i z a t i o n , b u t t h a t c r i m e v i c t i m s cope d i f f e r e n t l y i n response t o d i f f e r e n t t y p e s o f c r i m e P s y c h o l o g i c a l A s s o c i a t i o n , 1985; W i r t z & H a r r e l l , W i r t z and H a r r e l l  (American  1987).  (1987) i n t h e i r s t u d y o f 236 v i c t i m s o f f i v e  d i f f e r e n t c r i m e s found v i c t i m s o f d i f f e r e n t c r i m e s appear t o u s e d i f f e r e n t coping responses according t o t h e crime experience. For example, v i c t i m s o f s e x u a l a s s a u l t s t a y home more o f t e n v i c t i m i z a t i o n t h a n do any o t h e r c r i m e v i c t i m s .  following  B u r g l a r y v i c t i m s more  t h a n o t h e r c r i m e v i c t i m s a r e c a r e f u l t o l o c k doors and i n s t a l l l o c k s and b a r s . T h e r e f o r e , i t may n o t be prudent t o a p p l y r e s e a r c h f i n d i n g s o f c r i m e v i c t i m c o p i n g from one t y p e o f c r i m e t o a n o t h e r d i f f e r e n t t y p e c r i m e . As such, c o p i n g w i t h b u r g l a r y may be d i s t i n c t from o t h e r t y p e s o f crime v i c t i m i z a t i o n coping, t h e r e f o r e , t h e f o l l o w i n g review of crime v i c t i m c o p i n g i s p r i m a r i l y concerned w i t h b u r g l a r y v i c t i m s . Papp (1981) documented h i s own r e a c t i o n s o f f a l l i n g v i c t i m t o r e s i d e n t i a l b u r g l a r y . He i d e n t i f i e d t h r e e s t a g e s o f r e a c t i o n t o b e i n g a v i c t i m . The i n i t i a l s t a g e l a s t e d s e v e r a l days and was c h i e f l y c h a r a c t e r i z e d by a v e r s i v e e m o t i o n a l r e s p o n s e s , such as f e a r , d i s g u s t .  v i o l a t i o n , and anger. The m i d d l e stage was c h a r a c t e r i z e d by b e h a v i o r a l a c t i v i t i e s predominately  geared towards r e d u c i n g t h e r i s k o f f u t u r e  v i c t i m i z a t i o n . A c t i v i t i e s i n t h e middle stage i n c l u d e d changing l o c k s and i n s t a l l i n g a b u r g l a r alarm. The s t r o n g a v e r s i v e r e a c t i o n s experienced The  d u r i n g t h e i n i t i a l stage s u b s i d e d d u r i n g t h e m i d d l e  stage.  f i n a l s t a g e was c h a r a c t e r i s e d by a s t a t e o f normalcy, w i t h m i l d  emotions o f resentment and c y n i c i s m . Papp's (1981) study was l i m i t e d by i t s s u b j e c t i v e n e s s and case study methodology t h a t a l l o w s t h e e x p e r i e n c e  t o be p l a c e d o n l y w i t h i n an  i d i o g r a p h i c c o n t e x t . However, t h e study d i d p r o v i d e d e s c r i p t i v e i n f o r m a t i o n about t h e e m o t i o n a l  and d e v e l o p m e n t a l i s s u e s e x p e r i e n c e d  by  one v i c t i m o f b u r g l a r y . W i t h i n Papp's d e s c r i p t i o n o f t h e b u r g l a r y experience,  i t was p o s s i b l e t o t e a s e o u t s a l i e n t f e a t u r e s t h a t may  p r o v i d e i n s i g h t i n t o why t h e r e i s i n d i v i d u a l c o p i n g v a r i a t i o n i n r e s p o n s e t o v i c t i m i z a t i o n . F o r example, Papp argued t h a t b e h a v i o r a l a c t i v i t i e s geared towards r e d u c i n g t h e r i s k o f f u t u r e v i c t i m i z a t i o n p r o v i d e d a sense o f p e r s o n a l c o n t r o l . Hence, Papp's w o r l d v i e w about control  ( i . e . , l o c u s o f c o n t r o l ) c o u p l e d w i t h h i s b e l i e f s about c o n t r o l  s p e c i f i c t o the s i t u a t i o n ( i . e . , s i t u a t i o n a l appraisals of control) i n f l u e n c e d h i s c h o i c e o f c o p i n g s t r a t e g i e s employed t o manage t h e v i c t i m i z a t i o n experience.  Papp's (1981) p e r s p e c t i v e on how c o n t r o l  b e l i e f s ' i n f l u e n c e c o p i n g i s i n k e e p i n g w i t h t h e b r o a d e r l i t e r a t u r e on s t r e s s and c o p i n g as d i s c u s s e d by L a z a r u s  and Folkman  (1984).  F i s c h e r (1984) used a phenomenological methodology t o s t u d y t h e experience  o f t h o s e who have f a l l e n v i c t i m t o e i t h e r r o b b e r y ,  t h e f t , vandalism,  assault,  attempted rape, harassment, and b u r g l a r y . The 50  p a r t i c i p a n t s ranged i n age from 18 t o 90 y e a r s and were from v a r y i n g e d u c a t i o n a l and socio-economic backgrounds. F i s c h e r (1984) argued t h a t b u r g l a r y v i c t i m s ' r e a c t i o n s are q u i t e s i m i l a r t o rape v i c t i m s ' r e a c t i o n s as d e s c r i b e d by Burgess and Holmstrom (1974). t h e i r homes as h a v i n g been p e n e t r a t e d ,  " B u r g l a r y v i c t i m s speak o f  desecrated  and d i r t i e d " ( F i s c h e r ,  1984, p. 168). However, t h e r e i s a q u a l i t a t i v e d i f f e r e n c e between d e s c r i b i n g one's home and d e s c r i b i n g one's p e r s o n i n such t e r m s . Y e t one f a c t o r apparent was t h a t v i c t i m ' s c o n t r o l over h i s / h e r l i f e h a d been suspended. Fischers' experience  (1984) study p r o v i d e d  an o v e r v i e w o f c r i m e v i c t i m s '  and p r o v i d e d  f u r t h e r support f o r t h e argument t h a t v i c t i m s o f  b u r g l a r y may e x p e r i e n c e  a great deal of p s y c h o l o g i c a l d i s t r e s s . Yet, t h e  study has l i m i t a t i o n s . The p a r t i c i p a n t s were i n t e r v i e w e d on t h e telephone,  perhaps l i m i t i n g o r d i s t o r t i n g t h e i n f o r m a t i o n o b t a i n e d . A l l  t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s i n t h e study had r e p o r t e d t h e c r i m e t o p o l i c e , t h e r e f o r e t h e sample may n o t be r e p r e s e n t a t i v e o f c r i m e v i c t i m s who do not r e p o r t t o p o l i c e . Furthermore, F i s c h e r (1984) d i d n o t e x p l a i n o r account f o r i n d i v i d u a l d i f f e r e n c e s i n r e a c t i o n t o c r i m i n a l v i c t i m i z a t i o n . However, t h e apparent c e n t r a l r o l e t h a t c o n t r o l p l a y s i s s i m i l a r t o Papp's (1981) study. Both s t u d i e s suggest t h e more c o n t r o l an i n d i v i d u a l p e r c e i v e s he o r she has, t h e g r e a t e r number o f b e h a v i o r a l s t r a t e g i e s one i s a b l e t o i n c o r p o r a t e i n t o h i s / h e r c o p i n g  behaviour.  M a g u i r e (1980) i n v e s t i g a t e d t h e impact o f b u r g l a r y t h r o u g h i n t e r v i e w i n g 322 b u r g l a r y v i c t i m s a t t h e i r homes 4 t o 10 weeks a f t e r t h e d i s c o v e r y o f t h e o f f e n s e . Ten independent judges c l a s s i f i e d t h e v i c t i m s ' r e s p o n s e s . S i x c a t e g o r i e s o f i n i t i a l r e a c t i o n s were d e t e r m i n e d by t h e j u d g e s . A p p r o x i m a t e l y 30% o f t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s f e l t anger and annoyance, 19% were shocked, 17% e x p e r i e n c e d  c o n f u s i o n , 9% e x p e r i e n c e d  disbelief,  9% f e l t f e a r , and 17% had no s t r o n g r e a c t i o n . To g a i n a sense o f c o n t r o l , s e v e r a l v i c t i m s e x h i b i t e d s e c u r i t y b e h a v i o u r such as c h a n g i n g l o c k s , i n s t a l l i n g alarms, updating  o r purchasing  d e p e n d i n g on t h e t y p e o f s e c u r i t y b e h a v i o u r ) .  insurance  (42% - 80%  M a g u i r e (1980) found t h a t  t h e t i m e o f day when t h e b u r g l a r y o c c u r r e d , t h e p r o p e r t y  stolen, or  whether t h e v i c t i m was a t home a t t h e t i m e o f t h e b u r g l a r y d i d n o t account f o r i n d i v i d u a l v a r i a t i o n i n v i c t i m c o p i n g . However, he d i d f i n d t h a t female b u r g l a r y v i c t i m s expressed stronger emotional  d i s t r e s s than  t h e i r male c o u n t e r p a r t s . Gender d i f f e r e n c e s i n r e a c t i o n t o c r i m i n a l v i c t i m i z a t i o n have a l s o been r e p o r t e d by J a n o f f - B u l m a n and F r i e z e (1987) and W i r t z and H a r r e l l  (1987).  There are d i f f i c u l t i e s i n v e r i f y i n g t h e a c c u r a c y o f M a g u i r e ' s f i n d i n g s because o f u n d e r / o v e r r e p o r t i n g  that i s c h a r a c t e r i s t i c  of  r e s e a r c h t h a t r e l i e s e x c l u s i v e l y on s e l f - r e p o r t s ( M a g u i r e , 1980). F u r t h e r m o r e , a l t h o u g h Maguire found i n d i v i d u a l and gender d i f f e r e n c e s i n b u r g l a r y v i c t i m c o p i n g , he f a i l e d t o account f o r t h e s e d i f f e r e n c e s . However, h i s r e s e a r c h r e a f f i r m e d t h e o b s e r v a t i o n t h a t b u r g l a r y v i c t i m s use e m o t i o n a l  and/or b e h a v i o r a l e f f o r t s t o cope and t h a t  a p p r a i s a l s of c o n t r o l may  f i g u r e prominently  situational  i n i n f l u e n c i n g the  coping  Brown and H a r r i s (1989) argue t h a t b u r g l a r y i s more t h a n a  simple  used by b u r g l a r y v i c t i m s .  p r o p e r t y c r i m e because t h e o f f e n s e i n v o l v e s an i n t r u s i o n i n t o what i s normally  considered  a s a f e t e r r i t o r y by t h e v i c t i m . B u r g l a r y may  create  extreme p s y c h o l o g i c a l d i s t r e s s i n v i c t i m s p a r t l y because i t i s a v i o l a t i o n of p r i m a r y t e r r i t o r y , which i s c h a r a c t e r i z e d by  psychological  c e n t r a l i t y . V i o l a t i o n of p r i m a r y t e r r i t o r y t h r e a t e n s t h e v i c t i m s ' sense o f c o n t r o l . Brown and H a r r i s (1989) suggest t h a t i n r e s p o n s e t o  the  psychological d i s t r e s s associated with burglary v i c t i m i z a t i o n , victims use b e h a v i o u r a l and e m o t i o n a l r e s p o n s e may  c o p i n g e f f o r t s . For example, a  behavioural  be t o i n s t a l l l o c k s t o p r e v e n t f u t u r e v i c t i m i z a t i o n ,  whereas an e m o t i o n a l  response may  be t o c o n s u l t p o w e r f u l  o t h e r s , such as  t h e p o l i c e , i n an e f f o r t t o reduce f e e l i n g s of d i s t r e s s . To e x p l o r e v a r i e t y of aspects  about t h e b u r g l a r y e x p e r i e n c e .  Brown and  a  Harris  (1989) conducted 30-minute i n t e r v i e w s w i t h 44 female b u r g l a r y v i c t i m s . They found t h a t on t h e average, p a r t i c i p a n t s r e p o r t e d t h a t  burglary  v i c t i m i z a t i o n caused seven s t r e s s f u l emotions. F u r t h e r m o r e , u n l i k e M a g u i r e ' s (1980) f i n d i n g . Brown and H a r r i s (1989) found t h a t s e v e r e damage t o t h e i n s i d e of t h e r e s i d e n c e c o r r e l a t e d w i t h g r e a t e r v i c t i m distress  ( r = .43; p < .01).  This discrepancy  between M a g u i r e ' s (1980)  f i n d i n g and Brown and H a r r i s '  (1989) may r e s u l t from t h e l a t t e r  studying  o n l y women—women r e p o r t e d g r e a t e r l e v e l s o f d i s t r e s s i n M a g u i r e ' s (1980) s t u d y . Brown and H a r r i s  (1989) a l s o found t h a t p a r t i c i p a n t s u s e d  a v a r i e t y o f coping s t r a t e g i e s f o l l o w i n g t h e burglary, t o f r i e n d s f o r s o c i a l support, t a l k i n g t o p o l i c e f o r purchasing firearms,  including t a l k i n g information,  and i n s t a l l i n g alarms. These c o p i n g s t r a t e g i e s a r e  s i m i l a r t o problem- and emotion-focused c o p i n g and may be s t r o n g l y influenced  by c o n t r o l b e l i e f s (Lazarus & Folkman, 1984).  Generalization  o f Brown and H a r r i s '  female v i c t i m s o f b u r g l a r y .  (1989) r e s u l t s a r e l i m i t e d t o  Furthermore, t h e y d i d n o t measure c o n t r o l ,  w h i c h m i g h t have p r o v i d e d support f o r t h e i r argument t h a t v i o l a t i o n o f p r i m a r y t e r r i t o r y t h r e a t e n s t h e v i c t i m s ' sense o f c o n t r o l . Tyler  (1981), i n h i s study o f 244 crime v i c t i m s , found s u p p o r t f o r  t h e argument t h a t p e r c e i v e d c o n t r o l i n f l u e n c e s p a r t i c i p a n t s were i n t e r v i e w e d how  c r i m e v i c t i m c o p i n g . The  f o r 45 minutes i n an e f f o r t t o e s t a b l i s h  t h e i r control b e l i e f s r e l a t e t o the v i c t i m i z a t i o n process.  Tyler  (1981) found a s i g n i f i c a n t r e l a t i o n s h i p between p e r c e i v e d c o n t r o l and b e h a v i o u r a l responses t o burglary  ( r = .21, E< .001). Thus, t h e g r e a t e r  t h e p e r c e i v e d c o n t r o l , t h e g r e a t e r t h e emphasis on a c t i v e c o p i n g employed f o l l o w i n g v i c t i m i z a t i o n ( i . e . , l o c k i n g d o o r s , a l a r m s , b u y i n g a guard Tyler's  installing  dog).  (1981) d a t a were c o r r e l a t i o n a l and d i d n o t show  causal  o r d e r . I n a d d i t i o n , a t h i r d v a r i a b l e may mediate o r moderate t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p between p e r c e i v e d c o n t r o l and c o p i n g b e h a v i o u r . F u r t h e r m o r e , a c t i v e c o p i n g may r e s u l t i n h i g h l e v e l s o f c o n t r o l , t h u s confusing the d i r e c t i o n of the r e l a t i o n s h i p . Tyler f a i l e d t o recognize a d i s t i n c t i o n between g e n e r a l i z e d control)  b e l i e f s about c o n t r o l  ( i . e . , locus of  and s i t u a t i o n a l c o n t r o l b e l i e f s ( i . e . , s i t u a t i o n a l  appraisals  of c o n t r o l )  and how t h e y may d i f f e r e n t i a l l y i n f l u e n c e  generalized  b e l i e f s about c o n t r o l and s i t u a t i o n a l c o n t r o l b e l i e f s a r e  believed  c o p i n g . Both  t o i n f l u e n c e c o p i n g b e h a v i o u r (Compas & Orosan, i n p r e s s ;  Folkman, 1984; P a r k e s , 1984; T h o i t s , 1991). F i n a l l y i t would have added c l a r i t y i f T y l e r had p l a c e d h i s d i s c u s s i o n o f v i c t i m c o p i n g s t r a t e g i e s w i t h i n a t h e o r e t i c a l model o f c o p i n g . I n summary, s e v e r a l r e s e a r c h e r s have found i n d i v i d u a l and gender d i f f e r e n c e s i n t h e way i n d i v i d u a l s cope w i t h c r i m i n a l v i c t i m i z a t i o n , i n g e n e r a l , and b u r g l a r y v i c t i m i z a t i o n , s p e c i f i c a l l y  (Agnew, 1985; F a t t a h ,  1991; J a n o f f - B u l m a n & F r i e z e , 1987; M a g u i r e , 1980; W i r t z & H a r r e l l , 1987). V i c t i m s cope w i t h v i c t i m i z a t i o n t h r o u g h managing e m o t i o n s  (i.e.,  d e n i a l , comparison w i t h o t h e r s l e s s f o r t u n a t e ) and/or managing t h e problem ( i . e . , changing l o c k s , i n s t a l l i n g an a l a r m , p u r c h a s i n g a f i r e a r m ) . Some r e s e a r c h e r s have found t a n g e n t i a l and d i r e c t e v i d e n c e t h a t gender, g e n e r a l b e l i e f s about c o n t r o l , and s i t u a t i o n a l  beliefs  about c o n t r o l i n f l u e n c e c o p i n g (Brown & H a r r i s , 1989; Compas & Orosan, i n p r e s s ; Folkman, 1984; Maguire, 1980; Papp, 1981; P a r k e s , 1984; T y l e r , 1981). Coping Theory C o p i n g has been addressed from a v a r i e t y o f t h e o r e t i c a l p e r s p e c t i v e s , a l l o f which have l i m i t i n g and/or s e r i o u s f l a w s ( L a z a r u s & Folkman, 1984). L a z a r u s and Folkman framework  (1984) p r e s e n t a t h e o r e t i c a l  o f c o p i n g t h a t attempts t o r e c t i f y t h e d e f i c i e n c i e s o f  p r e v i o u s approaches. T h e i r t r a n s a c t i o n a l t h e o r y o f s t r e s s and c o p i n g has c o n s i d e r a b l y changed t h e way i n which c o p i n g i s c o n c e p t u a l i z e d ( S t o n e , Greenberg, Kennedy-Moore, & Newman, 1991). L a z a r u s and Folkman  (1984) d e f i n e t h e c o p i n g p r o c e s s as  " c o n s t a n t l y c h a n g i n g c o g n i t i v e and b e h a v i o r a l e f f o r t s t o manage  specific  e x t e r n a l an/or i n t e r n a l demands t h a t a r e a p p r a i s e d as t a x i n g o r e x c e e d i n g t h e r e s o u r c e s o f t h e p e r s o n " (p. 1 4 1 ) . C o p i n g i s what t h e p e r s o n a c t u a l l y does o r t h i n k s i n response t o a s p e c i f i c  situation.  C o p i n g changes as t h e p e r s o n ' s c o g n i t i v e a p p r a i s a l s change and/or as t h e environment changes. Compas, F o r s y t h e , and Wagner (1988) i n t h e i r s t u d y o f 65 u n d e r g r a d u a t e s found low c o n s i s t e n c y i n p a t t e r n s o f c o p i n g a c r o s s  two t y p e s o f ongoing s t r e s s o r s . F i n d i n g s by Compas e t a l . (1988) the  support  p o s i t i o n t h a t c o p i n g i s s i t u a t i o n a l l y s p e c i f i c and n o t a t r a i t .  Moreover, B o l g e r (1990) argues t h a t i n many s t u d i e s i n d i v i d u a l d i f f e r e n c e s i n c o p i n g s t r a t e g i e s r e s u l t from d i f f e r e n c e s i n t h e t y p e s o f s t r e s s o r s p e o p l e encounter and not from p e r s o n a l i t y f a c t o r s o r o t h e r f a c t o r s t h a t were p o s t u l a t e d as a c c o u n t i n g f o r such d i f f e r e n c e s . L a z a r u s and Folkman (1984) c o n s i d e r p r o b l e m - f o c u s e d c o p i n g and e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d c o p i n g as t h e two main f u n c t i o n s o f c o p i n g . A c o p i n g f u n c t i o n i s t h e purpose a c o p i n g s t r a t e g y s e r v e s . P r o b l e m - f o c u s e d c o p i n g i s d i r e c t e d a t managing t h e problem c a u s i n g t h e d i s t r e s s .  Emotion-  focused coping i s d i r e c t e d at d e a l i n g w i t h t h e i n d i v i d u a l ' s t h a t a r i s e from t h e problem event ( L a z a r u s & Folkman, the  1984). However,  i m p o r t a n t d i s t i n c t i o n between p r o b l e m - and e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d  o f t e n l a c k s c l a r i t y . F o r example,  functions  s e e k i n g s o c i a l s u p p o r t may be p r o b l e m -  f o c u s e d o r e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d depending on whether or  emotions  i ti s f o r instrumental  e m o t i o n a l r e a s o n s ( C a r v e r e t a l . , 1989; E n d l e r & P a r k e r , 1990; T o b i n ,  H o l r o y d , R e y n o l d s , & W i g a l , 1989). There i s c o n f l i c t i n g e v i d e n c e r e g a r d i n g whether  i n any one e v e n t an  i n d i v i d u a l w i l l use one f u n c t i o n o f c o p i n g t o t h e t o t a l e x c l u s i o n o f a n o t h e r c o p i n g f u n c t i o n . Folkman and L a z a r u s (1980) d e v e l o p e d t h e Ways of  C o p i n g C h e c k l i s t (WCC) t o measure t h e c o p i n g o f a middle-age  community sample comprised o f 52 women and 48 men. They found i n 98% o f the  1,332 c o p i n g e p i s o d e s r e p o r t e d t h a t t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s used v a r y i n g  amounts o f e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d and p r o b l e m - f o c u s e d , o r one f u n c t i o n o f c o p i n g was more dominant depending on t h e s i t u a t i o n . F o r example, i n w o r k - r e l a t e d s i t u a t i o n s , t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s used p r o b l e m - f o c u s e d c o p i n g more f r e q u e n t l y t h a n e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d c o p i n g , whereas i n h e a l t h r e l a t e d e p i s o d e s t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s used e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d c o p i n g more f r e q u e n t l y t h a n p r o b l e m - f o c u s e d c o p i n g . Folkman and L a z a r u s (1980) c o n c l u d e d t h a t c o g n i t i v e a p p r a i s a l (an e v a l u a t i v e p r o c e s s concerned w i t h t h e meaning o r s i g n i f i c a n c e o f an event) and how amenable t o change a s i t u a t i o n i s  p e r c e i v e d as b e i n g ( i . e . , how c o n t r o l l a b l e a s i t u a t i o n i s p e r c e i v e d ) d e t e r m i n e s t h e use o f emotion-focused  and problem-focused  coping during  any e p i s o d e . S p e c i f i c a l l y , s i t u a t i o n a l a p p r a i s a l s o f c o n t r o l  influence  t h e c o p i n g f u n c t i o n s used by an i n d i v i d u a l ( L a z a r u s & Folkman,  1980).  Folkman and L a z a r u s (1985), i n a s t u d y o f c o l l e g e s t u d e n t s , a d m i n i s t e r e d t h e WCC  ( m o d i f i e d ) d u r i n g t h r e e s t a g e s o f an e x a m i n a t i o n .  The t h r e e s t a g e s were i d e n t i f i e d as t h e a n t i c i p a t o r y s t a g e , w a i t i n g s t a g e ( w a i t i n g f o r marks), and t h e outcome s t a g e ( a f t e r r e c e i v i n g t h e marks). They found t h a t d u r i n g t h e a n t i c i p a t o r y s t a g e 99% o f t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s used problem-focused  c o p i n g as t h e predominate  coping  f u n c t i o n . D u r i n g t h e w a i t i n g s t a g e and outcome s t a g e v a r y i n g cimounts o f emotion-focused  and problem-focused  c o p i n g were used by 95% and 94% o f  t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s , r e s p e c t i v e l y . The changes i n c o p i n g i n d i c a t e d t h a t s i t u a t i o n a l a p p r a i s a l s of c o n t r o l a f f e c t c o p i n g . Yet i t was whether t h i s was  a d i r e c t e f f e c t , mediating e f f e c t , or  not  clear  moderating  e f f e c t . I n t h e a n t i c i p a t o r y s t a g e (where one can a c t i v e l y manage t h e s i t u a t i o n ) problem-focused  c o p i n g was a t i t s peak, whereas i n t h e  w a i t i n g s t a g e , problem-focused  c o p i n g s u b s i d e d and  emotion-focused  c o p i n g i n c r e a s e d . D u r i n g t h e outcome stage t h e c o p i n g f u n c t i o n  was  i n f l u e n c e d by t h e grade t h e p a r t i c i p a n t r e c e i v e d . Those p a r t i c i p a n t s r e c e i v e d lower grades used more emotion-focused p a r t i c i p a n t s who  who  coping than those  r e c e i v e d h i g h e r grades. Though c o p i n g f u n c t i o n s  s i g n i f i c a n t l y s h i f t e d from t h e a n t i c i p a t i o n s t a g e t o t h e w a i t i n g s t a g e , p a r t i c i p a n t s throughout t h e exam used v a r y i n g degrees o f b o t h f o c u s e d and emotion-focused encounter  problem-  c o p i n g . However, i n a more s t r e s s f u l  ( i . e . , b u r g l a r y ) an i n d i v i d u a l may  use more o f one  coping  f u n c t i o n than another. Anderson (1977) s t u d i e d 102 randomly s e l e c t e d b u s i n e s s ownermanagers a f t e r t h e i r b u s i n e s s e s had been damaged by a h u r r i c a n e .  Coping  f u n c t i o n s ( C l a s s I and I I ) were measured a c c o r d i n g t o Kahn, W o l f e r , Quinn, Snoek, and R o s e n t h a l ' s (1964) c l a s s i f i c a t i o n system.  C l a s s I and  I I c o p i n g a r e s i m i l a r t o L a z a r u s and Folkman's (1984) c o p i n g and emotion-focused Lazarus'  problem-focused  c o p i n g , r e s p e c t i v e l y . C o n t r a r y t o Folkman a n d  (1980, 1985) f i n d i n g s , Anderson (1977) found t h a t p a r t i c i p a n t s  i n h i s s t u d y d i d n o t use a c o m b i n a t i o n o f c o p i n g f u n c t i o n s b u t used e i t h e r problem-focused  c o p i n g o r emotion-focused  coping.  His findings  may be a t t r i b u t a b l e , i n p a r t , t o t h e extreme n a t u r e o f t h e s i t u a t i o n a n d t o t h e t y p e o f s c a l e used t o measure c o p i n g . F u r t h e r r e s e a r c h i s r e q u i r e d t o c l a r i f y i f and how a p p r a i s a l i n f l u e n c e s c o p i n g (Peacock & Wong, 1990). Peacock and Wong (1990) u s e d l i n e a r s t r u c t u r a l m o d e l l i n g a n a l y s i s t o t e s t t h e r e l a t i o n s between a p p r a i s a l , e m o t i o n - o r i e n t e d , and p s y c h o l o g i c a l d i s t r e s s d u r i n g an u n i v e r s i t y e x a m i n a t i o n . I n t h e i r sample o f 143 u n d e r g r a d u a t e s ,  they  found no s i g n i f i c a n t r e l a t i o n s h i p between a p p r a i s a l and e m o t i o n - o r i e n t e d c o p i n g . However, t h e y d i d f i n d t h a t g r e a t e r l e v e l s o f e m o t i o n - o r i e n t e d c o p i n g were a s s o c i a t e d w i t h h i g h e r l e v e l s o f d i s t r e s s . A l t h o u g h Peacock and Wong acknowledge t h a t o t h e r r e s e a r c h e r s have found t h a t l o w e r  levels  of d i s t r e s s were a s s o c i a t e d w i t h h i g h e r l e v e l s o f e m o t i o n - o r i e n t e d c o p i n g , t h e y suggest t h a t c o p i n g i s antecedent t o d i s t r e s s . Moreover, t h e y p o s i t t h a t t h e c o p i n g f u n c t i o n must be congruent w i t h t h e n a t u r e o f t h e s t r e s s i n o r d e r t o decrease t h e d i s t r e s s . They a l s o argue t h a t s i t u a t i o n a l c o n t r o l may a c t as a m e d i a t i n g v a r i a b l e where  emotion-  f o c u s e d c o p i n g i s concerned. Y e t , b o t h t h e o r e t i c a l l y and e m p i r i c a l l y t h e r e i s s u p p o r t f o r t h e p o s i t i o n t h a t g e n e r a l i z e d b e l i e f s about c o n t r o l and s i t u a t i o n a l c o n t r o l b e l i e f s i n f l u e n c e t h e c o p i n g f u n c t i o n s employed by an i n d i v i d u a l d u r i n g a s t r e s s f u l encounter al.,  (Anderson,  1977; C a r v e r e t  1989; L a z a r u s & Folkman, 1984; P a r k e s , 1984; Solomon e t a l . ,  1989).  A s i d e from t h e d i f f i c u l t y i n d i s t i n g u i s h i n g between problem- and emotion-focused  c o p i n g on some o f t h e c o p i n g s u b s c a l e s , r e c e n t l y ,  self-  r e p o r t , s i t u a t i o n - s p e c i f i c c o p i n g q u e s t i o n n a i r e s ( e . g . , WCC) have been criticized  f o r numerous reasons  ( E n d l e r & P a r k e r , 1990; Stone e t a l . ,  1991). S p e c i f i c a l l y , E n d l e r and P a r k e r (1990) argue t h a t t h e  p s y c h o m e t r i c p r o p e r t i e s o f t h e WCC a r e q u e s t i o n a b l e . They contend t h a t t h e e m p i r i c a l s u p p o r t f o r t h e v a l i d i t y and i n t e r n a l c o n s i s t e n c y r e l i a b i l i t i e s o f many o f t h e c o p i n g s u b s c a l e s a r e v e r y modest. E n d l e r and P a r k e r (1990) suggest t h a t t h e p s y c h o m e t r i c problems o f t h e WCC a r e f u r t h e r e x a s p e r a t e d by r e s e a r c h e r s who add o r drop i t e m s a c c o r d i n g t o hypotheses  b e i n g s t u d i e d o r a c c o r d i n g t o t h e p o p u l a t i o n under  i n v e s t i g a t i o n . Stone e t a l . (1991) c r i t i c i z e d s e l f - r e p o r t ,  situation-  o r i e n t e d c o p i n g q u e s t i o n n a i r e s (e.g., WCC R e v i s e d , Folkman & L a z a r u s , 1985)  r e g a r d i n g t h e a p p l i c a b i l i t y o f coping items t o s p e c i f i c problems  (domain), t h e s t a g e o f t h e s t r e s s f u l event f o r w h i c h c o p i n g was r e p o r t e d ( c o p i n g p e r i o d ) , and t h e meaning e x t e n t i n t h e r e s p o n s e key used w i t h c o p i n g i t e m s (response k e y ) . To examine t h e s e c r i t i c i s m s e m p i r i c a l l y . Stone e t a l . (1991) i n t e r v i e w e d 49 female and 42 male c o l l e g e s t u d e n t s about t h e most s t r e s s f u l event t h a t t h e y had e x p e r i e n c e d i n t h e p a s t week. D u r i n g t h e i n t e r v i e w t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s answered t h e Ways o f C o p i n g Q u e s t i o n n a i r e (WOC) and s p e c i f i c q u e s t i o n s d e s i g n e d t o i n v e s t i g a t e t h e c r i t i c i s m s o f domain, c o p i n g p e r i o d , and response key. U s i n g two-way ANOVA, f i n d i n g s i n d i c a t e d t h a t a h i g h e r number o f n o t a p p l i c a b l e r e s p o n s e s were endorsed for  t h e n o n i n t e r p e r s o n a l t h a n i n t e r p e r s o n a l domains. F u r t h e r a n a l y s i s  w i t h a r e p e a t e d measures ANOVA i n d i c a t e d h i g h e r p r o p o r t i o n s o f "not a p p l i c a b l e " r e s p o n s e s were r e p o r t e d f o r p r o b l e m - f o c u s e d  than  emotion-  f o c u s e d c o p i n g . Stone e t a l . (1991) c o n c l u d e d t h a t t h e WOC i t e m s t h a t comprised emotion-focused whereas p r o b l e m - f o c u s e d  s t r a t e g i e s were endorsed a c r o s s problem t y p e s ,  c o p i n g items were s i t u a t i o n - s p e c i f i c .  Stone e t a l . (1991) found t h a t a p p r o x i m a t e l y 70% o f t h e r e s p o n d e n t s r e p o r t e d t h a t t h e y c o n s i d e r e d t h e a c u t e s t a g e as t h e i r d e f i n i t i o n o f t h e c o p i n g p e r i o d . The r e m a i n i n g p a r t i c i p a n t s r e p o r t e d t h a t t h e i r of  definition  the coping p e r i o d i n v o l v e d t h e preparatory stage o n l y , t h e recovery  s t a g e o n l y , o r a c o m b i n a t i o n o f t h e p r e p a r a t o r y and r e c o v e r y s t a g e . F i n a l l y , Stone e t a l . (1991) examined what t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s meant by  t h e i r responses.  P a r t i c i p a n t s were asked i f t h e y judged ' e x t e n t ' i n t h e  response key i n terms o f " d u r a t i o n , " " f r e q u e n c y , "  "effort," or  " u s e f u l n e s s " . The r e s u l t s i n d i c a t e d t h a t t h e r e was a g r e a t d e a l o f v a r i a t i o n among t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s i n t h e ways t h e y c o n c e p t u a l i z e d t h e t e r m e x t e n t . Stone e t a l . (1991) concluded  that p a r t i c i p a n t s interpreted  t h e meaning o f e x t e n t i n t h e response key i n d i f f e r e n t ways. I n summary, L a z a r u s  and Folkman (1984) o f f e r a t r a n s a c t i o n a l t h e o r y  o f s t r e s s and c o p i n g i n which problem- and e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d c o p i n g a r e t h e two main f u n c t i o n s o f c o p i n g . The i n s t r u m e n t and L a z a r u s  d e v e l o p e d by Folkman  t o measure c o p i n g have been c r i t i c i z e d  f o r several  reasons,  e s p e c i a l l y i n t h e a r e a o f s t r e s s o r domain, c o p i n g p e r i o d , and r e s p o n s e key  (Stone e t a l . , 1991). The coping s t r a t e g i e s s e l e c t e d by b u r g l a r y  v i c t i m s a r e l i k e l y t o be t h o s e t h a t a r e consonant w i t h t h e i r  general  b e l i e f s about c o n t r o l and t h e i r b e l i e f s about c o n t r o l s p e c i f i c t o t h e s i t u a t i o n ( L a z a r u s & Folkman, 1984; W a l l s t o n t e a l . , 1987). F u r t h e r m o r e , v i c t i m s who v a l u e t h e outcome o f t h e b u r g l a r y and who b e l i e v e t h a t t h e s t r e s s o r i s s u b j e c t t o c o n t r o l w i l l u s e p r o b l e m - f o c u s e d c o p i n g more t h a n v i c t i m s who do n o t v a l u e t h e outcome and do n o t b e l i e v e t h e s t r e s s o r i s s u b j e c t t o c o n t r o l (Lazarus & Folkman, 1980, 1984). P r e v i o u s  research  found t h a t women respond more e m o t i o n a l l y t o b u r g l a r y v i c t i m i z a t i o n t h a n men; t h e r e f o r e i t i s e x p e c t e d t h a t women v i c t i m s would u s e more e m o t i o n focused  c o p i n g t h a n men and t h a t men would u s e more p r o b l e m - f o c u s e d  c o p i n g t h a n women (Maguire,  1980).  Generalized B e l i e f s About Control G e n e r a l i z e d b e l i e f s about c o n t r o l a r e e x p e c t e d t o i n f l u e n c e an i n d i v i d u a l ' s c h o i c e o f c o p i n g f u n c t i o n s ( L a z a r u s & Folkman, 1984). The b e s t known c o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o n o f g e n e r a l i z e d b e l i e f about c o n t r o l i s Rotter's  (1956) c o n s t r u c t o f l o c u s o f c o n t r o l . Locus o f c o n t r o l , as  d e f i n e d by R o t t e r (1966, 1975), i s a g e n e r a l i z e d e x p e c t a n c y c o n s t r u c t that a r i s e s out of s o c i a l l e a r n i n g theory. Generalized expectancies are s i m i l a r t o a p e r s o n ' s w o r l d view and a r e l a r g e l y d e t e r m i n e d by an  i n d i v i d u a l ' s p a s t e x p e r i e n c e s (Hersch & S c h e i b e , 1967). b e l i e v e s t h a t a reinforcement  i s contingent  When a p e r s o n  upon h i s o r h e r own  b e h a v i o u r o r a c t i o n , t h e n t h i s b e l i e f i s r e f e r r e d t o as an i n t e r n a l c o n t r o l ( R o t t e r , 1966). not c o n t i n g e n t  When a p e r s o n b e l i e v e s t h a t a r e i n f o r c e m e n t i s  upon h i s o r h e r own b e h a v i o u r o r a c t i o n , b u t i s s u b j e c t  t o l u c k , chance o r f a t e , then t h i s b e l i e f i s r e f e r r e d t o as an e x t e r n a l c o n t r o l o f reinforcement Rotter's  o r e x t e r n a l l o c u s o f c o n t r o l ( R o t t e r , 1966).  (1966) c o n s t r u c t o f l o c u s o f c o n t r o l has been  for being unidimensional. forth multidimensional  Subsequently, s e v e r a l researchers  variations of Rotter's o r i g i n a l  criticized have p u t  conceptualization  of l o c u s o f c o n t r o l . I n p a r t i c u l a r , Levenson (1981), a l t h o u g h r e t a i n i n g t h e i n t e r n a l o r i e n t a t i o n , has f u r t h e r d e v e l o p e d t h e e x t e r n a l l o c u s o f c o n t r o l o r i e n t a t i o n t o i n c l u d e t h e dimensions o f chance and p o w e r f u l o t h e r s . The p o w e r f u l o t h e r s o r i e n t a t i o n i s p a r t i c u l a r y p e r t i n e n t f o r b u r g l a r y v i c t i m s because i t a l l o w s t h e v i c t i m t o h o l d t h e e x p e c t a n c y t h a t t h e a u t h o r i t i e s ( i . e . , p o l i c e ) may be a b l e t o h e l p a c h i e v e t h e desired reinforcement.  Therefore,  d i f f e r e n t i a t i n g between p o w e r f u l  o t h e r s and chance appears i m p o r t a n t i n o r d e r t o u n d e r s t a n d t h e e x p e c t a n c y b e l i e f s o f p e o p l e when t h e r e a r e p o t e n t i a l l y p o w e r f u l  others  i n v o l v e d i n t h e p s y c h o l o g i c a l event (Levenson, 1981). F u r t h e r m o r e , Levenson's (1981) m o d i f i c a t i o n f u r t h e r r e f i n e s t h e e x t e r n a l o r i e n t a t i o n of R o t t e r ' s  (1966) c o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o n and i n d o i n g so makes i t r e l e v a n t  for t h e study of burglary v i c t i m s . From a t h e o r e t i c a l b a s i s , l o c u s o f c o n t r o l has i t s g r e a t e s t i n f l u e n c e on b e h a v i o u r i n n o v e l and/or ambiguous s i t u a t i o n s ( R o t t e r , 1966,  1975).  The s i g n i f i c a n c e o f l o c u s o f c o n t r o l ' s i n f l u e n c e on  behaviour diminishes increases  as t h e i n d i v i d u a l ' s e x p e r i e n c e i n a s i t u a t i o n  ( R o t t e r , 1975).  When t h e s i t u a t i o n i s known t o t h e  i n d i v i d u a l , s p e c i f i c expectancies  o f c o n t r o l as opposed t o a g e n e r a l i z e d  e x p e c t a n c y w i l l a c t t o determine b e h a v i o u r ( R o t t e r , 1966, 1975, 1990; Strickland,  1978).  L a z a r u s and Folkman (1984) d e f i n e a m b i g u i t y as " l a c k o f c l a r i t y i n t h e environment, s i t u a t i o n a l cues r e g a r d i n g t h e n a t u r e o f t h e outcome and/or e x t e n t t o which i t can be c o n t r o l l e d a r e m i n i m a l "  (p.66).  They  contend t h a t t h e g r e a t e r t h e a m b i g u i t y t h e more t h e i n d i v i d u a l r e l i e s  on  generalized expectancies ( i . e . , locus of c o n t r o l ) i n determining h i s / h e r behaviour.  A s i t u a t i o n i s n o v e l when a person has not e x p e r i e n c e d  s i t u a t i o n b e f o r e ( L a z a r u s & Folkman, 1984).  Few  the  s i t u a t i o n s are  c o m p l e t e l y n o v e l , i n most s i t u a t i o n s a p e r s o n w i l l be a b l e t o make some c o n n e c t i o n , no m a t t e r how weak, between t h e s i t u a t i o n a t hand and some o t h e r group o f s i t u a t i o n s . Hence, t h e n o v e l t y o f a s i t u a t i o n i s r e l a t i v e r a t h e r t h a n a b s o l u t e (Lazarus & Folkman, 1984). Furthermore,  a novel  s i t u a t i o n i s a l s o ambiguous i n t h a t t h e i n d i v i d u a l i s u n c l e a r about t h e s i g n i f i c a n c e o r meaning o f t h e event  ( L a z a r u s & Folkman, 1984).  In a  s t u d y o f t h e i n t e r a c t i o n between t r a i t a n x i e t y and c o n t r o l i n a shock avoidance  task. Archer  (1979) p r o v i d e s e m p i r i c a l e v i d e n c e t h a t  p e r s o n a l i t y d i s p o s i t i o n s have t h e s t r o n g e s t i n f l u e n c e on b e h a v i o u r ambiguous c o n d i t i o n s .  Moreover, Solomon e t a l . (1989), i n t h e i r  under study  o f l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and c o m b a t - r e l a t e d p o s t - t r a u m a t i c s t r e s s d i s o r d e r i n s o l d i e r s , found t h a t t h e g r e a t e r t h e cunbiguity o f t h e b a t t l e  intensity,  t h e more l o c u s o f c o n t r o l i n f l u e n c e d t h e c o p i n g f u n c t i o n s u s e d by  the  s o l d i e r s to deal with the post-traumatic s t r e s s . Folkman and L a z a r u s  (1980, 1985), i n t h e i r s t u d i e s o f c o p i n g i n a  m i d d l e - a g e community sample and c o l l e g e exéimination t a k i n g , found was  no s i g n i f i c a n t r e l a t i o n s h i p between l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and  function.  there  coping  However, i n o r d e r f o r an i n d i v i d u a l ' s l o c u s o f c o n t r o l t o  i n f l u e n c e h i s / h e r c o p i n g , i t i s n e c e s s a r y f o r t h e s t r e s s o r t o be n o v e l . C o l l e g e s t u d e n t s p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n an e x a m i n a t i o n  i s not a n o v e l o r  ambiguous s i t u a t i o n and i t i s not known i f t h e c o p i n g b e h a v i o u r s o f a m i d d l e - a g e sample i n v o l v e d n o v e l o r ambiguous s t r e s s o r s . Solomon e t a l . (1989), i n t h e i r study of p o s t - t r a u m a t i c s t r e s s d i s o r d e r , examined t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p between l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and  coping  functions.  The 104 male p a r t i c i p a n t s who ranged i n age from 18 t o 32  w i t h a median age o f 30, a year p r i o r t o d a t a c o l l e c t i o n had f o u g h t o n t h e f r o n t l i n e f o r I s r a e l d u r i n g t h e 1982 Lebanon war. A s h o r t e n e d v e r s i o n o f R o t t e r ' s l o c u s o f c o n t r o l s c a l e was a d m i n i s t e r e d t o e s t a b l i s h the l o c u s of c o n t r o l of t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s . Threat a p p r a i s a l  was  a s c e r t a i n e d t h r o u g h h a v i n g t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s r a t e on a 5 - p o i n t L i k e r t t y p e s c a l e how t h r e a t e n i n g t h e y found t h e b a t t l e . Raw s c o r e s from t h e WCC  (Folkman & L a z a r u s , 1980) were used t o measure problem- and  emotion-  f o c u s e d c o p i n g . Through t h e i n t e r v i e w , t h e p a r t i c i p a n t ' s p e r c e p t i o n o f low and h i g h b a t t l e i n t e n s i t y was  determined.  Solomon e t a l . (1989) found t h a t under low b a t t l e i n t e n s i t y t h e g r e a t e r t h e i n t e r n a l l o c u s o f c o n t r o l t h e more t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s used problem-focused  c o p i n g , r(52)=.20,  E<.05, as w e l l , under h i g h b a t t l e  i n t e n s i t y the greater the i n t e r n a l locus of control of the p a r t i c i p a n t s t h e more t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s used problem-focused s t r e s s r e a c t i o n , r(48)=.40,  E<.01. Furthermore,  c o p i n g f o l l o w i n g combat under low b a t t l e  i n t e n s i t y t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s r e p o r t e d u s i n g more e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d when t h e y e x p e r i e n c e d s t r o n g n e g a t i v e emotions,  r(52)=.29,  coping  E<.05, as  w e l l , under h i g h b a t t l e i n t e n s i t y p a r t i c i p a n t s r e p o r t e d u s i n g more emotion-focused r(48)=.27, focused  c o p i n g when t h e y e x p e r i e n c e d s t r o n g n e g a t i v e  emotions,  E<.05. T h e r e f o r e , b a t t l e i n t e n s i t y was r e l a t e d t o e m o t i o n -  coping.  F i n d i n g s by Solomon e t a l . (1989) a r e i n c o n t r a s t t o t h e i r c o n t e n t i o n t h a t h i g h b a t t l e i n t e n s i t y p r o v i d e d an unambiguous s i t u a t i o n cue o f how t o r e a c t . A c c o r d i n g l y , l o c u s o f c o n t r o l would be e x p e c t e d t o have a s i g n i f i c a n t r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h c o p i n g under t h e ambiguous event o f low-battle intensity. A l t h o u g h Solomon e t a l . (1989) found a s i g n i f i c a n t r e l a t i o n s h i p between l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and c o p i n g f u n c t i o n s r e g a r d l e s s o f b a t t l e i n t e n s i t y , f u r t h e r a n a l y s e s c o m p l i c a t e t h e s e p r e v i o u s f i n d i n g s . These r e s e a r c h e r s conducted  simultaneous m u l t i p l e r e g r e s s i o n analyses t o  a s s e s s d i r e c t c o n t r i b u t i o n of l o c u s of c o n t r o l , t h r e a t n e g a t i v e emotions, and h i g h - and  low-battle  appraisal,  coping functions t o post-traumatic s t r e s s i n b o t h  i n t e n s i t y . The  c o n t r i b u t i o n of l o c u s o f c o n t r o l  to  p o s t - t r a u m a t i c s t r e s s r e a c t i o n s d i d not r e a c h s i g n i f i c a n c e under e i t h e r c o n d i t i o n . However, Solomon e t a l . , u s i n g p a t h a n a l y s i s , examined  the  i n d i r e c t e f f e c t s of l o c u s of c o n t r o l on p o s t - t r a u m a t i c s t r e s s . Under h i g h b a t t l e i n t e n s i t y no d i r e c t p a t h between l o c u s of c o n t r o l and  post-  t r a u m a t i c s t r e s s v i a the o t h e r v a r i a b l e s r e a c h e d s i g n i f i c a n c e . However, under low b a t t l e i n t e n s i t y the i n d i r e c t p a t h from c o n t r o l e x p e c t a n c y t o p o s t - t r a u m a t i c s t r e s s t h r o u g h t h r e a t a p p r a i s a l was T h e r e f o r e , p a r t i c i p a n t s who reported  h e l d i n t e r n a l l o c u s of c o n t r o l and  low b a t t l e i n t e n s i t y were a s s o c i a t e d  a p p r a i s a l , which was  significant.  w i t h lower  who  threat  t h e n r e l a t e d t o fewer p o s t - t r a u m a t i c  stress  symptoms. Solomon e t a l . (1989) argued t h a t t h e s e f i n d i n g s s u p p o r t p o s i t i o n t h a t l o c u s of c o n t r o l has  i t s strongest  i n f l u e n c e on  the  behaviour  under ambiguous c o n d i t i o n s . Under the ambiguous c o n d i t i o n of  low-battle  i n t e n s i t y , locus of c o n t r o l influenced post-traumatic s t r e s s through  the  m e d i a t i n g e f f e c t of t h r e a t a p p r a i s a l , whereas, under t h e unambiguous c o n d i t i o n of h i g h - b a t t l e i n t e n s i t y l o c u s of c o n t r o l was  not a f a c t o r  i n f l u e n c i n g post-traumatic s t r e s s behaviour. Findings  by Solomon e t a l . (1989) f u r t h e r i l l u s t r a t e t h e  r e l a t i o n s h i p between l o c u s of c o n t r o l , c o p i n g f u n c t i o n s , and  complex  other  a s p e c t s o f human b e h a v i o u r ( i . e . , p o s t - t r a u m a t i c s t r e s s ) . C l e a r l y t h e r e i s a r e l a t i o n s h i p between l o c u s of c o n t r o l and  coping  functions.  However, Solomon e t a l . f a i l e d t o address the i n c o n s i s t e n t  moderating  e f f e c t o f a m b i g u i t y as d i s p l a y e d t h r o u g h b a t t l e i n t e n s i t y . Moreover, t h e i r f i n d i n g s a l s o suggest t h a t l o c u s of c o n t r o l has  a  stronger  r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h problem-focused coping than emotion-focused coping. From t h e i r s t u d y i t appears t h a t p r o b l e m - f o c u s e d c o p i n g i s p o s i t i v e l y r e l a t e d t o l o c u s of c o n t r o l and  high l e v e l s of emotional d i s t r e s s  p o s i t i v e l y r e l a t e d t o emotion-focused coping. This f i n d i n g i s  are  consistent  w i t h more r e c e n t r e s e a r c h (Compas & Orosan, i n p r e s s ; Peacock & Wong, 1990). The s t u d y by Solomon e t a l . (1989) has s e v e r a l l i m i t a t i o n s . F i r s t , a s Solomon e t a l . suggest, c a u s a l i n f e r e n c e i s n o t p o s s i b l e because o f t h e f a c t t h a t a l l v a r i a b l e s were measured one y e a r r e t r o s p e c t i v e l y and because o f t h e c r o s s - s e c t i o n a l d e s i g n o f t h e s t u d y . Second, a l t h o u g h t h e r e was a p o s i t i v e moderate c o r r e l a t i o n between i n t e r n a l l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and problem-focused  coping,  their  i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f t h i s i s i n c o m p l e t e w i t h o u t a s c e r t a i n i n g whether outcome v a l u e moderated t h e l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and c o p i n g f u n c t i o n r e l a t i o n s h i p . R o t t e r (1975, 1990) argues t h a t r e s e a r c h u s i n g l o c u s o f c o n t r o l i s f l a w e d i f i t does not t a k e i n t o c o n s i d e r a t i o n outcome v a l u e . T h i r d , Solomon e t a l . d i d not p r o v i d e a c o n v i n c i n g argument, n o r d i d t h e i r c o n t r a d i c t o r y r e s u l t s support t h e p o s i t i o n t h a t b a t t l e  intensity  l e v e l r e p r e s e n t s ambiguity of t h e events. Conceivably, l o w - b a t t l e i n t e n s i t y c o r r e s p o n d s w i t h low outcome v a l u e , i n t h a t t h e outcome i s n o t as i m p o r t a n t as h i g h - b a t t l e i n t e n s i t y , where t h e outcome i s e x c e p t i o n a l l y i m p o r t a n t . F o u r t h , many a s p e c t s o f b a t t l e may n o t be n o v e l and/or ambiguous t o e x p e r i e n c e d s o l d i e r s , t h e r e f o r e i t would have been prudent  t o e s t a b l i s h whether s i t u a t i o n a l a p p r a i s a l s o f c o n t r o l p r e d i c t  c o p i n g f u n c t i o n s and/or mediate t h e l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and c o p i n g f u n c t i o n r e l a t i o n s h i p . F i n a l l y , l o c u s o f c o n t r o l was measured a f t e r t h e event and not a n t e c e d e n t  t o t h e event. Research  c o n t r o l may be a l t e r e d by l i f e e v e n t s  supports t h a t a person's  locus of  ( i . e . , war) and subsequent c o p i n g  e f f o r t s and i s n o t a f i x e d p e r s o n a l i t y t r a i t ( B e r g e r & Koocher, 1972; C o l l i n s e t a l . , 1990). T h e r e f o r e , l o c u s o f c o n t r o l as a p r e d i c t o r v a r i a b l e may have been i n a p p r o p r i a t e and may have c r e a t e d d i f f i c u l t y i n i n t e r p r e t i n g t h e e f f e c t s o f l o c u s o f c o n t r o l on c o p i n g f u n c t i o n s . Anderson (1977), i n h i s study o f 102 b u s i n e s s p e o p l e who s u r v i v e d a h u r r i c a n e , found a r e l a t i o n s h i p between an i n d i v i d u a l ' s l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and c o p i n g f u n c t i o n s used t o cope w i t h t h e a f t e r m a t h o f t h e h u r r i c a n e . I n g e n e r a l , Anderson (1977) found t h a t i n d i v i d u a l s w i t h an e x t e r n a l  l o c u s of c o n t r o l used more emotion-focused c o p i n g t h a n p r o b l e m - f o c u s e d coping.  Those w i t h an i n t e r n a l l o c u s of c o n t r o l used more c o p i n g  s i m i l a r t o problem-focused coping than coping s i m i l a r to emotion-focused coping. Anderson's (1977) f i n d i n g s d i d not p r o v i d e a c l e a r u n d e r s t a n d i n g t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p between l o c u s of c o n t r o l and t h e a n a l y s i s was  c o r r e l a t i o n a l , therefore,  r e l a t i o n s h i p between l o c u s of c o n t r o l and  coping functions.  d e t e r m i n a t i o n of a c o p i n g was  not  First, causal  possible.  Second, he f a i l e d t o account f o r the r e q u i s i t e i n f o r m a t i o n  on outcome  v a l u e . For example, a p e r s o n w i t h an i n t e r n a l l o c u s o f c o n t r o l who a low-outcome v a l u e r e g a r d i n g the e v e n t , may  holds  not have used p r o b l e m -  f o c u s e d c o p i n g . Based on t h e o r y , t h e l o c u s of c o n t r o l - c o p i n g r e l a t i o n s h i p may  of  be moderated by outcome v a l u e ( R o t t e r ,  function  1966,  1975,  1990). T h i r d , Anderson (1977) t r e a t s l o c u s of c o n t r o l as b i m o d a l t h u s making t h e occurring  s c a l e i p s a t i v e . F a i l u r e t o t r e a t l o c u s of c o n t r o l on a continuum l i m i t s the f i n d i n g s and  s t u d y . F i n a l l y , more i n f o r m a t i o n  as  i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s of  regarding i n d i v i d u a l differences  c o p i n g may  have been p r o v i d e d by t a k i n g i n t o account s i t u a t i o n a l  appraisals  o f c o n t r o l . Locus of c o n t r o l i s o p t i m a l l y  n o v e l and/or ambiguous s i t u a t i o n s ( R o t t e r , 1966,  1975,  c o n t r o l b e l i e f s , may functions  1990). I t i s  coping function  between t h e  with  coping  and/or i n u n d e r s t a n d i n g t h e p o s s i b l e m e d i a t i n g r o l e of c o n t r o l has  not  about s i t u a t i o n a l  have been h e l p f u l i n the p r e d i c t i o n o f  s i t u a t i o n a l appraisals  in  predictive in  known i f t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s i n Anderson's (1977) s t u d y were c o p i n g n o v e l and/or ambiguous e v e n t s . T h e r e f o r e , i n f o r m a t i o n  the  that  l o c u s of c o n t r o l  and  relationship.  C a r v e r e t a l . (1989) a d m i n i s t e r e d t h e i r m u l t i d i m e n s i o n a l c o p i n g inventory  (COPE) and  several other questionnaires i n c l u d i n g  (1966) l o c u s o f c o n t r o l s c a l e t o a group of 162  Rotter's  university  u n d e r g r a d u a t e s . I n t e r n a l i t y reached s i g n i f i c a n c e w i t h 2 of t h e scales.  I n t e r n a l l o c u s of c o n t r o l had  13 COPE  a s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n (r =  .17, E < '05) w i t h A c t i v e Coping and a s i g n i f i c a n t n e g a t i v e ( r = -.15,  E <.05)  correlation  w i t h Focus On and V e n t i l a t i o n o f Emotions. Due  i p s a t i v e n a t u r e o f R o t t e r ' s s c a l e , t h e same magnitude but w i t h  to  the  the  o p p o s i t e d i r e c t i o n would have o c c u r r e d f o r e x t e r n a l i t y . These f i n d i n g s l e n d weak support t h a t t h e r e i s a r e l a t i o n s h i p between i n t e r n a l l o c u s  of  c o n t r o l and p r o b l e m - f o c u s e d c o p i n g . Moreover, i t i s not c l e a r from t h e study by C a r v e r e t a l . (1989) whether t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s were c o p i n g  with  n o v e l and/or ambiguous e v e n t s . S i t u a t i o n a l c o n t r o l b e l i e f s were s i g n i f i c a n t l y r e l a t e d t o coping  (7 o f t h e 13 s u b s c a l e s ) more f r e q u e n t l y  t h a n l o c u s o f c o n t r o l (2 of t h e 13 s u b s c a l e s ) , t h e r e f o r e i t was  likely  t h a t t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s were not c o p i n g w i t h n o v e l and/or ambiguous e v e n t s . Under unambiguous c o n d i t i o n s , a s t r o n g r e l a t i o n s h i p between l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and c o p i n g would not be  expected.  B l a n c h a r d - F i e l d s and I r i o n (1989) examined t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p between l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and c o p i n g as moderated by age and c o n t e x t . The  96  p a r t i c i p a n t s completed s e v e r a l q u e s t i o n n a i r e s i n c l u d i n g Levenson's (1981) I n t e r n a l , P o w e r f u l O t h e r s , Lazarus's  (1985) WCC  and Chance S c a l e s , and Folkman  ( r e v i s e d ) . The male and  and  female p a r t i c i p a n t s were  d i v i d e d e q u a l l y i n t o f o u r age groups: a d o l e s c e n t s , young a d u l t s , m i d d l e aged a d u l t s , and o l d e r a d u l t s . I n g e n e r a l , younger i n d i v i d u a l s w i t h an i n t e r n a l l o c u s o f c o n t r o l used c o p i n g s t r a t e g i e s t h a t were e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d , such as s e l f - b l a m e  and  h o s t i l e r e a c t i o n . However, a d u l t s w i t h an i n t e r n a l l o c u s o f c o n t r o l used more p r o b l e m - f o c u s e d c o p i n g t h a n e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d c o p i n g . F i e l d s and  I r i o n (1988) argue t h a t i n t e r n a l i t y may  Blanchard-  represent  a  m u l t i d i m e n s i o n a l c o n s t r u c t w i t h d i f f e r e n t a t t r i b u t i o n s made a c c o r d i n g age.  to  F o r excimple, young i n d i v i d u a l s w i t h an i n t e r n a l l o c u s o f c o n t r o l  o r i e n t a t i o n may  b e l i e v e t h a t they are r e s p o n s i b l e f o r a s t r e s s f u l  s i t u a t i o n and r e a c t immaturely. They a v o i d o r r e a c t i n a h o s t i l e manner t o w a r d s t h e event.  However, o l d e r a d u l t s r e a c t m a t u r e l y  r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r t h e s t r e s s o r . T h e r e f o r e , t h e y use  and o f t e n t a k e  problem-focused  c o p i n g t o manage t h e s t r e s s o r . F u r t h e r m o r e , o l d e r a d u l t s who h e l d a p o w e r f u l o t h e r s l o c u s o f c o n t r o l o r i e n t a t i o n endorsed c o p i n g s t r a t e g i e s t h a t were p r o b l e m f o c u s e d , whereas w i t h younger groups p o w e r f u l o t h e r s were n e g a t i v e l y r e l a t e d t o c o p i n g s t r a t e g i e s t h a t comprise p r o b l e m - f o c u s e d  coping.  P a r t i c i p a n t s w i t h a chance o r i e n t a t i o n , t h e second d i m e n s i o n o f e x t e r n a l i t y on Levenson's l o c u s o f c o n t r o l s c a l e , used d i f f e r e n t  coping  s t r a t e g i e s t h a n t h o s e w i t h a p o w e r f u l o t h e r s o r i e n t a t i o n . Both younger and o l d e r p a r t i c i p a n t s h o l d i n g chance l o c u s o f c o n t r o l o r i e n t a t i o n u s e d e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d c o p i n g . However, o l d e r a d u l t s endorsed a h o s t i l e reaction.  B l a n c h a r d - F i e l d s and I r i o n (1988) suggested t h a t chance has a  d i f f e r e n t meaning f o r o l d e r a d u l t s t h a n younger a d u l t s . B l a n c h a r d - F i e l d ' s and I r i o n ' s (1988) f i n d i n g s s u p p o r t t h e p o s i t i o n t h a t l o c u s o f c o n t r o l has a t l e a s t t h r e e d i m e n s i o n s . Moreover, i n t h e case o f o l d e r a d u l t s i n t e r n a l and p o w e r f u l o t h e r s l o c u s o f c o n t r o l were r e l a t e d t o p r o b l e m - f o c u s e d c o p i n g , whereas chance l o c u s o f c o n t r o l a f f e c t e d e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d c o p i n g . Yet i n younger a d u l t s a l l t h r e e d i m e n s i o n s o f l o c u s o f c o n t r o l were r e l a t e d t o c o p i n g s t r a t e g i e s t h a t were c o n s i d e r e d e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d s t r a t e g i e s . T h i s e v i d e n c e p r o v i d e d support  some  f o r t h e h y p o t h e s i s t h a t age moderated t h e l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and  c o p i n g f u n c t i o n r e l a t i o n . However, B l a n c h a r d - F i e l d s and I r i o n d i d n o t measure outcome v a l u e . T h e r e f o r e ,  i t may be t h a t t h e i r f i n d i n g s do n o t  r e f l e c t t h e m o d e r a t i n g e f f e c t o f age, r a t h e r t h e m o d e r a t i n g e f f e c t o f outcome v a l u e . Perhaps younger a d u l t s d i d n o t p l a c e an emphasis on t h e outcome v a l u e and t h e r e f o r e d i d not engage i n p r o b l e m - f o c u s e d  coping  s t r a t e g i e s . However, o l d e r a d u l t s may have p l a c e d g r e a t e r emphasis on outcome v a l u e t h a n younger c o h o r t s and t h u s engaged i n p r o b l e m - f o c u s e d coping. I n summary, s e v e r a l s t u d i e s showed a complex r e l a t i o n s h i p between l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and c o p i n g 1988;  (Anderson, 1977; B l a n c h a r d - F i e l d s & I r i o n ,  C a r v e r e t a l . , 1989; L a z a r u s  & Folkman, 1984, 1985; P a r k e s , 1984;  Solomon e t a l . , 1989). The d i r e c t e f f e c t o f l o c u s o f c o n t r o l on c o p i n g was  e q u i v o c a l . I n t h e case o f b u r g l a r y v i c t i m i z a t i o n , t h e l o c u s o f  c o n t r o l and c o p i n g r e l a t i o n s h i p may be moderated o r mediated by outcome v a l u e , gender, and s i t u a t i o n a l a p p r a i s a l s o f c o n t r o l . F u r t h e r m o r e , Levenson's (1981) p o w e r f u l o t h e r s s c a l e may be p e r t i n e n t t o b u r g l a r y v i c t i m s because i t may d e p i c t t h e v i c t i m t o h o l d t h e e x p e c t a n c y t h a t t h e a u t h o r i t i e s ( i . e . , p o l i c e ) may be a b l e t o h e l p a c h i e v e d e s i r e d r e s u l t s ( i . e . , home s e c u r i t y ) . Both t h e m e d i a t i n g  and m o d e r a t i n g e f f e c t s o f  outcome v a l u e and s i t u a t i o n a l a p p r a i s a l s o f c o n t r o l on t h e l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and c o p i n g r e l a t i o n s h i p must be examined t o u n d e r s t a n d t h e l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and c o p i n g f u n c t i o n r e l a t i o n f o r b u r g l a r y v i c t i m s . Importance of Outcome R o t t e r (1966, 1990) argues t h a t a p e r s o n ' s b e h a v i o u r  or actions i n  a n o v e l o r ambiguous s i t u a t i o n a r e a f u n c t i o n o f t h a t i n d i v i d u a l ' s l o c u s o f c o n t r o l , as w e l l as t h e degree o f outcome v a l u e t h a t t h e i n d i v i d u a l attaches t o t h e s i t u a t i o n . In the context of locus o f c o n t r o l t h e term reinforcement  v a l u e i s used i n t e r c h a n g e a b l y w i t h outcome v a l u e  (Rosolack  & Hampson, 1991; R o t t e r , 1966, 1990). Thus, u n l i k e l o c u s o f c o n t r o l , w h i c h i s a g e n e r a l i z e d expectancy b e l i e f t h a t i s h e l d a n t e c e d e n t t o t h e event, outcome v a l u e i s a b e l i e f t h a t must be c o n s i d e r e d  i n l i g h t of a  s p e c i f i c event a t a p a r t i c u l a r t i m e (Rosolack & Hampson, 1991). F o r example, t h o s e who h o l d an i n t e r n a l l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and who v a l u e  their  h e a l t h , g a t h e r more i n f o r m a t i o n about h e a l t h maintenance t h a n t h o s e who do n o t v a l u e t h e i r h e a l t h ( S t r i c k l a n d , 1978; W a l l s t o n e t a l . , 1987). t h i s example, t h e b e h a v i o u r  In  i s g a t h e r i n g i n f o r m a t i o n and t h e degree t o  which a p e r s o n v a l u e s h i s o r h e r h e a l t h i s c o n s i d e r e d outcome v a l u e . Outcome v a l u e s h o u l d be c o n s i d e r e d  i n conjunction with the locus of  c o n t r o l c o n s t r u c t , and f a i l u r e t o do so i s c h a r a c t e r i s t i c o f many s t u d i e s (Levenson, 1981; R o t t e r , 1975, 1990; S t r i c k l a n d , 1989; W a l l s t o n e t a l . , 1987). H. L e f c o u r t ( p e r s o n a l communication, June 18, 1990) s u g g e s t s t h a t outcome v a l u e i s f r e q u e n t l y n o t measured because i n most  r e s e a r c h t h e outcome v a l u e i s a c c e p t e d as h i g h due t o t h e s e r i o u s n e s s o f the encounters  being studied.  Y e t , i n t h e case o f b u r g l a r y , t h e r e may  be v a r i a n c e i n outcome v a l u e h e l d by t h e v i c t i m s and t h i s may, i n p a r t , account  f o r i n d i v i d u a l d i f f e r e n c e s i n t h e way b u r g l a r y v i c t i m s cope (H.  L e f c o u r t , p e r s o n a l communication, June 18, 1990).  Furthermore,  Rosolack  and Hampson (1991) argue t h a t outcome v a l u e must r e a c h some minimum l e v e l b e f o r e i t i n t e r a c t s w i t h l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and has p r e d i c t i v e power of  behaviour. One o f t h e few s t u d i e s t o c o n s i d e r a s i m i l a r c o n s t r u c t t o outcome  v a l u e was conducted  by Parkes  i n d i c a t e t h e importance  (1984). P a r k e s asked p a r t i c i p a n t s t o  o f t h e s i t u a t i o n t h a t t h e y were c o p i n g w i t h .  T h i s was s i m i l a r t o outcome v a l u e , except t h a t w i t h outcome v a l u e t h e emphasis i s on t h e importance measured w i t h t h e WCC.  o f t h e outcome o f t h e e v e n t . C o p i n g  Parkes conducted  was  Very Simple S t r u c t u r e ( R e v e l l e &  R o c k l i n , 1979) f a c t o r a n a l y s i s on t h e WCC d a t a and d i s t i n g u i s h e d t h r e e f a c t o r s o f c o p i n g . The f i r s t f a c t o r r e p r e s e n t e d G e n e r a l Coping i n c l u d e d c o g n i t i v e and b e h a v i o r a l s t r a t e g i e s i n response  that  to a stressful  e v e n t ; t h e second f a c t o r r e p r e s e n t e d D i r e c t Coping, w h i c h i s s i m i l a r t o problem-focused  c o p i n g ; t h e t h i r d f a c t o r r e p r e s e n t e d S u p p r e s s i o n and  i n c l u d e d items such as s u p p r e s s i n g thoughts o f t h e s t r e s s f u l c o p i n g s t r a t e g i e s g e n e r a l l y c o n s i d e r e d emotion-focused  situation,  coping.  Parkes  r e p o r t e d a c c e p t a b l e i n t e r n a l c o n s i s t e n c y v a l u e s f o r G e n e r a l and D i r e c t Coping  (.89 and .71) and l e s s t h a n a c c e p t a b l e r e l i a b i l i t y v a l u e f o r  S u p p r e s s i o n Coping  (.56). Hence, any f i n d i n g w i t h r e g a r d t o S u p p r e s s i o n  C o p i n g must be c o n s i d e r e d i n l i g h t o f a low i n t e r n a l c o n s i s t e n c y v a l u e . Parkes  (1984) found t h a t female s t u d e n t nurses who h e l d e i t h e r an  i n t e r n a l o r e x t e r n a l l o c u s o f c o n t r o l used s i g n i f i c a n t l y h i g h e r  levels  o f S u p p r e s s i o n c o p i n g when a s i t u a t i o n was r a t e d as low i n outcome v a l u e . T h i s r e l a t i o n s h i p was not found f o r G e n e r a l o r D i r e c t Coping. main e f f e c t o f outcome v a l u e f o r S u p p r e s s i o n c o p i n g i l l u s t r a t e s t h e importance  o f outcome v a l u e as i t p e r t a i n s t o c o p i n g  strategies  The  encompassed by emotion-focused l e v e l , outcome v a l u e may  c o p i n g . Furthermore,  unimportant  conceptual  moderate t h e l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and  r e l a t i o n s h i p . Parkes argues t h a t emotion-focused parsimonious  at the  coping  c o p i n g may  be a more  c o p i n g f u n c t i o n f o r events t h a t t h e p a r t i c i p a n t h o l d s  as  (low outcome v a l u e ) because t h e r e i s l i t t l e m o t i v a t i o n t o  change t h e s t r e s s o r under such Solomon e t a l .  (1989)  circumstances.  i n t h e i r study o f  104  males e x p e r i e n c i n g  p o s t - t r a u m a t i c s t r e s s d i s o r d e r , d i d not measure outcome v a l u e . However, t h e v a r i a b l e , low and h i g h b a t t l e i n t e n s i t y , c o n c e i v a b l y  corresponds  w i t h low and h i g h outcome v a l u e . That i s , under low b a t t l e i n t e n s i t y importance  o f t h e s i t u a t i o n i s l e s s t h a n under h i g h b a t t l e  As such, under low outcome v a l u e t h e r e was c o r r e l a t i o n (r  =.32,  E<.001)  a significant  the  intensity.  positive  between l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and  emotion-  f o c u s e d c o p i n g . However, under h i g h outcome v a l u e t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p between l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and emotion-focused  c o p i n g was  whereas between l o c u s of c o n t r o l and problem-focused s i g n i f i c a n t r e l a t i o n s h i p (r = . 4 0 , p < . 0 5 ) .  not  significant,  c o p i n g t h e r e was  a  A l t h o u g h not c o n c l u s i v e ,  t h e s e f i n d i n g s suggest t h a t outcome v a l u e moderates t h e l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and c o p i n g f u n c t i o n r e l a t i o n . Carver et a l .  (1989)  measured outcome v a l u e w i t h two  items.  The  g r e a t e r t h e outcome v a l u e t h e more t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s r e p o r t e d u s i n g s t r a t e g i e s c o m p a t i b l e w i t h emotion-focused A l t h o u g h t h e r e was  coping ( i . e . ,  denial).  a r e s t r i c t e d range i n a s s e s s i n g outcome v a l u e  ( p a r t i c i p a n t s h o l d i n g low outcome v a l u e were not i n c l u d e d ) , t h e s e f i n d i n g s a r e not c o n s i s t e n t w i t h t h o s e o f P a r k e s ' c o n t r a d i c t i o n may  (1984).  This  be r e s o l v e d , i n p a r t , by c o n s i d e r i n g t h a t e m o t i o n a l  a r o u s a l / d i s t r e s s may  be l i n k e d t o t h e use of e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d  (Compas & Orosan, i n p r e s s ; Peacock & Wong,  1990).  coping  Conceivably,  the  g r e a t e r t h e outcome v a l u e t h e g r e a t e r t h e e m o t i o n a l a r o u s a l and t h u s t h e need f o r emotion-focused  coping increases.  I n summary, t h e r e i s a d e a r t h o f i n f o r m a t i o n about t h e r o l e o f  outcome v a l u e as a moderator between l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and c o p i n g f u n c t i o n s . Numerous r e s e a r c h e r s contend t h a t when l o c u s o f c o n t r o l i s a s s e s s e d outcome v a l u e s h o u l d a l s o be assessed 1975,  (Levenson,  1981; R o t t e r ,  1990; S t r i c k l a n d , 1989; W a l l s t o n e t a l . , 1987). M o r e o v e r , based on  t h e o r y and e m p i r i c a l r e s e a r c h t h e r e i s some e v i d e n c e t h a t outcome v a l u e moderates t h e l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and c o p i n g f u n c t i o n r e l a t i o n s h i p .  That  i s , outcome v a l u e a f f e c t s t h e d i r e c t i o n and/or s t r e n g t h between l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and c o p i n g . The r e l a t i o n s h i p between l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and emotion-focused  c o p i n g w i l l be s t r o n g e r among v i c t i m s h o l d i n g h i g h  outcome v a l u e t h a n among v i c t i m s h o l d i n g low outcome v a l u e .  Conversely,  t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p between l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and p r o b l e m - f o c u s e d  coping  w i l l be s t r o n g e r among v i c t i m s h o l d i n g h i g h outcome v a l u e t h a n among v i c t i m s h o l d i n g low outcome v a l u e . Situational  Appraisals of Control  In o r d e r f o r l o c u s o f c o n t r o l t o be a p r e d i c t o r o f c o p i n g ,  specific  c o n t r o l e x p e c t a n c i e s must a l s o be c o n s i d e r e d (Folkman, 1984; R o t t e r , 1975). To address t h e i s s u e o f s p e c i f i c c o n t r o l e x p e c t a n c i e s ,  Lazarus  and Folkman (1984) proposed s i t u a t i o n a l a p p r a i s a l s o f c o n t r o l . I n g e n e r a l , s i t u a t i o n a l a p p r a i s a l s of c o n t r o l r e f e r t o t h e degree t o which an i n d i v i d u a l b e l i e v e s he o r she can change o r c o n t r o l a s p e c i f i c s i t u a t i o n i n l i g h t o f t h e demands o f t h a t s i t u a t i o n . Folkman and L a z a r u s  (1980) s t u d i e d c o p i n g i n a m i d d l e - a g e d  community sample and found t h a t i n d i v i d u a l s who b e l i e v e d a s i t u a t i o n c o u l d be c o n t r o l l e d used more problem-focused  coping than emotion-  f o c u s e d c o p i n g . On t h e o t h e r hand, i n d i v i d u a l s who b e l i e v e d a s i t u a t i o n c o u l d n o t be c o n t r o l l e d used more emotion-focused f o c u s e d c o p i n g . Folkman and L a z a r u s  c o p i n g t h a n problem-  (1985) i n t h e i r s t u d y o f c o p i n g  d u r i n g t h r e e s t a g e s o f e x a m i n a t i o n t a k i n g found t h a t p a r t i c i p a n t s who p e r c e i v e d t h a t t h e y c o u l d c o n t r o l t h e i r e x a m i n a t i o n p e r f o r m a n c e used more p r o b l e m - f o c u s e d  than emotion-focused  s t a g e o f e x a m i n a t i o n t a k i n g . Furthermore,  coping d u r i n g the preparatory Folkman e t a l . (1986), i n a  study t h a t examined t h e r e l a t i o n between a p p r a i s a l and c o p i n g i n a sample o f 85 m a r r i e d c o u p l e s , a g a i n found t h a t i n d i v i d u a l s w i t h h i g h e r l e v e l s o f s i t u a t i o n a l a p p r a i s a l s o f c o n t r o l used more than e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d  problem-focused  c o p i n g i n d e a l i n g w i t h s t r e s s o r s . However, b e c a u s e  i n t h e s e s t u d i e s t h e s i t u a t i o n a l a p p r a i s a l s o f c o n t r o l q u e s t i o n s were vague, i t was u n c l e a r as t o what p a r t i c i p a n t s were s u g g e s t i n g t h e y c o n t r o l l e d o r f a i l e d t o c o n t r o l . Moreover, i n some  encounters  s i t u a t i o n a l a p p r a i s a l s o f c o n t r o l not o n l y p r e d i c t c o p i n g b u t may a l s o mediate t h e l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and c o p i n g r e l a t i o n ( P a r k e s , 1984). Y e t , Folkman (1984) argues t h a t assessment o f s i t u a t i o n a l a p p r a i s a l s o f c o n t r o l i s p l a g u e d by t h e d i f f i c u l t y o f d e t e r m i n i n g what t h e p a r t i c i p a n t p e r c e i v e s as b e i n g c o n t r o l l e d . FoDcman and L a z a r u s  (1985) suggest  that  f u t u r e r e s e a r c h s p e c i f y what t h e i n d i v i d u a l p e r c e i v e s he o r she i s c o n t r o l l i n g . To d a t e few r e s e a r c h e r s have a c t e d on Folkman and L a z a r u s ' s (1985) s u g g e s t i o n . C a r v e r e t a l . (1989), i n a study o f c o l l e g e s t u d e n t s ' c o p i n g , u s e d a s i n g l e i t e m t o measure p e r c e i v e d c o n t r o l ("When you a r e under s t r e s s , do you u s u a l l y . . . " f o l l o w e d by f o u r c h o i c e s r a n g i n g from "you d e f i n i t e l y can do something about t h e s i t u a t i o n " t o "you d e f i n i t e l y can do n o t h i n g about t h e s i t u a t i o n " ) . P e r c e i v e d c o n t r o l reached s i g n i f i c a n c e w i t h more s c a l e s (3 s c a l e s ) t h a t comprise problem-focused  coping than d i d R o t t e r ' s  (1966) i n t e r n a l l o c u s o f c o n t r o l (1 s c a l e ) and was p o s i t i v e l y r e l a t e d t o problem-focused  c o p i n g and n e g a t i v e l y r e l a t e d t o e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d  coping.  C a r v e r e t a l . (1989) d i d not t e s t whether p e r c e i v e d c o n t r o l m e d i a t e d t h e l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and c o p i n g r e l a t i o n . Furthermore,  perceived control  a s s e s s e d w i t h a s i n g l e item does not a d e q u a t e l y address Folkman's (1984) c o n c e r n o f what i t i s t h e p a r t i c i p a n t p e r c e i v e s he o r she i s controlling. Parkes  (1984) examined t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p among l o c u s o f c o n t r o l ,  s i t u a t i o n a l a p p r a i s a l s o f c o n t r o l , importance  of episode  (similar to  outcome v a l u e ) , and c o p i n g f u n c t i o n o f 171 f i r s t y e a r female  nursing  s t u d e n t s . R o t t e r ' s (1966) l o c u s o f c o n t r o l s c a l e was a d m i n i s t e r e d a n d , based on a median s p l i t , t h o s e who s c o r e d 0 t o 12 were c l a s s i f i e d as i n t e r n a l s and t h o s e who s c o r e d 13 t o 22 were c l a s s i f i e d as S i x t o 12 weeks a f t e r t h e a d m i n i s t r a t i o n a m o d i f i e d WCC  externals.  of the locus of c o n t r o l  scale,  (Folkman & L a z a r u s , 1980) was a d m i n i s t e r e d . The  p a r t i c i p a n t s were i n s t r u c t e d t o complete t h e WCC w h i l e r e c a l l i n g a demanding o r troublesome event t h a t had o c c u r r e d w i t h i n t h e p r e v i o u s month. P a r k e s o b t a i n e d a c l o s e a p p r o x i m a t i o n o f outcome v a l u e by a s k i n g each p a r t i c i p a n t t o r a t e t h e importance o f t h e event as e i t h e r low, medium, o r h i g h .  Situational appraisals  o f c o n t r o l were o b t a i n e d t h r o u g h  t h e c l a s s i f i c a t i o n o f t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s ' a p p r a i s a l o f t h e e v e n t as (a) could  change ( c o n t r o l p o s s i b l e ) ,  (b) mixed (may o r may n o t be a b l e t o  have c o n t r o l ) , and (c) must accept (no c o n t r o l  possible).  P a r k e s (1984) conducted a s e r i e s o f m u l t i p l e r e g r e s s i o n  analyses t o  d e t e r m i n e main and m e d i a t i n g e f f e c t s . She found a s i g n i f i c a n t main e f f e c t f o r l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and D i r e c t Coping, b u t not f o r G e n e r a l o r S u p p r e s s i o n Coping. Furthermore, P a r k e s examined t h e d i f f e r e n t i n t e r a c t i o n e f f e c t s o f l o c u s o f c o n t r o l by s i t u a t i o n a l a p p r a i s a l s o f c o n t r o l , and l o c u s o f c o n t r o l by outcome v a l u e .  A l t h o u g h t h e main  e f f e c t o f outcome v a l u e was s i g n i f i c a n t f o r S u p p r e s s i o n C o p i n g , t h e l o c u s o f c o n t r o l by outcome v a l u e i n t e r a c t i o n was not s i g n i f i c a n t f o r a l l t h r e e t y p e s o f c o p i n g . However, f o r each c o p i n g t y p e t h e l o c u s o f c o n t r o l by s i t u a t i o n a l a p p r a i s a l s  o f c o n t r o l i n t e r a c t i o n s were  s i g n i f i c a n t . P a r k e s (1984) r e p o r t e d t h a t t h e s i g n i f i c a n t i n t e r a c t i o n demonstrated t h a t s i t u a t i o n a l a p p r a i s a l s o f c o n t r o l and c o p i n g r e l a t i o n s h i p .  of c o n t r o l mediated t h e l o c u s  However, a c c o r d i n g t o Baron and  Kenny (1986) s i g n i f i c a n t i n t e r a c t i o n s i n d i c a t e a m o d e r a t i n g e f f e c t and not  a mediating e f f e c t . Accordingly,  t e s t i n g f o r mediator e f f e c t s  i n t e r a c t i o n terms may be i n a p p r o p r i a t e . the  Yet, considering  that  with  without  i n t e r a c t i o n t e r m o f l o c u s o f c o n t r o l by s i t u a t i o n a l a p p r a i s a l s o f  c o n t r o l t h e r e was no s i g n i f i c a n t r e l a t i o n s h i p between l o c u s o f c o n t r o l  and c o p i n g ,  i t i s conceivable  t h a t t h e i n t e r a c t i o n has a c t e d as a  m e d i a t o r between l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and c o p i n g .  Therefore,  the r o l e of  s i t u a t i o n a l a p p r a i s a l s o f c o n t r o l as a m e d i a t o r and moderator o f t h e l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and c o p i n g r e l a t i o n s h i p r e m a i n s u n c l e a r . I n g e n e r a l , P a r k e s (1984) found t h a t i n t e r n a l s used l e a s G e n e r a l C o p i n g t h a n e x t e r n a l s when t h e y a s s e s s e d t h e s i t u a t i o n as one t h e y change o r must a c c e p t .  could  However, f o r t h o s e w i t h an e x t e r n a l l o c u s o f  c o n t r o l , a p p r a i s a l s were not s i g n i f i c a n t l y r e l a t e d t o l e v e l s o f G e n e r a l coping.  P a r t i c i p a n t s w i t h an i n t e r n a l l o c u s o f c o n t r o l used more D i r e c t  C o p i n g t h a n S u p p r e s s i o n when t h e s i t u a t i o n was a p p r a i s e d  as one t h e y  c o u l d change. P a r t i c i p a n t s w i t h an e x t e r n a l l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and an a p p r a i s a l o f c o u l d change used more S u p p r e s s i o n t h a n D i r e c t C o p i n g .  Yet  e x t e r n a l s use o f D i r e c t Coping i n c r e a s e d when making an a p p r a i s a l o f must a c c e p t .  I n t e r n a l s and e x t e r n a l s used g r e a t e r l e v e l s o f S u p p r e s s i o n  Coping d u r i n g mixed a p p r a i s a l s . Moreover, b o t h i n t e r n a l s and e x t e r n a l s used more S u p p r e s s i o n when t h e i r s i t u a t i o n a l a p p r a i s a l s o f c o n t r o l were i n c o n g r u e n t w i t h t h e i r l o c u s o f c o n t r o l o r i e n t a t i o n . Y e t , P a r k e s (1984) found t h a t i n t e r n a l s and e x t e r n a l s used s i g n i f i c a n t l y h i g h e r  levels of  S u p p r e s s i o n when t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s r a t e d t h e s t r e s s o r s i t u a t i o n as low i n outcome v a l u e . T h i s l a t t e r f i n d i n g may i n d i c a t e t h a t S u p p r e s s i o n o r emotion-focused coping  i s a more a c c e p t a b l e  type of coping  during a less  s i g n i f i c a n t e v e n t , whereas t h e former f i n d i n g s u g g e s t s t h a t S u p p r e s s i o n or emotion-focused coping  i s used when e m o t i o n a l d i s t r e s s i n c r e a s e s as a  r e s u l t o f an i n c o n g r u i t y between s i t u a t i o n a l a p p r a i s a l s o f c o n t r o l and locus of c o n t r o l . H a r t and Cardozo (1986) examined t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p between s i t u a t i o n a l a p p r a i s a l s o f c o n t r o l and c o p i n g .  They s t u d i e d 135 c o l l e g e  s t u d e n t s t o d e t e r m i n e , i n p a r t , how t h e y cope w i t h s i t u a t i o n s t h a t cause anger, h o s t i l i t y , o r i r r i t a t i o n . S e v e r a l q u e s t i o n n a i r e s administered  including a questionnaire  that contained  were  3 items t h a t  measured s i t u a t i o n a l a p p r a i s a l s o f c o n t r o l . These 3 i t e m s , u n l i k e  other  s t u d i e s t h a t have measured s i t u a t i o n a l a p p r a i s a l s o f c o n t r o l , d e t e r m i n e d whether t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s f e l t i n c o n t r o l of t h e i r emotions, b e h a v i o u r , and t h e s i t u a t i o n . Hence, Hart and Cardozo's  (1986) i n d i c a t o r s o f  s i t u a t i o n a l a p p r a i s a l s b e g i n t o address Folkman's c o n c e r n r e g a r d i n g s i t u a t i o n a l a p p r a i s a l s of c o n t r o l . Coping was measured w i t h t h e ( L a z a r u s & Folkman, 1984). H a r t and Cardozo  WCC  (1986) found t h a t  s i t u a t i o n a l a p p r a i s a l s of c o n t r o l were p o s i t i v e l y r e l a t e d t o p r o b l e m f o c u s e d c o p i n g and n e g a t i v e l y r e l a t e d t o e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d c o p i n g e f f o r t s for  b o t h men  and women. However, t h e i r study does not c l a r i f y t h e r o l e  of s i t u a t i o n a l a p p r a i s a l s o f c o n t r o l i n a n o v e l and/or ambiguous encounter. I n summary, t h e measurement o f s i t u a t i o n a l a p p r a i s a l s o f c o n t r o l has been c o m p l i c a t e d by not knowing what a s p e c t o f an e n c o u n t e r i n d i v i d u a l i s a t t e m p t i n g t o c o n t r o l (Folkman, 1984).  an  However, e m p i r i c a l  evidence supports the p o s i t i o n that s i t u a t i o n a l a p p r a i s a l s of c o n t r o l are r e l a t e d t o c o p i n g e f f o r t s . S p e c i f i c a l l y , t h e r e i s a p o s i t i v e c o r r e l a t i o n between s i t u a t i o n a l a p p r a i s a l s o f c o n t r o l and focused coping (Blanchard-Fields  problem-  & I r i o n , 1986; C a r v e r e t a l . , 1989;  Folkman e t a l . , 1981; Folkman, 1984; Folkman & L a z a r u s , 1980,  1985;  & Cardozo, 1986). I n t h e p r e s e n t r e s e a r c h , I w i l l examine how v i c t i m ' s s i t u a t i o n a l a p p r a i s a l s o f c o n t r o l i n f l u e n c e t h e way  Hart  burglary an  i n d i v i d u a l copes w i t h v i c t i m i z a t i o n . Based on t h e o r y , i t i s e x p e c t e d t h a t s i t u a t i o n a l a p p r a i s a l s o f c o n t r o l would mediate t h e l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and c o p i n g f u n c t i o n r e l a t i o n s h i p (Folkman, 1984; P a r k e s , Rotter,  1984;  1966).  Gender Differences Little  i s known about gender d i f f e r e n c e s i n r e a c t i o n t o c r i m e  v i c t i m i z a t i o n (Janoff-Bulman & F r i e z e , 1987), and i n t h e s t r e s s  and  c o p i n g l i t e r a t u r e gender d i f f e r e n c e s have been r e l a t i v e l y n e g l e c t e d (Long, 1990; Long & G e s s a r o l i , 1989). However, gender may  account, i n  p a r t , f o r i n d i v i d u a l d i f f e r e n c e s i n t h e way b u r g l a r y v i c t i m s cope.  In  t h e b r o a d e r l i t e r a t u r e t h e r e i s support f o r c o p i n g d i f f e r e n c e s based on gender d i f f e r e n c e s . V i n g e r h o e t s and Van Heck (1990) used t h e WCC (Folkman & L a z a r u s , 1980)  t o s t u d y c o p i n g b e h a v i o u r o f 465 males and 532 f e m a l e s from a  community sample. The c o p i n g q u e s t i o n n a i r e was m o d i f i e d t o measure how p e o p l e cope w i t h s t r e s s f u l encounters s i t u a t i o n . They conducted  i n g e n e r a l and n o t w i t h a s p e c i f i c  a s e r i e s o f t t e s t s t h a t i n d i c a t e d t h a t men  used s i g n i f i c a n t l y (p <.001) more problem-focused  c o p i n g t h a n women; and  women u s e s i g n i f i c a n t l y (p <.001) more e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d  c o p i n g t h a n men.  A l t h o u g h t h e s e f i n d i n g s support gender d i f f e r e n c e s i n c o p i n g t h e r e were t h r e e main problems w i t h t h e s t u d y . F i r s t , m u l t i p l e t t e s t s i n c r e a s e d t h e l i k e l i h o o d o f Type I e r r o r ( R o s e n t h a l & Rosnow, 1984). Second, i t was  n o t c l e a r what each p a r t i c i p a n t was c o p i n g w i t h ; d i f f e r e n c e s may be  a t t r i b u t a b l e t o men and women r e s p o n d i n g t o d i f f e r e n t s t r e s s o r s  (i.e.,  t h r e a t , c h a l l e n g e , o r b e n i g n - p o s i t i v e ) . F i n a l l y , t h e WCC was m o d i f i e d t o measure c o p i n g as a p e r s o n a l i t y t r a i t , which i s t h e a n t i t h e s i s t o t h e t r a n s a c t i o n a l model o f s t r e s s and c o p i n g (Folkman & L a z a r u s ,  1980).  C a r v e r e t a l . (1989) examined c o l l e g e s t u d e n t s ' c o p i n g w i t h t h e most s t r e s s f u l event i n t h e i r l i f e o f t h e p a s t 2 months and found t h a t men and women engaged i n d i f f e r e n t c o p i n g s t r a t e g i e s . Women more t h a n men r e p o r t e d s e e k i n g s o c i a l support f o r e m o t i o n a l r e a s o n s and men more t h a n women r e p o r t e d u s e o f a l c o h o l i n an e f f o r t t o cope. U n f o r t u n a t e l y , C a r v e r e t a l . (1989) d i d n o t e l a b o r a t e f u r t h e r r e g a r d i n g gender d i f f e r e n c e s . Moreover, i t i s u n c l e a r whether t h e gender d i f f e r e n c e s found by C a r v e r e t a l . (1989) were o f such a magnitude t h a t  combining  t h e d a t a o f men and women f o r a n a l y s e s d e t r a c t e d from t h e r e s t o f t h e i r f i n d i n g s (Endler & Parker,  1990).  B l a n c h a r d - F i e l d s and I r i o n (1988), i n t h e i r s t u d y o f age as a m o d e r a t o r o f l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and c o p i n g , a l s o found gender d i f f e r e n c e i n c o p i n g . The p a r t i c i p a n t s i d e n t i f i e d t h e most t h r e a t e n i n g and c h a l l e n g i n g s i t u a t i o n t h e y had encountered  i n t h e l a s t s i x months. Women  endorsed more forms o f emotion-focused c o p i n g t h a n d i d t h e male p a r t i c i p a n t s . However, t h i s f i n d i n g o n l y h e l d t r u e f o r t h r e a t a p p r a i s e d s i t u a t i o n s . I n c h a l l e n g e s i t u a t i o n s t h e r e were no gender d i f f e r e n c e s i n c o p i n g . Thus, i f b u r g l a r y v i c t i m i z a t i o n i s c o n s i d e r e d p r e d o m i n a n t l y a t h r e a t and n o t a c h a l l e n g e , gender d i f f e r e n c e s would be e x p e c t e d . Maguire  (1980) examined 322 b u r g l a r y v i c t i m s ' r e s p o n s e s and found  t h a t a d i s p r o p o r t i o n a t e number o f female b u r g l a r y v i c t i m s e x p e r i e n c e d g r e a t e r d i s t r e s s and changed b e h a v i o u r s i n a more d r a m a t i c way t h a n t h e i r male c o u n t e r p a r t s . Females, more f r e q u e n t l y t h a n males, r e p o r t e d r e a c t i o n s o f s e v e r e and a c u t e d i s t r e s s . S e p a r a t e d , widowed o r d i v o r c e d women were judged by 10 independent severe p s y c h o l o g i c a l r e a c t i o n s .  judges t o have e x p e r i e n c e d t h e most  "The most s t r i k i n g  long-term  p s y c h o l o g i c a l e f f e c t was e x p e r i e n c e d almost e x c l u s i v e l y by women. 12 p e r c e n t o f a l l females used words such as ' p o l l u t i o n ' , 'a p r e s e n c e i n t h e house'. assault..."  About  'violation' or  Many made an e x p l i c i t a n a l o g y w i t h s e x u a l  (Maguire, 1980, p.285).  Maguire's  (1980) s t u d y does n o t d i s c u s s v i c t i m r e a c t i o n s i n terms  o f p r o b l e m - and emotion-focused c o p i n g . However, i n l i g h t o f Peacock and Wong's (1990) f i n d i n g s and Compas and Oroson's ( i n p r e s s ) r e v i e w o f t h e l i t e r a t u r e , women who e x p e r i e n c e such s e v e r e d i s t r e s s from b e i n g b u r g l a r i z e d would be more i n c l i n e d t h a n men t o use e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d c o p i n g . Maguire  (1980) does n o t e x p l a i n why women i n h i s s t u d y  e x p e r i e n c e d g r e a t e r d i s t r e s s t h a n men.  Maguire's f i n d i n g s a r e n o t  u n i q u e . W a l l e r and O k i h i r o (1978), i n t h e i r s t u d y o f b u r g l a r y v i c t i m s i n t h e T o r o n t o a r e a , found t h a t female v i c t i m s o f b u r g l a r y e x p e r i e n c e d s i g n i f i c a n t l y more d i s t r e s s t h a n male v i c t i m s o f b u r g l a r y . J a n o f f - B u l m a n and F r i e z e (1987) argued t h a t male and female s e x u a l abuse v i c t i m s e x p e r i e n c e d s i m i l a r emotions b u t d i f f e r e d on a t l e a s t three behaviours.  Men tended t o n o n - r e p o r t more t h a n women, men  e x p e r i e n c e d l e s s s o c i a l w i t h d r a w a l t h a n women, and male v i c t i m s experienced a greater increase i n aggressive behaviour than  female  v i c t i m s . A l t h o u g h Janoff-Bulman and F r i e z e m a i n t a i n t h a t t h e s e  gender  d i f f e r e n c e s a r e b e h a v i o r a l and not e m o t i o n a l , i t i s u n l i k e l y t h a t some of t h e s e b e h a v i o r a l d i f f e r e n c e s a r e not accompanied emotions. For example,  by c o r r e s p o n d i n g  an i n c r e a s e i n a g g r e s s i v e b e h a v i o u r would  likely  be a s s o c i a t e d w i t h an i n c r e a s e i n anger, whereas g r e a t e r s o c i a l w i t h d r a w a l i s l i k e l y a s s o c i a t e d w i t h an i n c r e a s e i n d e p r e s s i o n . However, J a n o f f - B u l m a n and F r i e z e (1987) emphasized  that there i s a  p a u c i t y o f r e s e a r c h r e g a r d i n g c r i m e v i c t i m gender d i f f e r e n c e s  and  t h e r e f o r e d e s c r i p t i o n s o f such d i f f e r e n c e s a r e t e n t a t i v e . There a r e l i k e l y s e v e r a l u n d e r l y i n g r e a s o n s e x p l a i n i n g why are  gender d i f f e r e n c e s i n t h e way b u r g l a r y v i c t i m s cope.  there  Janoff-Bulman  and F r i e z e (1987) suggest t h a t gender d i f f e r e n c e s i n r e a c t i o n t o c r i m e may  be a r e s u l t o f d i f f e r e n c e s i n w o r l d view b e l i e f s and s e l f - s c h e m a s .  S e l f - s c h e m a s a r e d e f i n e d as " c o g n i t i v e g e n e r a l i z a t i o n s about t h e s e l f t h a t g u i d e t h e p r o c e s s i n g o f s e l f - r e l a t e d i n f o r m a t i o n and p r o v i d e a frame work f o r summarizing, e v a l u a t i o n , and d e s c r i b i n g one's e x p e r i e n c e s and b e h a v i o u r " ( M i l l e r , 1984, p. 1223). S e v e r a l b e l i e f s l i k e l y comprise an i n d i v i d u a l ' s s e l f - s c h e m a , and, on a r a t i o n a l b a s i s , l o c u s o f c o n t r o l would appear t o be one o f t h o s e b e l i e f s . Locus o f c o n t r o l i s s i m i l a r t o a p e r s o n ' s w o r l d v i e w (Hersch & S c h i e b e , 1967) and i s p a r t l y developed t h r o u g h gender  (Levenson,  1981).  The male schema as determined by N o r t h American s o c i e t y i s s t r o n g , a c t i v e , and p o w e r f u l ; whereas t h e female schema i s f r e q u e n t l y c o m p r i s e d of p a s s i v e n e s s and h e l p l e s s n e s s (Bem,  1981; J a n o f f - B u l m a n & F r i e z e -  Hanson, 1987). From t h e s e s t e r e o t y p i c a l gender schémas one c o u l d  infer  t h a t male b u r g l a r y v i c t i m s a r e more l i k e l y t o use more p r o b l e m - f o c u s e d c o p i n g t h a n e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d c o p i n g , and women b u r g l a r y v i c t i m s a r e l i k e l y t o use more e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d c o p i n g t h a n p r o b l e m - f o c u s e d c o p i n g . McCaan e t a l . (1988) a l s o suggest t h a t t h e impact o f v i c t i m i z a t i o n on an i n d i v i d u a l ' s schema w i l l i n f l u e n c e t h e c o p i n g o f t h e i n d i v i d u a l . I n p a r t i c u l a r , a p e r s o n may  d e v e l o p a n e g a t i v e s e l f - t r u s t schema t h a t  i n v o l v e s t h e b e l i e f t h a t a p e r s o n cannot t r u s t h i s o r her p e r c e p t i o n s o r judgements  own  and p e r c e i v e s a l a c k o f c o n t r o l o v e r  life.  T h e o r e t i c a l l y , a n e g a t i v e s e l f - t r u s t schema makes a p e r s o n v u l n e r a b l e t o powerful others. In  summary, t h e r e i s l i t t l e known about gender d i f f e r e n c e s as t h e y  p e r t a i n t o crime v i c t i m coping. Researchers o f f e r evidence t h a t i n t h r e a t s i t u a t i o n s females t e n d t o use more e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d c o p i n g t h a n p r o b l e m - f o c u s e d c o p i n g and t h a t men  t e n d t o use more p r o b l e m - f o c u s e d  coping than emotion-focused coping ( B l a n c h a r d - F i e l d s & I r i o n , Carver et a l . ,  1989; V i n g e r h o e t s & Van Heck, 1990). Maguire  1988;  (1990),  J a n o f f - B u l m a n and F r i e z e (1987), and W a l l e r and O k i h i r o (1978) have o b s e r v e d t h a t men  and women behave d i f f e r e n t l y i n r e s p o n s e t o c r i m i n a l  v i c t i m i z a t i o n . Gender schema, p a r t l y comprised o f l o c u s o f c o n t r o l (Hersch & S c h e i b e , 1967; Levenson, 1981), may, gender d i f f e r e n c e s i n c r i m e v i c t i m c o p i n g .  i n p a r t , account f o r  Accordingly, f o r v i c t i m s of  b u r g l a r y , l o c u s of c o n t r o l s h o u l d mediate t h e g e n d e r - c o p i n g f u n c t i o n relationship. Mediator and Moderator Variables T h i s s t u d y i s concerned w i t h c o n t r o l b e l i e f s t h a t may  account f o r  i n d i v i d u a l d i f f e r e n c e s i n t h e way b u r g l a r y v i c t i m s cope. T h e r e f o r e , i t was u s e f u l t o examine l o c u s of c o n t r o l , outcome v a l u e , s i t u a t i o n a l a p p r a i s a l s o f c o n t r o l , and gender i n l i g h t o f t h e i r m e d i a t i n g o r m o d e r a t i n g e f f e c t s on c o p i n g f u n c t i o n s . F r e q u e n t l y , p s y c h o l o g i c a l r e s e a r c h e r s have used t h e terms m e d i a t i n g and m o d e r a t i n g i n t e r c h a n g e a b l y . However, Baron and Kenny (1986) c o g e n t l y argue t h a t m e d i a t o r s and moderators a r e d i s t i n c t . A v a r i a b l e a c t s as a m e d i a t o r when: (a) v a r i a t i o n s i n l e v e l s o f t h e independent  variable  s i g n i f i c a n t l y account f o r v a r i a t i o n s i n t h e presumed m e d i a t o r ( i . e . . Path a ) , (b) v a r i a t i o n s i n t h e m e d i a t o r s i g n i f i c a n t l y account f o r v a r i a t i o n s i n t h e dependent v a r i a b l e  ( i . e . . Path b ) , and (c) when Paths a and b a r e c o n t r o l l e d , a p r e v i o u s l y s i g n i f i c a n t r e l a t i o n between t h e independent and dependent v a r i a b l e s i s no l o n g e r s i g n i f i c a n t , w i t h t h e s t r o n g e s t demonstration p.  o c c u r r i n g when Path c i s z e r o (Baron & Kenny, 1986,  1176).  Based on t h e o r y and e m p i r i c a l r e s e a r c h , i t i s e x p e c t e d t h a t  locus  o f c o n t r o l a f f e c t s s i t u a t i o n a l a p p r a i s a l s o f c o n t r o l (Path a) and s i t u a t i o n a l a p p r a i s a l s of c o n t r o l a f f e c t coping  ( P a t h b ) , and when P a t h  a and b a r e c o n t r o l l e d , l o c u s o f c o n t r o l w i l l no l o n g e r have a s i g n i f i c a n t r e l a t i o n w i t h c o p i n g f u n c t i o n (Path c ) . Hence, s i t u a t i o n a l a p p r a i s a l w i l l mediate t h e l o c u s o f c o n t r o l - c o p i n g r e l a t i o n s h i p ( s e e Figure 1 ) . A moderator v a r i a b l e a f f e c t s t h e d i r e c t i o n and/or s t r e n g t h between an independent o r p r e d i c t o r v a r i a b l e and a dependent o r c r i t e r i o n v a r i a b l e (Baron & Kenny, 1986; Smith, S m o l l , & P t a c e k ,  1990). W i t h i n t h e  framework o f a n a l y s i s o f v a r i a n c e a moderator e f f e c t o c c u r s when t h e r e i s a s i g n i f i c a n t i n t e r a c t i o n between "a f o c a l independent v a r i a b l e and a factor that s p e c i f i e s the appropriate conditions f o r i t s operation" (Baron & Kenny, 1986, p. 1174). F o r example ( s e e F i g u r e 2 ) , based on t h e o r y and e m p i r i c a l r e s e a r c h , i t i s e x p e c t e d t h a t l o c u s o f c o n t r o l i s a p r e d i c t o r o f b u r g l a r y v i c t i m c o p i n g f u n c t i o n s w i t h outcome v a l u e as a moderator o f t h i s r e l a t i o n . The moderator h y p o t h e s i s  i s supported i f  t h e r e i s s i g n i f i c a n t i n t e r a c t i o n between l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and outcome v a l u e r e g a r d l e s s o f t h e main e f f e c t (Baron & Kenny, 1986).  Situational  (Mediator) A p p r a i s a l s of C o n t r o l  Locus o f C o n t r o l (Independent variable)  Figure  1. H y p o t h e t i c a l  \ Coping F u n c t i o n ^ of Burglary victims (Dependent Variable)  model o f s i t u a t i o n a l  m e d i a t i n g the l o c u s of c o n t r o l - c o p i n g  a p p r a i s a l s of c o n t r o l  function  relation.  {Predictor) Locus o f c o n t r o l  (Moderator) Outcome V a l u e  (Criterion) ->Coping Function  Locus o f C o n t r o l X Outcome V a l u e  F i g u r e 2 . H y p o t h e t i c a l model o f outcome v a l u e as moderator o f the l o c u s of c o n t r o l - c o p i n g function r e l a t i o n .  I n summary, p r e v i o u s r e s e a r c h e r s  have f a i l e d t o d e l i n e a t e t h e  d i s t i n c t i o n between moderator and m e d i a t o r v a r i a b l e s . Baron and Kenny (1986) c l a r i f y t h e ways i n which moderators and m e d i a t o r s d i f f e r and i n d o i n g so h e l p t o c l a r i f y t h e complex r e l a t i o n s h i p s so o f t e n f o u n d w i t h i n t h e s t r e s s and c o p i n g l i t e r a t u r e . Methodological Issues Once an i n d i v i d u a l has been b u r g l a r i z e d , t h e o p p o r t u n i t y t o a s c e r t a i n the victim's pre-burglary By s t u d y i n g  l o c u s o f c o n t r o l may be compromised.  r e a l v i c t i m s , t h e r o l e o f l o c u s o f c o n t r o l as a p r e d i c t o r  v a r i a b l e o f c o p i n g i s confounded c r e a t i n g a m e t h o d o l o g i c a l dilemma. F u r t h e r m o r e , b u r g l a r y v i c t i m r e c a l l i s n o t always a c c u r a t e because o f lying, forgetting, or telescoping  (misplace  the v i c t i m i z a t i o n incident  i n t i m e ) ( F a t t a h , 1991). As w e l l , when p e o p l e r e c a l l e v e n t s t h e y  often  do n o t f o c u s e q u a l l y on a l l a s p e c t s o f t h e e v e n t . Some t h i n k more about t h e f a c t s and some t h i n k more about t h e i r e m o t i o n a l r e a c t i o n t o t h e event (Suengas & Johnson, 1988). Moreover, Brewin (1988) a r g u e s t h a t i n s e l f - r e p o r t r e c a l l when i n d i v i d u a l s d e s c r i b e o r e x p l a i n t h e i r f e e l i n g s and b e h a v i o u r s t h e y are making i n f e r e n c e s d e s i g n e d t o account f o r o r j u s t i f y t h e i r actions. R o t t e r ' s t h e o r y suggests t h a t an i n d i v i d u a l ' s l o c u s o f c o n t r o l may change f o l l o w i n g a s i g n i f i c a n t event ( R o t t e r , 1975). A s t u d y by C o l l i n s e t a l . (1990) p r o v i d e d  some support f o r t h i s n o t i o n . They examined  b e l i e f changes s u r r o u n d i n g t h e l i f e domains o f t h e w o r l d , p r i o r i t i e s and r e l a t i o n s h i p s , t h e s e l f , and t h e f u t u r e as a consequence o f t h e e x p e r i e n c e o f c a n c e r . L i f e domain o f s e l f i n c l u d e s f e e l i n g s o f s e l f efficacy  ( s i m i l a r t o locus of c o n t r o l i n that both address aspects o f  perceived  c o n t r o l ) . B e l i e f domain o f t h e f u t u r e i n c l u d e s b e l i e f s t h a t  f u t u r e e v e n t s a r e n o t always c o n t r o l l a b l e ( s i m i l a r t o e x t e r n a l l o c u s o f c o n t r o l ) . The p a r t i c i p a n t s i n C o l l i n s e t a l . s t u d y i n c l u d e d 30 women and 25 men, a l l o f whom were cancer p a t i e n t s . I n t e r v i e w s determine p o s i t i v e , negative,  were conducted t o  o r n e u t r a l changes i n t h e b e l i e f domains  o f t h e v i c t i m s . C o p i n g was measured w i t h a m o d i f i e d v e r s i o n o f t h e and was h y p o t h e s i z e d  WCC  t o l e a d t o changes i n t h e domains o f  a c t i v i t i e s / p r i o r i t i e s , r e l a t i o n s h i p s , t h e s e l f , and t h e f u t u r e . F o l l o w i n g d i a g n o s i s t h e m a j o r i t y o f p a r t i c i p a n t s r e p o r t e d p o s i t i v e and n e g a t i v e changes i n t h e i r b e l i e f s . E i g h t y - f o u r p e r c e n t  reported  i n t h e i r v i e w s o f t h e m s e l v e s , 83% r e p o r t e d changes i n t h e i r  changes  relations  w i t h o t h e r s , 79% r e p o r t e d changes i n p r i o r i t i e s / d a i l y a c t i v i t i e s ,  67%  r e p o r t e d changes i n t h e i r b e l i e f s about t h e f u t u r e , and 66% r e p o r t e d changes i n t h e i r b e l i e f s o f t h e w o r l d . Repeated measures ANOVA were u s e d t o a n a l y z e t h e d a t a . I n t h e b e l i e f domains o f t h e s e l f and t h e f u t u r e b o t h n e g a t i v e and p o s i t i v e changes o c c u r r e d as a r e s u l t o f c o p i n g e f f o r t s . I n t h e c a s e o f b e l i e f s about s e l f , t h e most f r e q u e n t change  was  r e l a t e d t o p e r c e i v e d v u l n e r a b i l i t y , w i t h some p a r t i c i p a n t s f e e l i n g l e s s i n c o n t r o l and o t h e r s f e e l i n g more i n c o n t r o l . I n t h e case o f t h e f u t u r e , t h e most common changes were changes i n t i m e t a b l e and n o t making p l a n s because t h e f u t u r e was viewed as t h r e a t e n i n g . C o l l i n s e t a l . acknowledged t h a t t h e r e t r o s p e c t i v e n a t u r e o f t h e d a t a does n o t a l l o w f o r t h e d e t e r m i n a t i o n o f whether t h e changes i n b e l i e f s r e p o r t e d by t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s were a c t u a l o r p e r c e i v e d . However, C o l l i n s e t a l . argued t h a t a c t u a l change may be l e s s important  t h a n p e r c e i v e d change and  recommended f u t u r e r e s e a r c h i n c l u d e p r e - and p o s t measures o f b e l i e f s t o c l a r i f y the exact nature of the v i c t i m ' s experience. Regardless  o f whether t h e changes i n b e l i e f s a r e n e g a t i v e o r  p o s i t i v e f o l l o w i n g v i c t i m i z a t i o n , t h e study by C o l l i n s e t a l . (1990) s u p p o r t s t h e t h e o r e t i c a l p o s i t i o n t h a t f o l l o w i n g v i c t i m i z a t i o n an i n d i v i d u a l ' s b e l i e f s may change. Hence, f o l l o w i n g b u r g l a r y v i c t i m i z a t i o n i t i s l i k e l y t h a t an i n d i v i d u a l ' s l o c u s o f c o n t r o l b e l i e f may  change  from i n t e r n a l t o e x t e r n a l , e x t e r n a l t o i n t e r n a l , o r an i n d i v i d u a l ' s l o c u s o f c o n t r o l may not change. C o n s e q u e n t l y , m e a s u r i n g l o c u s o f c o n t r o l a f t e r a b u r g l a r y e x p e r i e n c e would make i t d i f f i c u l t t o d e t e r m i n e whether l o c u s o f c o n t r o l was a p r e d i c t o r o f b u r g l a r y v i c t i m c o p i n g o r  whether t h e l o c u s of c o n t r o l o r i e n t a t i o n was  a consequence o f  coping  efforts. I t i s d i f f i c u l t t o determine  whether and how  locus of c o n t r o l  b e l i e f s w i l l change f o l l o w i n g b u r g l a r y . However, as a r e s u l t o f t h e b u r g l a r y v i c t i m i z a t i o n e x p e r i e n c e i t would be e x p e c t e d t h a t v i c t i m s would have a s t r o n g e r p o w e r f u l o t h e r s l o c u s o f c o n t r o l b e l i e f  than  e x p e r i m e n t a l l y induced v i c t i m s . The expected d i f f e r e n c e i n p o w e r f u l o t h e r s l o c u s o f c o n t r o l b e l i e f between v i c t i m s and e x p e r i m e n t a l l y i n d u c e d v i c t i m s i s expected because i t has been suggested v i c t i m i z a t i o n may  that  g i v e r i s e t o a n e g a t i v e s e l f - t r u s t schema. I n t u r n ,  t h e n e g a t i v e s e l f - t r u s t schema makes a v i c t i m v u l n e r a b l e t o p o w e r f u l o t h e r s , such as t h e p o l i c e and i n s u r a n c e companies ( J a n o f f - B u l m a n F r i e z e , 1983; McCaan e t a l . ,  &  1988).  An approach t o t h e study o f l o c u s o f c o n t r o l as an  antecedent  v a r i a b l e i s t o use a p a s s i v e - i n t e r p r e t i v e d e s i g n . W i t h t h i s d e s i g n t h e r e s e a r c h e r has c o n t r o l over when t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s r e c e i v e t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l t r e a t m e n t . For example, an i n d i v i d u a l ' s l o c u s o f c o n t r o l i s f i r s t e s t a b l i s h e d and t h e n t h e i n d i v i d u a l i s asked t o imagine  how  he o r  she would cope w i t h b u r g l a r y v i c t i m i z a t i o n . A p a s s i v e - i n t e r p r e t i v e d e s i g n i s c o n s i d e r e d a p p r o p r i a t e when use o f d e c e p t i o n i s u n e t h i c a l and f o r t h e purpose of t h e o r y development and r e f i n e m e n t . However, M i l l e r (1972), i n a comprehensive r e v i e w o f s t u d i e s t h a t have employed a p a s s i v e - i n t e r p r e t i v e d e s i g n s , argues t h a t a l t h o u g h s e v e r a l s t u d i e s have found t h a t t h e s e d e s i g n s r e p l i c a t e d e c e p t i o n s t u d y f i n d i n g s , many o f these p a s s i v e - i n t e r p r e t i v e r e s u l t s are s t a t i s t i c a l l y flawed Darroch  & S t e i n e r , 1970;  Willis & Willis,  Greenberg, 1967;  (i.e.,  H o r o w i t z & R o t h s c h i l d , 1970;  1970). M i l l e r c o n c l u d e s t h a t p e o p l e may  o r may  not  a b l e t o behave i n r o l e p l a y as t h e y would i n r e a l l i f e . Thus t h e c o g n i t i v e p r o c e s s e s i n v o l v e d i n p a s s i v e - i n t e r p r e t i v e d e s i g n and  real  event r e c a l l r e q u i r e f u r t h e r e l a b o r a t i o n . Johnson and Raye (1981) o f f e r t h e o r y ( r e f e r r e d t o as  reality  be  monitoring)  and e m p i r i c a l e v i d e n c e t h a t e x p l a i n t h e c o g n i t i v e p r o c e s s e s  t h a t d i f f e r e n t i a t e r e a l memory ( e x t e r n a l l y g e n e r a t e d ) and imagined memory ( i n t e r n a l l y g e n e r a t e d ) .  T h e o r e t i c a l l y , t h e d i f f e r e n c e s between  i n t e r n a l l y and e x t e r n a l l y g e n e r a t e d memories r e f l e c t d i f f e r e n c e s between t h e p r o c e s s e s i n v o l v e d i n t h e f o r m a t i o n o f each ( S c h o o l e r , G e r h a r d , & L o f t u s , 1986). E x t e r n a l l y g e n e r a t e d memories r e s u l t from r e c a l l and a r e hypothesized temporal),  t o i n c l u d e more c o n t e x t u a l and s e n s o r y d e t a i l ( s p a t i a l and  whereas, i n t e r n a l l y g e n e r a t e d e v e n t s have r e s u l t e d from  i m a g i n a i and thought p r o c e s s e s and t h e r e f o r e i n c l u d e i n f o r m a t i o n t h a t i s i d i o s y n c r a t i c t o t h e i n d i v i d u a l ( S c h o o l e r e t a l . , 1986). To e m p i r i c a l l y examine t h e t h e o r e t i c a l d i f f e r e n c e s between i n t e r n a l l y and e x t e r n a l l y g e n e r a t e d memories. S c h o o l e r presented  e t a l . (1986)  c o l o u r s l i d e s o f an auto a c c i d e n t t o 175 u n d e r g r a d u a t e  u n i v e r s i t y s t u d e n t s . H a l f t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s were shown s l i d e s t h a t d e p i c t e d a y i e l d s i g n and t h e o t h e r p a r t i c i p a n t s were shown t h e same s l i d e s e x c e p t t h e y i e l d s i g n was not i n c l u d e d . Both groups were t h e n asked t o d e s c r i b e t h e y i e l d s i g n . Two independent r a t e r s i n d i v i d u a l l y examined a l l t h e d e s c r i p t i o n s o f t h e y i e l d s i g n . Compared t o t h e r e a l memory group, t h e imagined memory group's d e s c r i p t i o n s " l e s s f r e q u e n t l y mentioned t h e s e n s o r y p r o p e r t i e s o f t h e s i g n b u t more o f t e n i n c l u d e d t h e s u b j e c t s ' c o g n i t i v e processes,  t h e f u n c t i o n o f t h e s i g n and v e r b a l  hedges" ( S c h o o l e r e t a l . , 1986, p.173). However, t h e real-memory group's d e s c r i p t i o n c o n t a i n e d more s e n s o r y p r o p e r t i e s o f t h e y i e l d s i g n t h a n t h e imagine memory group. S c h o o l e r  e t a l . suggest t h a t t h e s e f i n d i n g s  s u p p o r t t h e t h e o r e t i c a l p o s i t i o n t h a t r e c a l l i n v o l v e s more c o n t e x t u a l and  s e n s o r y d e t a i l t h a n imagined memory and t h a t i m a g i n e d memory  includes information that i s i d i o s y n c r a t i c t o the i n d i v i d u a l . F u r t h e r e m p i r i c a l e v i d e n c e f o r t h e d i s t i n c t i o n between r e c a l l memory and imagined memory i s o f f e r e d by Johnson e t a l . (1988) i n t h e i r s t u d y o f 72 c o l l e g e s t u d e n t s e i t h e r r e c a l l i n g o r i m a g i n i n g a u t o b i o g r a p h i c a l events.  To e s t a b l i s h r e c a l l memory, p a r t i c i p a n t s were  asked t o r e c a l l a s o c i a l event, a t r i p t o t h e l i b r a r y , o r a v i s i t t o t h e d e n t i s t . To e s t a b l i s h imagined memory, p a r t i c i p a n t s were asked t o r e c a l l a f a n t a s y o r an u n f u l f i l l e d i n t e n t i o n . The p a r t i c i p a n t s t h e n  completed  measures t h a t a s s e s s e d sensory, c o n t e x t u a l , and i d i o s y n c r a t i c components ( i . e . , c l a r i t y , sound, s m e l l , seeming i m p l i c a t i o n s ) . Comparison o f means r e v e a l e d t h a t , i n g e n e r a l , recall-memory  i n v o l v e s g r e a t e r sensory  and  c o n t e x t u a l d e t a i l t h a n imagined memory and t h a t imagined memory e v e n t s were more complex and r e f l e c t e d i n f o r m a t i o n i d i o s y n c r a t i c t o t h e participants. The  a b i l i t y t o imagine about f u t u r e e v e n t s may  be one o f t h e most  i m p o r t a n t f e a t u r e s o f c o g n i t i o n ( T a y l o r & S c h n e i d e r , 1989). I n t h e i r r e v i e w o f t h e l i t e r a t u r e on c o p i n g w i t h s i m u l a t e d e v e n t s , T a y l o r and Schneider  (1989) r e p o r t e d t h a t i m a g i n i n g an event made i t seem r e a l .  They f u r t h e r argued t h a t i m a g i n i n g an event can evoke s t r o n g e m o t i o n s with corresponding p h y s i o l o g i c a l reactions. A l t h o u g h i m a g i n i n g an event may  seem r e a l , t h e l i t e r a t u r e  s u g g e s t s t h a t t h e r e a r e d i f f e r e n c e s between r e c a l l - m e m o r y  and  reviewed imagined  memory (Johnson & Raye, 1981; S c h o o l e r e t a l . , 1986). As such, i t i s e x p e c t e d t h a t e x p e r i m e n t a l l y induced v i c t i m s and b u r g l a r y v i c t i m s would d i f f e r on c o p i n g because e x p e r i m e n t a l l y i n d u c e d v i c t i m s ' c o p i n g r e f l e c t how  may  t h e y b e l i e v e t h e y cope i n g e n e r a l , as opposed t o how  they  would a c t u a l l y cope w i t h t h e b u r g l a r y e x p e r i e n c e . I n o r d e r t o examine l o c u s of c o n t r o l as an a n t e c e d e n t  variable that  s e r v e s as a p r e d i c t o r o f b u r g l a r y v i c t i m c o p i n g i t would be n e c e s s a r y t o conduct a p r o s p e c t i v e study. T h i s would prove d i f f i c u l t because I would have t o measure p e o p l e ' s l o c u s o f c o n t r o l , w a i t f o r them t o be b u r g l a r i z e d , and t h e n measure t h e i r c o p i n g . I n t h i s s t u d y , p r a c t i c a l l i m i t a t i o n s makes such a d e s i g n d i f f i c u l t t o conduct. T h e r e f o r e ,  two  s t u d i e s were conducted t o overcome t h e s e d i f f i c u l t i e s . The f i r s t  study  i n v o l v e d b u r g l a r y v i c t i m s r e c a l l i n g t h e i r e x p e r i e n c e , whereas t h e s t u d y r e p l i c a t e d t h e f i r s t s t u d y but i n v o l v e d p a r t i c i p a n t s  second  anticipating  b u r g l a r y v i c t i m i z a t i o n . T h i s t y p e o f r e p l i c a t i o n i s r e f e r r e d t o as a c o n c e p t u a l r e p l i c a t i o n (Cozby, 1981). C o n c e p t u a l r e p l i c a t i o n i s an e f f o r t t o r e p l i c a t e t h e o r i g i n a l f i n d i n g s u s i n g d i f f e r e n t procedures f o r measuring t h e v a r i a b l e s o f concern ( H e n d r i c k , 1991). R e p l i c a t i o n i s i m p o r t a n t f o r t h e o r y c o n f i r m a t i o n o r d i s c o n f i r m a t i o n and f o r unconfounding v a r i a b l e s (Amir & Sharon, 1991; Lamal,  1991).  Summary There i s a p a u c i t y o f i n f o r m a t i o n e x p l a i n i n g why t h e r e a r e i n d i v i d u a l d i f f e r e n c e s i n t h e way b u r g l a r y v i c t i m s cope w i t h t h e v i c t i m i z a t i o n e x p e r i e n c e . L a z a r u s and Folkman (1984) p r o v i d e a t h e o r e t i c a l model o f c o p i n g t h a t i s w e l l s u i t e d f o r t h e s t u d y o f b u r g l a r y v i c t i m c o p i n g . W i t h i n t h e i r model problem- and e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d c o p i n g a r e t h e two main f u n c t i o n s o f c o p i n g . Based on t h e s t r e s s and c o p i n g l i t e r a t u r e t h e r e i s b o t h a t h e o r e t i c a l b a s i s and e m p i r i c a l e v i d e n c e t o s u p p o r t t h e p o s i t i o n t h a t l o c u s o f c o n t r o l , outcome v a l u e , s i t u a t i o n a l a p p r a i s a l s o f c o n t r o l , and gender may have main, m e d i a t i n g , or m o d e r a t i n g e f f e c t s t h a t account, i n p a r t , f o r i n d i v i d u a l d i f f e r e n c e s i n b u r g l a r y v i c t i m s ' s h o r t - t e r m u s e o f c o p i n g f u n c t i o n s (Anderson, 1977; Folkman,  1984; P a r k e s , 1984; Solomon e t a l . , 1989). I n p a r t i c u l a r ,  because o f s o c i a l i z a t i o n and g r e a t e r d i s t r e s s women a r e l i k e l y t o u s e more e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d c o p i n g t h a n men and men a r e l i k e l y t o u s e more p r o b l e m - f o c u s e d c o p i n g t h a n women ( C a r v e r , 1989; V i n g e r h o e t s & Van Heck, 1990). W i t h r e g a r d t o t h e l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and c o p i n g r e l a t i o n ,  victims  who h o l d an i n t e r n a l l o c u s o f c o n t r o l b e l i e f p r i o r t o b u r g l a r y would l i k e l y u s e more problem-focused t h a n e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d c o p i n g . However, v i c t i m s h o l d i n g chance o r p o w e r f u l o t h e r s l o c u s o f c o n t r o l b e l i e f s p r i o r t o v i c t i m i z a t i o n would l i k e l y use more e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d c o p i n g t h a n p r o b l e m - f o c u s e d c o p i n g (Anderson, 1977; P a r k e s , 1984; Solomon e t a l . , 1989). F u r t h e r m o r e , l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and s i t u a t i o n a l a p p r a i s a l s o f c o n t r o l would account f o r t h e r e l a t i o n between gender and c o p i n g because g e n e r a l i z e d e x p e c t a n c i e s o f c o n t r o l and s p e c i f i c c o n t r o l e x p e c t a n c i e s  appear t o m e d i a t e t h e gender and c o p i n g r e l a t i o n (Folkman,  1984;  Levenson, 1981; P a r k e s , 1984), However, gender and outcome v a l u e w o u l d a f f e c t t h e r e l a t i o n between l o c u s of c o n t r o l and c o p i n g because l o c u s i c o n t r o l i s b e l i e v e d t o be i n f l u e n c e d by t h e importance o f t h e outcome; f u r t h e r m o r e l o c u s o f c o n t r o l i s p a r t l y d e v e l o p e d t h r o u g h gender s o c i a l i z a t i o n (Levenson, 1981; P a r k e s , 1984; R o t t e r , 1966, 1975, Solomon e t a l . , 1989; V i n g e r h o e t s & Van Heck, 1990).  role 1990;  HYPOTHESES I t was e x p e c t e d t h a t t h e b u r g l a r y v i c t i m s ' l o c u s o f c o n t r o l  would  be a f f e c t e d by t h e b u r g l a r y e v e n t , t h e r e f o r e i t was e x p e c t e d t h a t t h e b u r g l a r y v i c t i m group would h o l d g r e a t e r p o w e r f u l o t h e r s l o c u s o f c o n t r o l b e l i e f s t h a n t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l l y induced v i c t i m  group.  F u r t h e r m o r e , because o f t h e d i f f e r e n c e between r e c a l l and a n t i c i p a t i o n , i t was e x p e c t e d t h a t e x p e r i m e n t a l l y induced v i c t i m s and b u r g l a r y v i c t i m s would d i f f e r on c o p i n g . I n o r d e r t o determine whether t h e s e d i f f e r e n c e s were s u p p o r t e d o r whether d a t a from t h e two s t u d i e s c o u l d be combined i n t o one group t o t e s t t h e f o l l o w i n g hypotheses, a n a l y s i s was c o n d u c t e d t o t e s t d i f f e r e n c e s between b u r g l a r y v i c t i m s (Study 1) and e x p e r i m e n t a l l y i n d u c e d v i c t i m s (Study 2) on t h e independent  (locus of  c o n t r o l , outcome v a l u e , and s i t u a t i o n a l a p p r a i s a l s o f c o n t r o l ) and dependent v a r i a b l e s (problem- and e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d c o p i n g ) . M a i n e f f e c t s were o f secondary i n t e r e s t t o t h i s s t u d y . However, i t was e x p e c t e d t h a t gender would be a s s o c i a t e d w i t h c o p i n g f u n c t i o n s , w i t h women u s i n g more e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d c o p i n g t h a n men and men u s i n g more p r o b l e m - f o c u s e d c o p i n g t h a n women. Furthermore, i t was e x p e c t e d t h a t t h e r e would be a p o s i t i v e r e l a t i o n s h i p between i n t e r n a l l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and p r o b l e m - f o c u s e d c o p i n g and a p o s i t i v e r e l a t i o n s h i p between  chance  and p o w e r f u l o t h e r s l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d c o p i n g . I t was f u r t h e r e x p e c t e d t h a t t h e g r e a t e r t h e outcome v a l u e t h e more p r o b l e m f o c u s e d c o p i n g would be used. The m e d i a t o r and moderator hypotheses a r e s t a t e d s e p a r a t e l y . A v a r i a b l e f u n c t i o n s as a m e d i a t o r t o t h e degree t h a t i t a c c o u n t s f o r t h e r e l a t i o n between a p r e d i c t o r and c r i t e r i o n v a r i a b l e ; whereas a moderator v a r i a b l e a f f e c t s t h e d i r e c t i o n and/or s t r e n g t h o f t h e r e l a t i o n between a p r e d i c t o r and c r i t e r i o n v a r i a b l e (Baron & Kenny, 1986). S p e c i f i c a l l y , t h e f o l l o w i n g mediated r e l a t i o n s h i p s were hypothesized: 1. I n t e r n a l l o c u s o f c o n t r o l mediates t h e gender and p r o b l e m - f o c u s e d  coping r e l a t i o n . 2. S i t u a t i o n a l a p p r a i s a l s  o f c o n t r o l mediates t h e i n t e r n a l l o c u s o f  c o n t r o l and problem-focused c o p i n g r e a c t i o n . 3. S i t u a t i o n a l a p p r a i s a l s  o f c o n t r o l mediates t h e gender and p r o b l e m -  focused coping r e l a t i o n . 4. Chance l o c u s o f c o n t r o l mediates t h e gender and e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d coping r e l a t i o n . 5. P o w e r f u l O t h e r s l o c u s o f c o n t r o l mediates t h e gender and e m o t i o n focused coping r e l a t i o n . 6. S i t u a t i o n a l a p p r a i s a l s  of c o n t r o l mediates t h e chance l o c u s o f  c o n t r o l and e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d c o p i n g r e l a t i o n . 7. S i t u a t i o n a l a p p r a i s a l s  o f c o n t r o l mediates t h e p o w e r f u l o t h e r s l o c u s  o f c o n t r o l and e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d c o p i n g r e l a t i o n . (See F i g u r e 3 f o r Hypotheses 1, 2, and 3 and F i g u r e 4 f o r hypotheses 4, 5, 6, and 7 ) .  I n t e r n a l Locus  of Control  Situational Appraisals of C o n t r o l  1  Problem-Focused Coping  Gender  F i g u r e 3. H y p o t h e s i z e d model o f i n t e r n a l a p p r a i s a l s o f c o n t r o l , and gender problem-focused Control  c o p i n g . l=Gender  l o c u s of c o n t r o l ,  (l=men, 2=women) as m e d i a t o r s of (2,1; 3,1;  4,1);  2 = I n t e r n a l Locus o f  (3,2; 4,2); 3 = S i t u a t i o n a l A p p r a i s a l s o f C o n t r o l  4=Problem-Focused Coping.  situational  (4,3);  Situational Appraisals of C o n t r o l  Chance Locus o f C o n t r o l 7K  ^  Gender  Emotion-Focused Coping  Powerful Others Locus o f C o n t r o l  Figure  4. H y p o t h e s i z e d model o f chance  locus of c o n t r o l ,  locus of c o n t r o l ,  s i t u a t i o n a l a p p r a i s a l s of c o n t r o l ,  powerful others  and gender  (l=men,  2=women) as m e d i a t o r v a r i a b l e s o f emotion-focused c o p i n g . l=Gender 4,1;  5,1); 2=Chance Locus o f C o n t r o l  Appraisals  of Control  5,4); 5=Emotion-Focused  (5,3);  (3,2; 5,2); 3 = S i t u a t i o n a I  4=Powerful  Coping.  (2,1;  Others Locus o f C o n t r o l  (3,4;  The  f o l l o w i n g moderated r e l a t i o n s h i p s were h y p o t h e s i z e d .  1. The r e l a t i o n s h i p between l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and chance) and emotion-focused  ( i n t e r n a l , powerful o t h e r s ,  c o p i n g w i l l be s t r o n g e r among  i n d i v i d u a l s h o l d i n g h i g h outcome v a l u e t h a n among i n d i v i d u a l s h o l d i n g low outcome v a l u e . 2. The r e l a t i o n s h i p between l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and chance) and problem-focused  ( i n t e r n a l , powerful o t h e r s ,  c o p i n g w i l l be s t r o n g e r among  i n d i v i d u a l s h o l d i n g h i g h outcome v a l u e t h a n among i n d i v i d u a l s h o l d i n g low outcome v a l u e . 3. The r e l a t i o n between i n t e r n a l l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and  problem-focused  c o p i n g w i l l be s t r o n g e r among men than women. 4. The r e l a t i o n between chance l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and  emotion-focused  c o p i n g w i l l be s t r o n g e r among women than men. There i s a l a c k o f e m p i r i c a l  evidence regarding t h e r o l e o f  p o w e r f u l o t h e r s l o c u s o f c o n t r o l as a moderator o f t h e gender and c o p i n g r e l a t i o n . Moreover, p o w e r f u l o t h e r s l o c u s o f c o n t r o l i s an e x t e r n a l o r i e n t a t i o n , y e t i t does have t h e p o t e n t i a l f o r c o n t r o l . Because l o c u s of c o n t r o l  i s p a r t l y developed  through gender t h r o u g h  societal  influence,  i t i s p o s s i b l e t h a t gender may a f f e c t t h e d i r e c t i o n and/or  s t r e n g t h o f t h e r e l a t i o n between p o w e r f u l o t h e r s l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and c o p i n g . T h e r e f o r e , t h e f o l l o w i n g q u e s t i o n s o f t h e o r e t i c a l i n t e r e s t were posed f o r e x p l o r a t o r y purposes. 1. Does gender moderate t h e p o w e r f u l o t h e r s l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and problem-focused  coping  relation?  2. Does gender moderate t h e p o w e r f u l o t h e r s l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and emotion-focused  coping  relation?  METHOD Because d i f f e r e n c e s were e x p e c t e d between t h e b u r g l a r y v i c t i m group and e x p e r i m e n t a l l y induced v i c t i m group due t o t h e f a c t t h a t an i n d i v i d u a l ' s l o c u s o f c o n t r o l may change f o l l o w i n g v i c t i m i z a t i o n and because t h e r e may be d i f f e r e n c e s between r e c a l l - m e m o r y v e r s u s  imagined  memory, d e t a i l s o f Study 1 ( b u r g l a r y v i c t i m s ) and Study 2 ( e x p e r i m e n t a l l y induced v i c t i m s ) a r e p r e s e n t e d  separately.  Study 1 Participants The  sample c o n s i s t e d o f 61 v o l u n t e e r c o l l e g e s t u d e n t s who were  e n r o l l e d i n f i r s t and second y e a r p s y c h o l o g y , courses  s o c i o l o g y , and c r i m i n o l o g y  a t a l a r g e Western Canadian c o l l e g e . Only t h o s e who had been  v i c t i m s o f b u r g l a r y w i t h i n t h e p r e v i o u s year and were n o t a t home a t t h e t i m e o f t h e b u r g l a r y were e l i g i b l e t o p a r t i c i p a t e . The sample i n c l u d e d 31 men and 30 women between t h e ages o f 19 and 37 w i t h a mean age o f 22.7  (SD=4.1).  Procedure I s o l i c i t e d v o l u n t e e r s from 17 f i r s t and second y e a r s o c i o l o g y , and c r i m i n o l o g y day and evening c l a s s was comprised o f a p p r o x i m a t e l y approximately to  600 s t u d e n t s  psychology,  c l a s s e s a t t h e c o l l e g e . Each  35 s t u d e n t s , t h e r e f o r e a t o t a l o f  (e.g., 35 s t u d e n t s p e r c l a s s ) were approached  p a r t i c i p a t e i n t h e study. I a t t e n d e d  each c l a s s and a t t h e b e g i n n i n g  o f t h e c l a s s I e x p l a i n e d c o n f i d e n t i a l i t y and t h e r a t i o n a l e f o r t h e s t u d y , and t h a t o n l y those i n d i v i d u a l s who were n o t a t home when t h e i r r e s i d e n c e was b r o k e n i n t o were e l i g i b l e t o p a r t i c i p a t e . Those who v o l u n t e e r e d t o p a r t i c i p a t e were asked t o complete an i n f o r m e d  consent  s t a t e m e n t , demographic q u e s t i o n n a i r e , and a l o c u s o f c o n t r o l measure (see Appendix A ) . Those who choose not t o p a r t i c i p a t e were asked t o s i t q u i e t l y and l o o k t h r o u g h t h e q u e s t i o n n a i r e s u n t i l a l l had been c o l l e c t e d so t h a t t h e y remained u n n o t i c e d .  The f o l l o w i n g week, I r e t u r n e d t o t h e  c l a s s e s and reminded t h e s t u d e n t s o f t h e purpose o f t h e study and  asked t h e v o l u n t e e r s t o view, i n t h e c l a s s r o o m , burglary i n progress procedures).  a video of a r e s i d e n t i a l  (video t o be d i s c u s s e d more f u l l y f o l l o w i n g S t u d y 2  The v i d e o was p r e s e n t e d  i n order t o f a c i l i t a t e t h e v i c t i m s '  memory o f t h e b u r g l a r y v i c t i m i z a t i o n t h a t t h e y had e x p e r i e n c e d .  Those  who chose n o t t o p a r t i c i p a t e were asked t o s i t q u i e t l y u n t i l t h e v i d e o and d a t a c o l l e c t i o n p r o c e s s was complete. J u s t p r i o r t o t h e v i d e o t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s were i n s t r u c t e d t o remember back t o when t h e y were a v i c t i m o f b u r g l a r y . Immediately f o l l o w i n g t h e v i d e o t h e y r e c e i v e d o r a l and w r i t t e n i n s t r u c t i o n s regarding the completion  o f t h e c o p i n g measure,  s i t u a t i o n a l a p p r a i s a l s o f c o n t r o l measure, outcome v a l u e measure, a s o c i a l d e s i r a b i l i t y s c a l e , and an i n t e n s i t y o f e x p e r i e n c e  measure,  r e s p e c t i v e l y ( s e e Appendix B ) . The  p a r t i c i p a n t was asked t o r e c a l l how he/she coped o v e r t h e  f i r s t 7 days a f t e r t h e b u r g l a r y . Seven days had been s e l e c t e d f o r two main r e a s o n s . F i r s t , Bard and Sangrey (1986) r e p o r t t h a t t h e v i c t i m may experience  t h r e e s t a g e s , impact, r e c o i l , and r e o r g a n i z a t i o n . The impact  and r e c o i l s t a g e a r e t h e stages when t h e v i c t i m i s most a c t i v e b e h a v i o r i a l l y and e m o t i o n a l l y i n c o p i n g w i t h t h e v i c t i m i z a t i o n experience. experience  During t h e r e o r g a n i z a t i o n stage t h e v i c t i m puts t h e i n t o p e r s p e c t i v e and commits h i s / h e r energy t o o t h e r  things  (Bard & Sangrey, 1986). Bard and Sangrey do n o t p u t a t i m e frame on each phase, b u t do suggest t h a t t h e impact and r e c o i l s t a g e may o c c u r w i t h i n s e v e r a l days a f t e r t h e v i c t i m i z a t i o n e x p e r i e n c e . 7 days a f t e r t h e b u r g l a r y e x p e r i e n c e  Hence, u s i n g t h e f i r s t  as t h e t i m e frame i n c r e a s e d t h e  l i k e l i h o o d of capturing the influence of s i t u a t i o n a l a p p r a i s a l s of c o n t r o l on c o p i n g f o l l o w i n g t h e b u r g l a r y . Second, I i n t e r v i e w e d 5 b u r g l a r y v i c t i m s who e x p l a i n e d t h a t t h e f i r s t week f o l l o w i n g t h e b u r g l a r y was t h e most p r o b l e m a t i c  p s y c h o l o g i c a l l y , w h i l e a t t h e same  t i m e , t h e f i r s t week was t h e p e r i o d when t h e y had t h e i r g r e a t e s t t o t r y and p r e v e n t f u t u r e b u r g l a r i e s ( t h e 5 b u r g l a r y v i c t i m s were n o t i n c l u d e d i n t h e s t u d y ) .  impetus  interviewed  The v i d e o was p l a y e d i n a c l a s s r o o m on a 24" c o l o u r t e l e v i s i o n s e t . A maximum group s i z e o f 35 viewed t h e v i d e o . A f t e r t h e  completion  o f t h e q u e s t i o n n a i r e s t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s were d e b r i e f e d , a l l q u e s t i o n s were answered, and a l l were thanked  f o r p a r t i c i p a t i n g . I informed  p a r t i c i p a n t s t h a t t h e y c o u l d c o n t a c t me  f o r the r e s u l t s of the  the  study.  D u r i n g t h e d e b r i e f i n g , s e v e r a l p a r t i c i p a n t s e n t h u s i a s t i c a l l y commented t h a t t h e v i d e o brought back memories o f t h e i r b u r g l a r y v i c t i m i z a t i o n experience. Study 2 Participants The  sample c o n s i s t e d of 102 v o l u n t e e r c o l l e g e s t u d e n t s who  e n r o l l e d i n f i r s t and second y e a r p s y c h o l o g y , courses  were  s o c i o l o g y , and c r i m i n o l o g y  (from t h e same c o l l e g e as Study 1 ) . A p p r o x i m a t e l y  600  students,  i n d i f f e r e n t c l a s s e s from t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s i n Study 1, were approached t o p a r t i c i p a t e i n t h e study. The sample i n c l u d e d 61 men between t h e ages o f 19 and 40 w i t h a mean age o f 22.3  and 41 women (SD=3.8). To  e n s u r e t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s ' l o c u s o f c o n t r o l o r i e n t a t i o n had not been a l t e r e d from a p r e v i o u s b u r g l a r y , t h o s e respondents p r e v i o u s l y b u r g l a r i z e d were e x c l u d e d from t h i s  who  had been  study.  Procedure Study 2 f o l l o w e d t h e same procedure  as Study 1 w i t h t h e e x c e p t i o n  o f t h r e e m o d i f i c a t i o n s . F i r s t , t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s were c o l l e g e s t u d e n t s who  had never been p r e v i o u s l y b u r g l a r i z e d . Second, t h e i n s t r u c t i o n s f o r  t h e c o p i n g , s i t u a t i o n a l a p p r a i s a l s of c o n t r o l , and outcome v a l u e measures were changed t o a l l o w t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s t o answer w i t h r e g a r d t o how  t h e y would r e a c t . F i n a l l y , t h e v i d e o v i e w i n g i n s t r u c t i o n s were  changed t o i n s t r u c t t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s t o imagine the b u r g l a r y v i c t i m i z a t i o n experience  how  t h e y would cope w i t h  (see Appendix B ) .  Video Stimulus A b r i e f v i d e o ( a p p r o x i m a t e l y 2 minutes) was  presented t o the  p a r t i c i p a n t s i n Study 1 and Study 2 t h a t d e p i c t s a r e s i d e n t i a l b u r g l a r y  i n p r o g r e s s . The v i d e o a l l o w e d t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s t o v i c a r i o u s l y e x p e r i e n c e b u r g l a r y v i c t i m i z a t i o n . The v i d e o was produced i n A u g u s t , 1990 by t h e J u s t i c e I n s t i t u t e o f B r i t i s h Columbia f o r t h e p u r p o s e o f t r a i n i n g p o l i c e o f f i c e r s i n the i n v e s t i g a t i o n of b u r g l a r y . Therefore, t h e p o r t i o n o f t h e v i d e o used i n t h i s s t u d y d e p i c t s a t y p i c a l b u r g l a r y and has been d e s i g n e d t o r e a l i s t i c a l l y p o r t r a y a b u r g l a r y i n p r o g r e s s (see Appendix B f o r d e t a i l s of v i d e o ) . To o f f e r f u r t h e r s u p p o r t f o r t h e r e a l i s m o f t h i s v i d e o , two p o l i c e o f f i c e r s who  are experts i n the  field  were shown t h e v i d e o and i n t e r v i e w e d . Both found t h e v i d e o t o be a r e a l i s t i c p o r t r a y a l of a t y p i c a l b u r g l a r y .  Furthermore,  the video  p i l o t e d on 18 p a r t i c i p a n t s . An assessment o f t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s ' o f i m a g i n i n g t h e v i c t i m i z a t i o n e x p e r i e n c e was p a r t i c i p a n t s r e p o r t e d a mean s c o r e o f 4.5  conducted.  was  intensity  The  (SD =1.21) on an I n t e n s i t y o f  B u r g l a r y E x p e r i e n c e measure (range 1 t o 7; See Appendix B ) . T h i s s c o r e i n d i c a t e d t h a t t h e v i d e o was  h e l p f u l i n f a c i l i t a t i n g the p a r t i c i p a n t s t o  v i c a r i o u s l y experience the burglary v i c t i m i z a t i o n experience.  Similarly,  during the d e b r i e f i n g the p a r t i c i p a n t s v e r b a l l y reported t h a t the video was  r e a l i s t i c and was  h e l p f u l i n f a c i l i t a t i n g v i s u a l i z a t i o n of  falling  victim to burglary. Predictor Variables Levenson's I. P, and  C Scales. A r e v i e w o f t h e l i t e r a t u r e r e v e a l e d  t h a t t h e r e i s no l o c u s o f c o n t r o l i n s t r u m e n t developed  specifically for  v i c t i m s of crime.  ( I ) , powerful  However, Levenson's (1981) i n t e r n a l  o t h e r s ( P ) , and chance (C) S c a l e s t r e a t l o c u s o f c o n t r o l as a m u l t i d i m e n s i o n a l c o n s t r u c t and t h e i n c l u s i o n o f t h e P S c a l e makes t h i s i n s t r u m e n t w e l l s u i t e d f o r use w i t h v i c t i m s o f b u r g l a r y (See Appendix A ) . Levenson's I , P, and C S c a l e s were d e s i g n e d as a r e c o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o n o f R o t t e r ' s (1966) S c a l e and i n c l u d e s t h r e e dimensions  of c o n t r o l .  F i r s t , t h e I S c a l e measures t h e i n d i v i d u a l ' s b e l i e f t h a t he/she has c o n t r o l over t h e r e i n f o r c e m e n t s i n he/her own  life.  Second, t h e P S c a l e  measures t h e i n d i v i d u a l ' s b e l i e f t h a t p o w e r f u l o t h e r s have c o n t r o l  over  t h e r e i n f o r c e m e n t s i n h i s / h e r own l i f e . However, i f t h e i n d i v i d u a l c a n determine  some r e g u l a r i t y i n t h e a c t i o n s o f t h e p o w e r f u l o t h e r s t h e r e  may be an o p p o r t u n i t y f o r c o n t r o l . F i n a l l y , t h e C S c a l e measure t h e i n d i v i d u a l s ' b e l i e f t h a t t h e w o r l d i s u n p r e d i c t a b l e and unordered,  hence  r e i n f o r c e m e n t s o c c u r by chance and a r e n o t s u b j e c t t o an i n d i v i d u a l ' s c o n t r o l . I n summary, t h e i n t e r n a l l o c u s o f c o n t r o l o r i e n t a t i o n i s a s s e s s e d by t h e I S c a l e and t h e e x t e r n a l o r i e n t a t i o n i s a s s e s s e d by t h e P and C S c a l e s . The utilizing  I , P, and C S c a l e s a r e comprised  o f t h r e e 8-item s u b s c a l e s  a 6-point L i k e r t - t y p e s c a l e (anchors a r e - 3 , -2, - 1 , 1, 2, 3 ) ,  but a r e p r e s e n t e d as a u n i f i e d 24-item s c a l e . T o t a l s c a l e s c o r e s a r e t h e sum o f t h e items s c o r e s p l u s 24. Levenson (1981) recommends a d d i n g 24 t o e l i m i n a t e n e g a t i v e s c o r e s . The range on each s c a l e i s from 0 t o 48. A high s c a l e score i n d i c a t e s t h a t t h e person holds a strong b e l i e f towards t h a t p a r t i c u l a r c o n t r o l o r i e n t a t i o n . T h i s i n s t r u m e n t has been used w i t h a v a r i e t y o f p o p u l a t i o n s i n c l u d i n g samples o f p r i s o n e r s and p e r s o n s a f f l i c t e d w i t h psychopathology, (Levenson,  1981).  Kuder-Richardson for  a l c o h o l i s m , and h e a l t h r e l a t e d i s s u e s  r e l i a b i l i t i e s f o r internal consistency estimates  I , P, and C S c a l e s were moderate; .51, .72, and .73, r e s p e c t i v e l y ;  and f o r a 1 week t e s t - r e t e s t r e l i a b i l i t y t h e c o e f f i c i e n t s were i n t h e .60 t o .79 range (Levenson,  1981). I n t h i s s t u d y ,  reliabilities  (Cronbach's a l p h a ) f o r t h e I , P, and C S c a l e s f o r t h e b u r g l a r y v i c t i m group were .73, .79, and .62, r e s p e c t i v e l y ; and f o r t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l l y i n d u c e d v i c t i m group t h e r e l i a b i l i t i e s were .51, .72, and .73. Levenson (1981) r e p o r t e d t h a t t h e v a l i d i t y o f t h e I , P, and C S c a l e s (convergent  and d i s c r i m i n a n t methods) was demonstrated i n s e v e r a l  studies. In addition. Rotter's locus of control e x t e r n a l scale c o r r e l a t e d .25 and .56 w i t h t h e P and C S c a l e s and -.41 w i t h t h e I S c a l e for  a c o l l e g e sample (Levenson,  1972). Furthermore,  Levenson (1981)  found t h a t t h e P and C S c a l e s (both e x t e r n a l o r i e n t a t i o n s ) had moderate  c o r r e l a t i o n s w i t h each o t h e r , r = .41 t o .60.  The  I S c a l e had a low  c o r r e l a t i o n w i t h t h e P and C S c a l e s w i t h c o e f f i c i e n t s t h a t range from -.25  t o .19. Levenson r e p o r t e d n e g l i g i b l e and n o n s i g n i f i c a n t  c o r r e l a t i o n s amongst I , P, and C S c a l e s and s o c i a l d e s i r a b i l i t y  as  measured by t h e Marlowe-Crowne S o c i a l D e s i r a b i l i t y S c a l e (Crowne & Marlowe, 1960). Situational  Appraisals of Control. S i t u a t i o n a l a p p r a i s a l s o f  c o n t r o l a r e t h e e x t e n t t o which a person b e l i e v e s he o r she can a p a r t i c u l a r s t r e s s f u l encounter  ( L a z a r u s & Folkman, 1984).  control  However,  s i t u a t i o n a l a p p r a i s a l s o f c o n t r o l a r e d i f f i c u l t t o e v a l u a t e because i t i s hard t o determine what c o n t r o l a s p e c t o f t h e s i t u a t i o n t h e i s f o c u s i n g on  (Folkman, 1984). I n an e f f o r t t o r e s o l v e t h i s  H a r t and Cardozo (1986, 1988)  individual difficulty.  suggest t h a t c o n t r o l a p p l i e s t o  emotions,  b e h a v i o u r s , as w e l l as t h e s i t u a t i o n . T h i s s t u d y employed 3 i t e m s t h a t H a r t and Cardozo (1988) used t o measure secondary a p p r a i s a l ( c o n t r o l l a b i l i t y ) i n t h e i r study o f 135 c o l l e g e s t u d e n t s B).  (See Appendix  I n t e r n a l c o n s i s t e n c y as measured by Cronbach's a l p h a was  Cardozo, 1988). I n t h i s study Cronbach's a l p h a was v i c t i m group and  .77  (Hart &  .82 f o r t h e b u r g l a r y  .88 f o r t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l l y i n d u c e d v i c t i m group.  P a r t i c i p a n t s i n d i c a t e on a 6-point L i k e r t t y p e s c a l e (1= " S t r o n g l y D i s a g r e e " t o 6= " S t r o n g l y Agree") t o each o f t h e 3 items c o n t r o l o f my emotions";  ("I f e l t i n  " I f e l t i n c o n t r o l o f what i t was  that I  doing"; "I f e l t i n c o n t r o l of the s i t u a t i o n " ) . A t o t a l score  was  was  o b t a i n e d by summing t h e r a t i n g s on t h e 3 items and d i v i d i n g by 3.  Scores  range from 1 t o 6, h i g h e r s c o r e s i n d i c a t e a g r e a t e r sense o f c o n t r o l . Outcome Value. Because outcome v a l u e has been r a r e l y a s s e s s e d , i t was  n e c e s s a r y t o d e v e l o p items t o a s s e s s t h i s c o n s t r u c t . The  following 3  i t e m s were used t o measure outcome v a l u e . The p a r t i c i p a n t s were asked  to  i n d i c a t e on a 6-point L i k e r t - t y p e s c a l e r a n g i n g from 1 " s t r o n g l y d i s a g r e e " t o 6 " s t r o n g l y agree" whether (a) t h e s i t u a t i o n was g r e a t p e r s o n a l importance  t o me,  (b) t h e s i t u a t i o n m a t t e r e d  one  of  a great deal  t o me,  and  (c) t h e outcome of my a c t i o n s m a t t e r e d a g r e a t d e a l t o  (See Appendix  B ) . I n t e r n a l c o n s i s t e n c y (Cronbach's  a l p h a ) was  me  .81 f o r  t h e b u r g l a r y v i c t i m group and .79 f o r t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l l y i n d u c e d  victim  group. The f i r s t two items were t a k e n from items H a r t and Cardozo (1986) used t o measure p r i m a r y a p p r a i s a l i n t h e i r s t u d y o f c o p i n g w i t h a n g e r p r o v o k i n g s i t u a t i o n s . These items appear s i m i l a r t o outcome v a l u e i n t h a t t h e y a s s e s s t h e p e r s o n a l s i g n i f i c a n c e o f t h e e v e n t . The t h i r d  item  was d e v e l o p e d by t h e author and i s i n k e e p i n g w i t h t h e c o n s t r u c t b e i n g measured. A t o t a l s c o r e o f outcome v a l u e was o b t a i n e d by summing t h e r a t i n g s on t h e items l i s t e d and d i v i d i n g by 3. S c o r e s range from 1 t o  6,  h i g h e r s c o r e s i n d i c a t e a g r e a t e r l e v e l o f outcome v a l u e . Three s o c i a l p s y c h o l o g i s t s r e v i e w e d t h e c o n s t r u c t and i n d i c a t e d t h a t t h e i t e m s were r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s o f t h e c o n s t r u c t . Furthermore, t h e outcome v a l u e measure was p i l o t e d on 18 c o l l e g e s t u d e n t s who w i t h a range o f 2.0 t o 6.0.  had a mean s c o r e o f 4.7  (SD  =1.2)  The p i l o t r e s u l t s s u p p o r t e d t h e p o s i t i o n  t h a t , i n g e n e r a l , outcome v a l u e would be h i g h but t h a t t h e r e would be variance. C r i t e r i o n Variables (Coping) C o p i n g f u n c t i o n s were a s s e s s e d u s i n g C a r v e r e t a l . (1989) m u l t i d i m e n s i o n a l c o p i n g i n v e n t o r y (COPE) t h a t has 52 i t e m s and  13  s u b s c a l e s t h a t d e s c r i b e s e v e r a l s t r a t e g i e s p e o p l e use t o manage s t r e s s (See Appendix  B ) . C a r v e r e t a l . (1989) have i d e n t i f i e d 5 s u b s c a l e s as  problem-focused competing  coping ( a c t i v e coping, planning, suppression of  a c t i v i t i e s , r e s t r a i n t coping, seeking instrumental s o c i a l  s u p p o r t ) and 5 s u b s c a l e s as emotion-focused  coping (seeking of emotional  s o c i a l support, p o s i t i v e r e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , acceptance, d e n i a l ,  turning  t o r e l i g i o n ) . Three s u b s c a l e s t h a t t h e y b e l i e v e t o be l e s s u s e f u l ( f o c u s on and v e n t i n g o f emotions, b e h a v i o r a l disengagement, and  mental  disengagement) were not i d e n t i f i e d by C a r v e r e t a l . (1989) as o r emotion-  f o c u s e d c o p i n g , but t h e c o n t e n t o f t h e s e s u b s c a l e s  problemappeared  p e r t i n e n t t o b u r g l a r y v i c t i m coping. I n s p e c t i o n of the items r e v e a l s  t h a t f o c u s on and v e n t i n g o f emotions and mental disengagement a r e i n k e e p i n g w i t h L a z a r u s and Folkman's (1984) d e f i n i t i o n o f  emotion-focused  c o p i n g . B e h a v i o r a l disengagement i s a c t i v e and hence s e r v e s as a problem-focused  f u n c t i o n . Each of t h e 7 emotion-focused  f o c u s e d s u b s c a l e s a r e comprised u n i v e r s i t y undergraduates, was  and 6 p r o b l e m -  of 4 i t e m s . I n a sample o f  978  i n t e r n a l c o n s i s t e n c y u s i n g Cronbach's a l p h a  c a l c u l a t e d f o r each s c a l e . Only mental disengagement f e l l below  t h e r e m a i n i n g s c a l e s ranged from .62 t o .92  .62,  ( C a r v e r e t a l . , 1989). I n  t h i s s t u d y Cronbach's a l p h a f o r problem- and e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d  coping f o r  t h e b u r g l a r y v i c t i m group was  .81 and  .87 and  .84, r e s p e c t i v e l y ; and  ,82  f o r t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l l y induced v i c t i m group. Each i t e m i s r a t e d a c c o r d i n g t o a 4 - p o i n t L i k e r t - t y p e s c a l e (1= " I d i d not do t h i s a t a l l " , 2= " I d i d t h i s a l i t t l e b i t " , 3= " I d i d t h i s medium amount", 4= " I d i d t h i s a l o t " ) ( C a r v e r e t a l . , 1989), F o r  a  this  s t u d y , t h e 4 - p o i n t L i k e r t - t y p e s c a l e has been r e t a i n e d , however, b e c a u s e t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s i n Study 2 must p r o j e c t t h e i r c o p i n g i n t o t h e f u t u r e , the responses  were changed t o t h e f u t u r e t e n s e f o r them (1= " I w i l l  not  do t h i s a t a l l " , 2= " I w i l l do t h i s a l i t t l e b i t " , 3= " I w i l l do t h i s  a  medium amount", 4= " I w i l l do t h i s a l o t " ) . C a r v e r e t a l . (1989) recommend t h a t t h e t e n s e o f t h e responses be a p p r o p r i a t e l y changed f o r t h e a p p l i c a t i o n . Scores f o r t h e problem-focused 96 and e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d  s c a l e s range from 24 t o  s c a l e s range from 28 t o 112, h i g h e r  i n d i c a t e d g r e a t e r c o p i n g use  scores  (see Appendix C f o r i n t e r c o r r e l a t i o n s o f  subscales). Manipulation Check The M - C l ( l O )  s c a l e ( S t r a h a n & G e r b a s h i , 1972)  s o c i a l d e s i r a b i l i t y response  was  s e t s (See Appendix B ) . The  used t o d e t e c t 10 i t e m  M-Cl  (10) S c a l e i s a m o d i f i e d v e r s i o n o f t h e 33 i t e m Marlowe-Crowne S c a l e D e s i r a b i l i t y S c a l e (Crowne & Marlowe, 1960). The M-Cl  (10) S c a l e  was  employed i n t h i s s t u d y t o reduce e x c e s s i v e q u e s t i o n n a i r e l e n g t h . T h i s s c a l e has 10 items  t h a t r e q u i r e True o r F a l s e r e s p o n s e s  (5 a r e keyed  t r u e and 5 a r e keyed f a l s e ) . Scores can range from 0 t o 10. The h i g h e r s c o r e i n d i c a t e s t h e s t r o n g e r need o f t h e p a r t i c i p a n t t o respond i n c u l t u r a l l y approved ways (Strahan & G e r b a s h i , 1972). The i n t e r n a l c o n s i s t e n c y c o e f f i c i e n t u s i n g Kuder-Richardson  20 ranged from .59  to  .70. T h i s s c a l e s t r o n g l y c o r r e l a t e s w i t h t h e Marlowe-Crowne S o c i a l D e s i r a b i l i t y S c a l e a t ( r =.80). I developed determine  t h e I n t e n s i t y o f B u r g l a r y E x p e r i e n c e Measure t o  how a c c u r a t e l y and i n t e n s e l y t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s imagined  falling  v i c t i m t o b u r g l a r y a f t e r v i e w i n g t h e v i d e o (See Appendix B ) . P a r t i c i p a n t s were asked t o i n d i c a t e on a 7 - p o i n t L i k e r t - t y p e s c a l e whether (a) " I was a b l e t o imagine t h a t I was a b u r g l a r y v i c t i m , " i n t e n s e l y imagined t h a t I was a b u r g l a r y v i c t i m , "  (b) " I  (c) " t h e v i d e o  a s s i s t e d me i n i m a g i n i n g t h a t I was a v i c t i m o f b u r g l a r y . "  A total  s c o r e o f i n t e n s i t y o f t h e b u r g l a r y e x p e r i e n c e was o b t a i n e d by summing t h e r a t i n g on t h e items l i s t e d and d i v i d i n g by 3.  S c o r e s range from 1  t o 7, h i g h e r s c o r e s i n d i c a t e a g r e a t e r l e v e l o f i n t e n s i t y o f t h e burglary experience. Analysis of Data Of t h e 175 r e t u r n e d measures, 12 were i n c o m p l e t e m i s s i n g i t e m s ) and not u s e a b l e  (20% o r more  (7 from t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l l y i n d u c e d  victim  group and 5 from t h e b u r g l a r y v i c t i m g r o u p ) . T h e r e f o r e , a n a l y s i s was based upon t h e i n f o r m a t i o n o f 61 p a r t i c i p a n t s from t h e b u r g l a r y v i c t i m group (Study 1) and 102 p a r t i c i p a n t s from t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l l y i n d u c e d v i c t i m group (Study 2 ) . Of t h e r e m a i n i n g 163 p a r t i c i p a n t s ,  approximately  4 c o p i n g measures had two m i s s i n g items each. An average s c o r e was c a l c u l a t e d from t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s ' p r e v i o u s s u b s c a l e s c o r e s and was a s s i g n e d t o t h e i t e m t h a t was not completed.  The a n a l y s e s o f d a t a were  t h e same f o r Study 1 and Study 2. Descriptive statistics  ( f r e q u e n c i e s , means, s t a n d a r d d e v i a t i o n s ,  and z e r o - o r d e r c o r r e l a t i o n m a t r i x ) f o r a l l v a r i a b l e s were computed. To determine  t h a t t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s ' answers were not based on a s o c i a l  d e s i r a b i l i t y response s e t , zero-order  c o r r e l a t i o n s were c a l c u l a t e d  between t h e M-Cl(10) s c a l e and t h e independent v a r i a b l e s ( i n t e r n a l  locus  of c o n t r o l , p o w e r f u l o t h e r s l o c u s o f c o n t r o l , chance l o c u s o f c o n t r o l , s i t u a t i o n a l a p p r a i s a l s o f c o n t r o l , and outcome v a l u e ) and t h e dependent v a r i a b l e s (problem- and emotion-focused c o p i n g ) . F u r t h e r m o r e , t o e s t a b l i s h t h a t p a r t i c i p a n t s were a b l e t o imagine o r r e c a l l t h e b u r g l a r y experience,  means and standard  d e v i a t i o n s were c a l c u l a t e d f o r t h e  I n t e n s i t y o f B u r g l a r y E x p e r i e n c e measure and c o r r e l a t i o n s w i t h t h e p r e d i c t o r and c r i t e r i o n v a r i a b l e s were examined. P r e l i m i n a r y a n a l y s i s was conducted t o determine whether t h e b u r g l a r y v i c t i m group d i f f e r e d from t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l l y  induced v i c t i m  group on demographic d a t a and on t h e independent and dependent v a r i a b l e s . To d e t e r m i n e d i f f e r e n c e s between t h e two groups on demographic d a t a , ANOVA and C h i - s q u a r e t e s t s o f independence were c o n d u c t e d . To d e t e r m i n e whether t h e two groups' means d i f f e r e d on t h e independent and dependent v a r i a b l e s used t o t e s t t h e h y p o t h e s e s , a 2 x 2 m u l t i v a r i a t e a n a l y s i s of variance  (MANOVA) was conducted on t h e combined  sample, w i t h gender and v i c t i m s t a t u s ( i . e . , e x p e r i m e n t a l l y  induced  v i c t i m s and b u r g l a r y v i c t i m s ) as independent v a r i a b l e s , and p r o b l e m - and emotion-focused coping,  i n t e r n a l , p o w e r f u l o t h e r s and chance l o c u s o f  c o n t r o l , s i t u a t i o n a l a p p r a i s a l s o f c o n t r o l , and outcome v a l u e as dependent v a r i a b l e s . To determine t h e r e l a t i v e i m p o r t a n c e o f t h e dependent v a r i a b l e s t h e MANOVA was f o l l o w e d up by u n i v a r i a t e F - t e s t and d i s c r i m i n a n t f u n c t i o n a n a l y s i s . Any s i g n i f i c a n t u n i v a r i a t e F - t e s t on any f a c t o r i n t h e d e s i g n was c o n s i d e r e d  a measure o f i m p o r t a n c e o f t h a t  dependent v a r i a b l e t o t h e m u l t i v a r i a t e d i s c r i m i n a t i o n (Haase & E l l i s , 1987). Haase and E l l i s  (1987) argue t h a t t h e major d i s a d v a n t a g e t o t h e  u n i v a r i a t e F - t e s t as a f o l l o w - u p p r o c e d u r e t o a MANOVA i s t h a t i t does not t a k e i n t o c o n s i d e r a t i o n t h e i n t e r c o r r e l a t i o n s o f t h e dependent v a r i a b l e s . To c o u n t e r a c t use o f s t a n d a r d i z e d  t h i s d i f f i c u l t y , Haase and E l l i s recommend t h e  d i s c r i m i n a t e f u n c t i o n c o e f f i c i e n t s f o r making  decisions  about t h e r e l a t i v e importance o f any dependent v a r i a b l e t o t h e  m u l t i v a r i a t e d i s c r i m i n a t i o n . Standardized discriminant  function  c o e f f i c i e n t s a r e measures o f t h e i n d i v i d u a l c o n t r i b u t i o n o f one o f t h e dependent v a r i a b l e s when a l l t h e o t h e r dependent v a r i a b l e s i n t h e model are c o n t r o l l e d f o r . The  main e f f e c t s were determined by c o n d u c t i n g h i e r a r c h i c a l  regression  a n a l y s e s . The v a r i a b l e s were stepped i n t o t h e e q u a t i o n i n t h e  f o l l o w i n g o r d e r . Gender was e n t e r e d f i r s t ,  followed  by i n t e r n a l l o c u s o f  c o n t r o l , chance l o c u s o f c o n t r o l , p o w e r f u l o t h e r s l o c u s o f c o n t r o l , outcome v a l u e ,  and s i t u a t i o n a l a p p r a i s a l s o f c o n t r o l . The c r i t e r i o n  v a r i a b l e s were problem- and emotion-focused c o p i n g . The  standardized  s c o r e s o f each o f t h e c o n t i n u o u s p r e d i c t o r v a r i a b l e s were used t o c o n t r o l f o r s c a l e d i f f e r e n c e s among t h e v a r i a b l e s . To t e s t t h e m e d i a t o r and moderator hypotheses t h e c r i t e r i o n recommended by Baron and Kenny (1986) were f o l l o w e d .  To t e s t t h e  m e d i a t o r h y p o t h e s e s , z e r o - o r d e r c o r r e l a t i o n s were c a l c u l a t e d t o d e t e r m i n e i f t h e independent v a r i a b l e a f f e c t e d t h e m e d i a t o r and i f t h e independent v a r i a b l e a f f e c t e d t h e dependent v a r i a b l e . I f t h e s e two r e l a t i o n s h i p s were s i g n i f i c a n t , a d i s c r i m i n a n t  f u n c t i o n a n a l y s i s was  c o n d u c t e d t o d e t e r m i n e i f t h e m e d i a t o r v a r i a b l e was t h e most i m p o r t a n t v a r i a b l e t h a t accounted f o r t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p between t h e independent v a r i a b l e and dependent v a r i a b l e . The moderator h y p o t h e s e s were t e s t e d w i t h m u l t i p l i c a t i v e terms ( c r o s s p r o d u c t s ) e n t e r e d i n t o t h e r e g r e s s i o n a n a l y s i s h i e r a r c h i c a l l y f o l l o w i n g t h e c o r r e s p o n d i n g f i r s t o r d e r terms (Cohen & Cohen, 1983).  RESULTS Descriptive The  C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f t h e B u r g l a r y V i c t i m Sample  p a r t i c i p a n t s i n the burglary  v i c t i m s t u d y (N = 61) i n c l u d e d  men and 30 women. The mean l e n g t h o f t i m e between b u r g l a r y  31  experience  and  c o m p l e t i n g t h e q u e s t i o n n a i r e s was 4.8 months (range 1 - 9  The  l a r g e s t number o f respondents were s i n g l e (75.4%) w i t h a mean age o f  22.7  months).  y e a r s (range 19 - 37). F o r t y - s e v e n p e r c e n t o f t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s  l i v e d a t home w i t h t h e i r p a r e n t s and 62% o f t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s p a i d The  rent.  average h o u s e h o l d income o f t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s was between $21,000 -  $30,000 p e r y e a r . The mean v a l u e s t o l e n d u r i n g t h e v i c t i m s ' b u r g l a r y $4,503.00 and t h e average damage s u s t a i n e d  was  t o t h e r e s i d e n c e was l i g h t t o  moderate. T w e n t y - f i v e p e r c e n t o f t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s had been a v i c t i m o f p r o p e r t y crime other than burglary  ( i . e . , t h e f t ) and an e q u a l number had  been a v i c t i m o f v i o l e n t c r i m e ( i . e . , a s s a u l t , s e x u a l a s s a u l t ) . See T a b l e 1 f o r a summary o f t h e d e s c r i p t i v e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f t h e sample. M a n i p u l a t i o n Checks S o c i a l d e s i r a b i l i t y as measured by t h e M - C l ( l O ) was  significantly  r e l a t e d o n l y t o e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d c o p i n g and chance l o c u s o f c o n t r o l , a l l c o r r e l a t i o n s were l e s s t h a n -.27 (See Appendix D ) . T h e r e f o r e , t h e r e s p o n s e s by t h e b u r g l a r y  v i c t i m group t o t h e measures were  relatively  f r e e from a s o c i a l l y d e s i r a b l e response s e t . The I n t e n s i t y o f B u r g l a r y E x p e r i e n c e measure a s s e s s e d t h e v i v i d n e s s memory o f t h e b u r g l a r y  of the burglary  victims'  v i c t i m i z a t i o n e x p e r i e n c e . The mean s c o r e on t h e  3-item I n t e n s i t y o f B u r g l a r y E x p e r i e n c e measure was 5.54, SD=1.08 (range 1-7,  "not a t a l l " t o " g r e a t l y " ) . No one s c o r e d below 3 on t h e summed  s c a l e , which i n d i c a t e d that t h e video f a c i l i t a t e d t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s r e c a l l the burglary Descriptive The  v i c t i m i z a t i o n experience.  C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f t h e E x p e r i m e n t a l l y Induced V i c t i m Sample  p a r t i c i p a n t s i n t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l l y induced b u r g l a r y  s t u d y (N = 102) i n c l u d e d  61 men and 41 women. I n g e n e r a l , t h e  victim  D e s c r i p t i v e C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f B u r g l a r y V i c t i m P a r t i c i p a n t s (N=61) and E x p e r i m e n t a l l y Induced V i c t i m P a r t i c i p a n t s (N=102> Burglary Victims Characteristics  M  SD  f  %  Experimentally M  SD  22.7  4.1  22.3  3.8  Burglary Experience  5.5  1.1  4.9  1.1  Time s i n c e b u r g l a r i z e d ( i n months)  4.8  3.0  Age  Value i n D o l l a r s of Amount S t o l e n (Md 1000)  f  Induced %  4,503  Gender men women  31 50.8 30 49.2  61 59.8 41 40.8  M a r i t a l Status single married separated divorced  46 75.4 12 19.7 3 4.9 0 0.0  90 88.2 7 6.9 1 1.0 4 3.9  Live with yes no  29 47.5 32 52.5  60 58.8 42 41.2  Pay Rent yes no  38 62.3 23 37.7  47 46.1 55 53.9  Income (household) under 10,000 10,000 - 20,000 21,000 - 30,000 31,000 - 40,000 o v e r 40,000  11 8 15 9 18  18 20 9 14 41  Damage severe moderate light none  2 3.3 18 29.5 28 45.9 13 21.3  V i c t i m o f P r e v i o u s Crime Other Than B u r g l a r y none property violence  31 50.8 15 24.6 15 24.6  Parents  18.0 13.1 24.6 14.8 29.5  17.6 19.6 8.8 13.7 40.3  38 37.3 43 42.2 21 20.5  r e s p o n d e n t s were s i n g l e (88.2%) w i t h a mean age o f 22.3 y e a r s 19 - 4 0 ) .  (range  F i f t y - e i g h t p e r c e n t o f t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s l i v e d a t home w i t h  t h e i r p a r e n t s and 46.1% o f t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s p a i d r e n t . The average h o u s e h o l d income o f t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s was between $21,000 and $30,000 p e r y e a r . None o f t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s had been p r e v i o u s l y 42.2%  burglarized,  although  o f t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s had been v i c t i m s o f o t h e r p r o p e r t y o f f e n s e s  ( i . e . , t h e f t , c a r t h e f t ) and (20.6%) o f t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s had been v i c t i m s o f v i o l e n t crime ( i . e . , a s s a u l t , robbery, sexual a s s a u l t ) . A one-way MANOVA on a l l p r e d i c t o r and c r i t e r i o n v a r i a b l e s was c o n d u c t e d t o d e t e r m i n e whether t h o s e who r e p o r t e d never h a v i n g been v i c t i m i z e d and t h o s e who r e p o r t e d p r e v i o u s v i c t i m i z a t i o n ( v i c t i m s o f v i o l e n t and p r o p e r t y c r i m e ) d i f f e r e d on mean s c o r e s f o r e m o t i o n - and p r o b l e m - f o c u s e d c o p i n g , i n t e r n a l , chance, and p o w e r f u l o t h e r s l o c u s o f c o n t r o l , situational appraisals  o f c o n t r o l , and outcome v a l u e . The m u l t i v a r i a t e  group e f f e c t f o r p r e v i o u s v i c t i m i z a t i o n was n o t s i g n i f i c a n t , F< 1 ( s e e Appendix E ) . See T a b l e 1 f o r a summary o f t h e d e s c r i p t i v e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f t h e sample. M a n i p u l a t i o n Check S o c i a l d e s i r a b i l i t y as measured by t h e M - C l ( l O ) was s i g n i f i c a n t l y r e l a t e d o n l y t o gender, a l l t h e c o r r e l a t i o n s were l e s s t h a n -.17 ( s e e Appendix D ) . T h e r e f o r e , t h e r e s p o n s e s by t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l l y i n d u c e d v i c t i m group t o t h e measures were f r e e from a s o c i a l l y  desirable  r e s p o n s e s e t . The I n t e n s i t y o f B u r g l a r y E x p e r i e n c e measure d e t e r m i n e d how a c c u r a t e l y burglary.  and i n t e n s e l y t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s i m a g i n e d f a l l i n g v i c t i m t o  The mean s c o r e on t h e 3-item I n t e n s i t y o f B u r g l a r y E x p e r i e n c e  measure was 4.94, SD = 1.08 (range 1 t o 7, "not a t a l l " t o " g r e a t l y " ) . No one s c o r e d l e s s t h a n 3 on t h e summed s c a l e , w h i c h i n d i c a t e d t h a t t h e v i d e o was o f a s s i s t a n c e  i n h e l p i n g t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s imagine t h a t  were v i c t i m s o f r e s i d e n t i a l b u r g l a r y . and  they  A one-way MANOVA on a l l p r e d i c t o r  c r i t e r i o n v a r i a b l e s was conducted t o d e t e r m i n e whether t h o s e who  s c o r e d above t h e median on t h e I n t e n s i t y o f B u r g l a r y E x p e r i e n c e measure  and  t h o s e who  e m o t i o n - and  s c o r e d below the median d i f f e r e d on mean s c o r e s f o r p r o b l e m - f o c u s e d c o p i n g , i n t e r n a l , chance, and  others locus of c o n t r o l , s i t u a t i o n a l a p p r a i s a l s v a l u e . The  powerful  of c o n t r o l , and  outcome  m u l t i v a r i a t e group e f f e c t f o r i n t e n s i t y of e x p e r i e n c e was  s i g n i f i c a n t , F<  not  1 (see Appendix E ) .  Descriptive S t a t i s t i c s of Variables for Burglary Victims I n t h e b u r g l a r y v i c t i m group, gender (coded 1 f o r male o r 2 female), locus of c o n t r o l dimensions, s i t u a t i o n a l a p p r a i s a l s and  outcome v a l u e (independent v a r i a b l e s )  most of t h e c o r r e l a t i o n s were below .30.  were not  r e l a t e d t o p o w e r f u l o t h e r s l o c u s of  r ( 6 1 ) = -.27,  E < -02,  and  r ( 6 1 ) = -.31,  E < .01.  I n t e r n a l l o c u s of c o n t r o l was  locus of c o n t r o l , r(61)  =.74,  control,  positively related  E < -Ol* Moreover,  p o s i t i v e l y c o r r e l a t e d w i t h chance  E < .001.  T h i s r e l a t i o n s h i p was  because b o t h measure d i f f e r e n t dimensions of t h e Problem- and  control,  r e l a t e d t o chance l o c u s of  of c o n t r o l , r ( 6 1 ) = .31,  p o w e r f u l o t h e r s l o c u s of c o n t r o l was  not  expected  same o r i e n t a t i o n .  e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d c o p i n g were r e l a t e d , r ( 6 1 )  I n g e n e r a l , p r o b l e m - f o c u s e d c o p i n g was  = .38,  c o r r e l a t e d w i t h any  p < of  .001. the  independent v a r i a b l e s , w i t h the e x c e p t i o n of outcome v a l u e , r ( 6 1 ) E<.001. However, e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d c o p i n g was  respectively.  outcome v a l u e , r s ( 6 1 ) =.41, The  burglary victims  .36,  means, s t a n d a r d d e v i a t i o n s , are p r e s e n t e d i n T a b l e  2.  =.55,  r e l a t e d to powerful others  l o c u s o f c o n t r o l , chance l o c u s of c o n t r o l , s i t u a t i o n a l a p p r a i s a l s c o n t r o l , and  and  However, i n t e r n a l l o c u s of  negatively  to s i t u a t i o n a l appraisals  control,  highly correlated  c o n t r o l was  negatively  of  for  -.34, and  and  of  .45,  intercorrelations  for  Means. S t a n d a r d D e v i a t i o n s , and I n t e r c o r r e l a t i o n s o f P r e d i c t o r and C r i t e r i o n V a r i a b l e s of Burglary V i c t i m s  Women(n=30) Variable  (N=61K  Men(n=31)  M  SD  M S D  1  2  2.Internal  33.37  6.71  34.71  8.30 -.09  3. P o w e r f u l Others 4. Chance  20.00 17.80  10.74 7.65  22.45 20.16  9.17 -.12 -.27 8.10 -.15 -.31  1.22  4.03  1.32 -.22  4.71  1.24 -.14 -.03  3  4  5  6  7  a 1.Gender  .74  5.Situational appraisals o f c o n t r o l 3.46 6.Outcome value 7. P r o b l e m focused coping  4.34  1.37  49.97  11.67  53.68 11.36 -.16  8. E m o t i o n focused coping  65.90  11.71  62.16 12.88  .32 -.17-.17  .06  .14 -.21  .19 .02 -.23 .15 .02  .03 .55  .41 .36 -.34 .45 .38  Note. H i g h e r s c o r e s i n d i c a t e g r e a t e r l o c u s o f c o n t r o l , a p p r a i s a l s o f c o n t r o l , outcome v a l u e , and c o p i n g . a  situational  Gender was coded 1 (men) and 2 (women) r ( 6 0 ) . 2 1 , E<.05; r ( 6 0 ) . 2 9 , E<.01 ( B o n f e r r o n i a d j u s t e d r ( 6 0 ) . 4 3 , E<.05; B o n f e r r o n i a d j u s t e d r ( 6 0 ) . 4 9 , E<.01, S h a v e l s o n ,  1988)  Descriptive  S t a t i s t i c s of Variables f o r Experimentally Induced Victims  The means, s t a n d a r d d e v i a t i o n s , and i n t e r c o r r e l a t i o n s f o r t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l l y i n d u c e d v i c t i m s a r e p r e s e n t e d i n T a b l e 3. I n t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l l y i n d u c e d v i c t i m group, gender  (coded men=l, women=2),  l o c u s o f c o n t r o l , s i t u a t i o n a l a p p r a i s a l s o f c o n t r o l , and outcome v a l u e (independent v a r i a b l e s ) were n o t h i g h l y c o r r e l a t e d and most o f t h e c o e f f i c i e n t s were below .20. I n t e r n a l l o c u s o f c o n t r o l was n o t s t r o n g l y r e l a t e d t o any o f t h e v a r i a b l e s . However, i n t e r n a l l o c u s o f c o n t r o l was n e g a t i v e l y r e l a t e d t o chance l o c u s o f c o n t r o l , r ( 1 0 2 ) = -.20, p <.02. T h i s n e g a t i v e r e l a t i o n s h i p was e x p e c t e d . A l t h o u g h t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p s were n o t s i g n i f i c a n t , the direction of the relationship of internal locus of c o n t r o l w i t h problem- and e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d c o p i n g was as e x p e c t e d ; t h a t is,  i n t e r n a l l o c u s o f c o n t r o l was p o s i t i v e l y r e l a t e d t o p r o b l e m - f o c u s e d  c o p i n g and was n e g a t i v e l y r e l a t e d t o e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d c o p i n g . P o w e r f u l o t h e r s l o c u s o f c o n t r o l was p o s i t i v e l y c o r r e l a t e d w i t h chance l o c u s o f c o n t r o l , r ( 1 0 2 ) = .50, £ <.001.  C o n c e p t u a l l y , t h i s r e l a t i o n s h i p was  e x p e c t e d because b o t h measure d i f f e r e n t dimensions o f t h e same o r i e n t a t i o n . As w e l l , s i t u a t i o n a l a p p r a i s a l s o f c o n t r o l were n e g a t i v e l y r e l a t e d t o gender, r ( 1 0 2 ) = -.36, E <.001, t h e r e f o r e , women r e p o r t e d lower l e v e l s o f s i t u a t i o n a l a p p r a i s a l s o f c o n t r o l .  The dependent  v a r i a b l e s , problem- and e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d c o p i n g , were r e l a t e d , r(102)=.40, E <.001. I n g e n e r a l , t h e independent v a r i a b l e s were n o t s i g n i f i c a n t l y r e l a t e d t o problem-focused coping, w i t h t h e e x c e p t i o n o f a p o s i t i v e r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h outcome v a l u e , r ( 1 0 2 ) = .25, p <.01.  Hence  t h e g r e a t e r t h e outcome v a l u e , t h e more p r o b l e m - f o c u s e d c o p i n g was used. Gender was p o s i t i v e l y r e l a t e d t o e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d c o p i n g , r ( 1 0 2 ) = .30, E<.001; t h e r e f o r e , women r e p o r t e d h i g h e r l e v e l s o f e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d c o p i n g . Chance l o c u s o f c o n t r o l was p o s i t i v e l y r e l a t e d t o e m o t i o n f o c u s e d c o p i n g , r ( 1 0 2 ) = .31, p <.001; t h e g r e a t e r t h e chance l o c u s o f c o n t r o l t h e more e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d c o p i n g was used.  Means, S t a n d a r d D e v i a t i o n s , and I n t e r c o r r e l a t i o n s o f P r e d i c t o r and C r i t e r i o n V a r i a b l e s o f E x p e r i m e n t a l l y Induced V i c t i m s (N=102>  Women <n=4H Variable  M S D  Men(n=61) M S D  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  a 1.Gender 2.Internal  34.66 5.60  36.12 5.14 -.13  Others  15.76 7.42  18.71 7.31 -.19 -.02  4. Chance  17.10 8.60  17.79 7.73 -.04 -.20 .50  3. P o w e r f u l  5.Situational a p p r a i s a l 3.15 1.30 4.05 1.06 -.36 .08 .08 .01 of c o n t r o l 6.Outcome value 5.19 .94 4.87 .88 .17 .01 .05 .01 -.20 7. Problemfocused coping 59.05 9.50 58.97 8.42 .01 .09 -.02 -.01 -.06 .25 8. E m o t i o n focused coping 67.93 9.70 61.74 10.03 .30 -.09 -.02 .31 -.18 .17  Note. H i g h e r s c o r e s i n d i c a t e g r e a t e r l o c u s o f c o n t r o l , a p p r a i s a l s o f c o n t r o l , outcome v a l u e , and c o p i n g . a  situational  Gender was coded 1= men and 2= women r ( 1 0 0 ) . 1 6 , E<.05; r ( 1 0 0 ) . 2 3 , E<.01 ( B o n f e r r o n i a d j u s t e d r ( l O O ) . 3 4 , E<.05; B o n f e r r o n i a d j u s t e d r ( 1 0 0 ) . 3 9 , E<.01, S h a v e l s o n , 1988)  .40  Preliminary  Analysis  To examine t h e e x p e c t e d group d i f f e r e n c e s and t o d e t e r m i n e  whether  d a t a from t h e b u r g l a r y v i c t i m group and t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l l y i n d u c e d g r o u p s h o u l d be combined t o answer t h e hypotheses, p r e l i m i n a r y a n a l y s e s were conducted. Group differences on demographic data. I n o r d e r t o compare t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s from t h e two s t u d i e s ( e x p e r i m e n t a l l y i n d u c e d v i c t i m s , N=102; b u r g l a r y v i c t i m s , N=61) on demographic  data, Chi-square t e s t s o f  independence were conducted on c a t e g o r i c a l d a t a . F o r t h e purpose o f t h e a n a l y s i s t h e c a t e g o r i e s were kept t h e same as found i n T a b l e 1. The groups d i d n o t d i f f e r s i g n i f i c a n t l y on gender, C h i - s q u a r e (1,N = 163)=.91, E<.33; income, C h i - s q u a r e ( 4 , N = 163)=8.61, E<.07; t y p e o f p r e v i o u s v i c t i m i z a t i o n , C h i - s q u a r e ( 1 , N = 163)=2.35, E<'13; and m a r i t a l s t a t u s , C h i - s q u a r e ( 1 , N = 163)=3.67, E<-06 ( f o r m a r i t a l s t a t u s t h e c a t e g o r i e s were m a r r i e d and o t h e r ) . A l t h o u g h b u r g l a r y v i c t i m s ' mean h o u s e h o l d incomes were not s t a t i s t i c a l l y d i f f e r e n t from e x p e r i m e n t a l l y i n d u c e d v i c t i m s ' , i t i s worth n o t i n g t h a t 40% o f t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l l y i n d u c e d v i c t i m s v e r s u s 29.5% o f t h e b u r g l a r y v i c t i m s had a h o u s e h o l d income o f $40,000 and over p e r y e a r . S i m i l a r l y , 19.7% o f t h e b u r g l a r y v i c t i m s were m a r r i e d v e r s u s 6.9% o f t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l l y i n d u c e d v i c t i m group. ANOVA r e s u l t s i n d i c a t e d no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e between groups on age, F < 1. T h e r e f o r e , on demographic  data the burglary v i c t i m  group  d i d n o t d i f f e r s i g n i f i c a n t l y from t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l l y i n d u c e d v i c t i m group. Group differences on independent and dependent v a r i a b l e s .  A  2 ( b u r g l a r y v i c t i m s , e x p e r i m e n t a l l y i n d u c e d v i c t i m s ) by 2(gender) MANOVA w i t h seven dependent v a r i a b l e s (emotion- and p r o b l e m - f o c u s e d c o p i n g , i n t e r n a l , chance, and p o w e r f u l o t h e r s l o c u s o f c o n t r o l ,  situational  a p p r a i s a l s o f c o n t r o l , and outcome v a l u e ) was c o n d u c t e d t o d e t e r m i n e whether b u r g l a r y v i c t i m s and e x p e r i m e n t a l l y i n d u c e d v i c t i m s d i f f e r e d on t h e dependent v a r i a b l e s . The m u l t i v a r i a t e group e f f e c t f o r v i c t i m  status  M u l t i v a r i a t e and U n i v a r i a t e F-Tests f o r V i c t i m S t a t u s , Gender, and V i c t i m S t a t u s bv Gender I n t e r a c t i o n E f f e c t s  df  V i c t i m Status F E<  M u l t i v a r i a t e (7,153) 4.96 Univariate  (N=163^  Gender £ E<  V i c t i m S t a t u s by Gender £ E<  ,01  4.93  .01  <1  .60  <1  .44  (1,159)  Emotionfocused coping  <1  .59  7.39  .01  Problemfocused coping  19.68  .01  1.26  .26  Internal locus of c o n t r o l  1.75  ,19  1.89  .17  <1  .96  Powerful Others locus of c o n t r o l  8.47  .01  3.87  .05  <1  .87  Chance locus of c o n t r o l  1.39  .24  1.36  .25  <1  .52  .46  14.16  .01  <1  .41  .01  <1  .88  Situational appraisals of c o n t r o l Outcome value  <1  8.33  1.37  3.77  .24  .05  ( b u r g l a r y v i c t i m s and e x p e r i m e n t a l l y i n d u c e d v i c t i m s ) was s i g n i f i c a n t , F(7,153) = 4.96, E<-001 (see T a b l e 4 ) . B u r g l a r y v i c t i m s d i f f e r e d from e x p e r i m e n t a l l y i n d u c e d v i c t i m s on mean s c o r e s (see T a b l e s 2 and 3) f o r p r o b l e m - f o c u s e d  coping, powerful  o t h e r s l o c u s o f c o n t r o l , and outcome v a l u e , u n i v a r i a t e Fs(1,159) = 19.68, 8.47, and 8.33, a l l ES<.01, r e s p e c t i v e l y  (see T a b l e 4 ) .  An e x a m i n a t i o n o f means r e v e a l e d t h a t e x p e r i m e n t a l l y i n d u c e d v i c t i m s r e p o r t e d s i g n i f i c a n t l y more problem-focused  c o p i n g and h e l d g r e a t e r  outcome v a l u e t h a n b u r g l a r y v i c t i m s . However, b u r g l a r y v i c t i m s were s i g n i f i c a n t l y h i g h e r on p o w e r f u l o t h e r s l o c u s o f c o n t r o l t h a n e x p e r i m e n t a l l y i n d u c e d v i c t i m s (see T a b l e s 2 and 3 ) . The s t a n d a r d i z e d d i s c r i m i n a n t f u n c t i o n c o e f f i c i e n t s f o r t h e v i c t i m s t a t u s main e f f e c t (see T a b l e 5) suggested a s i m i l a r o r d e r i n g o f i m p o r t a n c e o f t h e dependent v a r i a b l e s : t h e most i m p o r t a n t v a r i a b l e s were  problem-focused  c o p i n g and p o w e r f u l o t h e r s l o c u s o f c o n t r o l . However, chance l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and outcome v a l u e were t h e next i m p o r t a n t v a r i a b l e s i n d i f f e r e n t i a t i n g between e x p e r i m e n t a l l y i n d u c e d v i c t i m s and b u r g l a r y victims  (see T a b l e s 4 and 5 ) . U n l i k e t h e u n i v a r i a t e F t e s t s , t h e  d i s c r i m i n a n t a n a l y s i s does t a k e i n t o c o n s i d e r a t i o n t h e i n t e r c o r r e l a t i o n s . Because problem-focused correlated  c o p i n g and outcome v a l u e a r e  ( r ( 1 6 3 ) = .45, 2<.001), t h e unique c o n t r i b u t i o n o f outcome  v a l u e i s more modest t h a n t h e u n i v a r i a t e t e s t s s u g g e s t  (see Appendix F ) .  The m u l t i v a r i a t e group e f f e c t f o r gender was s i g n i f i c a n t , F(7,153)=4.93, E<.001 (see T a b l e 4 ) . Men d i f f e r e d s i g n i f i c a n t l y women on mean s c o r e s f o r emotion-focused  from  c o p i n g and s i t u a t i o n a l  a p p r a i s a l s o f c o n t r o l , u n i v a r i a t e F s ( l , 1 5 9 ) = 7.39 and 14.16, a l l ES<.01, r e s p e c t i v e l y  (see T a b l e 4 ) . The d i f f e r e n c e between men and women  on p o w e r f u l o t h e r s l o c u s o f c o n t r o l was s i g n i f i c a n t , F ( l , 1 5 9 ) = 3.87, E<.05.  S t a n d a r d i z e d D i s c r i m i n a n t F u n c t i o n C o e f f i c i e n t s f o r V i c t i m S t a t u s and Gender (N=163)  Victim Status Standardized Coefficient B  Variable  Gender Standardized Coefficient B  Emotion-focused coping  -.28  .76  Problem-focused coping  .75  -.43  Internal locus of control  .13  -.16  -.70  -.33  .34  -.36  -.13  -.57  .33  -.15  Powerful Others locus of c o n t r o l Chance l o c u s o f c o n t r o l Situational appraisals Outcome V a l u e  of c o n t r o l  An e x a m i n a t i o n  o f t h e means r e v e a l e d t h a t women r e p o r t e d  more e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d c o p i n g t h a n men,  whereas men  were s i g n i f i c a n t l y  h i g h e r on s i t u a t i o n a l a p p r a i s a l s o f c o n t r o l and p o w e r f u l c o n t r o l (see T a b l e s 2 and 3 ) . The  significantly  others locus of  standardized discriminant function  c o e f f i c i e n t s f o r gender main e f f e c t (see T a b l e 5) s u g g e s t e d a s i m i l a r o r d e r i n g of i m p o r t a n c e of t h e dependent v a r i a b l e s : t h e most  important  v a r i a b l e s were emotion-focused c o p i n g and s i t u a t i o n a l a p p r a i s a l s o f c o n t r o l . F u r t h e r m o r e , problem-focused c o p i n g , chance l o c u s o f and p o w e r f u l o t h e r s l o c u s o f c o n t r o l were t h e n e x t most v a r i a b l e s i n d e f i n i n g t h e dimension (see T a b l e s  control,  important  4 and 5 ) . Because  p o w e r f u l o t h e r s l o c u s of c o n t r o l and chance l o c u s o f c o n t r o l a r e c o r r e l a t e d (r(163) = .60, 2<.001), t h e u n i q u e c o n t r i b u t i o n o f  powerful  o t h e r s l o c u s o f c o n t r o l i s more modest t h a n t h e u n i v a r i a t e t e s t s s u g g e s t (see Appendix F ) . F i n a l l y , t h e m u l t i v a r i a t e t e s t s of s i g n i f i c a n c e f o r t h e V i c t i m S t a t u s by Gender i n t e r a c t i o n was The  not s i g n i f i c a n t , F< 1 (see T a b l e 4 ) .  absence o f an i n t e r a c t i o n suggested a s i m i l a r p a t t e r n o f means on  t h e gender f a c t o r a t each l e v e l o f v i c t i m s t a t u s f o r e m o t i o n -  and  p r o b l e m - f o c u s e d c o p i n g , i n t e r n a l , p o w e r f u l o t h e r s , and chance l o c u s o f c o n t r o l , s i t u a t i o n a l a p p r a i s a l s o f c o n t r o l , and outcome v a l u e . The  conceptual  d i f f e r e n c e between t h e b u r g l a r y v i c t i m group and  e x p e r i m e n t a l l y induced v i c t i m group was  supported  by t h e s e d a t a .  u n i v a r i a t e F - t e s t s r e v e a l e d mean d i f f e r e n c e s on p r o b l e m - f o c u s e d powerful  o t h e r s l o c u s o f c o n t r o l , and outcome v a l u e .  f u n c t i o n a n a l y s i s f u r t h e r supported most i m p o r t a n t  the  The coping,  Discriminant  t h e s e f i n d i n g s and r e v e a l e d t h a t t h e  v a r i a b l e s i n d i s t i n g u i s h i n g b u r g l a r y v i c t i m s from  e x p e r i m e n t a l l y induced v i c t i m s were p r o b l e m - f o c u s e d c o p i n g and o t h e r s l o c u s of c o n t r o l . Therefore, t h e h y p o t h e s e s were a n a l y z e d  powerful  c o n c e p t u a l l y and based on t h e  data,  s e p a r a t e l y f o r Study 1 ( b u r g l a r y v i c t i m  group) and Study 2 ( e x p e r i m e n t a l l y induced v i c t i m  group).  T e s t o f Main E f f e c t s f o r Study 1 ( B u r g l a r y V i c t i m s > I t was e x p e c t e d t h a t gender would be a s s o c i a t e d w i t h c o p i n g f u n c t i o n s , w i t h women u s i n g more e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d c o p i n g t h a n men and men u s i n g more problem-focused c o p i n g t h a n women. I t was e x p e c t e d t h a t t h e r e would be a p o s i t i v e r e l a t i o n s h i p between i n t e r n a l l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and p r o b l e m - f o c u s e d c o p i n g and a p o s i t i v e r e l a t i o n s h i p between chance and p o w e r f u l o t h e r s l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d c o p i n g . I t was f u r t h e r e x p e c t e d t h a t t h e g r e a t e r t h e outcome v a l u e t h e more p r o b l e m f o c u s e d c o p i n g would be used. To t e s t t h e main and moderating e f f e c t s two h i e r a r c h i c a l  regression  a n a l y s e s were conducted. The c o n t i n u o u s p r e d i c t o r v a r i a b l e s were s t a n d a r d i z e d . The v a r i a b l e s were stepped i n t o t h e e q u a t i o n i n t h e f o l l o w i n g o r d e r : Gender (coded l=men and -l=women) was e n t e r e d f i r s t , f o l l o w e d by i n t e r n a l l o c u s o f c o n t r o l , chance l o c u s o f c o n t r o l , p o w e r f u l o t h e r s l o c u s o f c o n t r o l , outcome v a l u e , and s i t u a t i o n a l a p p r a i s a l s o f c o n t r o l . The main e f f e c t s were f o l l o w e d by t h e c o r r e s p o n d i n g i n t e r a c t i o n terms  ( I n t e r n a l l o c u s o f c o n t r o l by Gender, Chance l o c u s o f c o n t r o l by  Gender, P o w e r f u l O t h e r s l o c u s o f c o n t r o l by Gender, I n t e r n a l l o c u s o f c o n t r o l by Outcome V a l u e , Chance l o c u s o f c o n t r o l by Outcome V a l u e , and P o w e r f u l O t h e r s l o c u s o f c o n t r o l by Outcome V a l u e ) . The c r i t e r i o n v a r i a b l e s were problem- and e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d c o p i n g . Main e f f e c t s must be interpreted cautiously i n l i g h t of s i g n i f i c a n t interaction e f f e c t s . The o v e r a l l r e g r e s s i o n was s i g n i f i c a n t f o r p r o b l e m - f o c u s e d c o p i n g , F(12,48)=3.37, p <.01. A l l v a r i a b l e s accounted f o r 46% (32% a d j u s t e d ) o f t h e v a r i a n c e i n problem-focused c o p i n g . A f t e r t h e e f f e c t s o f gender, i n t e r n a l , chance, and p o w e r f u l o t h e r s l o c u s o f c o n t r o l were a c c o u n t e d 2 f o r , outcome v a l u e accounted f o r a s i g n i f i c a n t R change (.252) i n p r o b l e m - f o c u s e d c o p i n g (B=7.23) (see T a b l e 6 ) . The o v e r a l l r e g r e s s i o n was s i g n i f i c a n t f o r e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d c o p i n g , F(12,48)=4.59, p < .01. A l l v a r i a b l e s accounted f o r 53% (42% a d j u s t e d ) o f t h e v a r i a n c e i n emotion-focused c o p i n g (see T a b l e 7 ) . Gender  H i e r a r c h i c a l R e g r e s s i o n A n a l y s i s T e s t i n g Main and M o d e r a t i n g  Effects  P r e d i c t i n g Problem-Focused Coping f o r B u r g l a r y V i c t i m s (N=61)  2 Source  Change R  F  E<  S  Gender  .005  <1  .50  .93  Internal  .006  <1  .45  1.15  Chance  .003  <1  .60  1.07  P o w e r f u l Others  .001  <1  .77  -.61  Outcome v a l u e  .252  22. 32  .01  7.23  Situational Appraisals of Control  .021  1. 86  .18  1.96  I n t e r n a l X Gender  .001  .75  -.46  Chance x Gender  .027  2. 38  .13  3.14  P o w e r f u l Others x Gender  .036  3. 20  .08  -3.53  I n t e r n a l X Outcome v a l u e  .019  1. 65  .20  -2.63  Chance x Outcome v a l u e  .002  Powerful Others x Outcome v a l u e  .032  <1  .67  <1 2. 86  .10  -.92 -2.89  C u m u l a t i v e R a d j u s t e d .32 Residual  Mean Square = 88.64  d f = 12,48  Note. Gender i s coded l=men, -l=women. a The B v a l u e s a r e t h e u n s t a n d a r d i z e d c o e f f i c i e n t s from t h e f i n a l s i m u l t a n e o u s a n a l y s i s . The c o n s t a n t i n t h e e q u a t i o n i s 52.32. The d f a r e 1,60 f o r t h e stepped i n v a r i a b l e s . *2<.001.  H i e r a r c h i c a l R e g r e s s i o n A n a l y s i s T e s t i n g M a i n and M o d e r a t i n g P r e d i c t i n g Emotion-Focused Coping  f o r B u r g l a r y V i c t i m s (N=61)  2  Source  a  Change R  Gender  .035  Internal  .001  Chance  .044  Powerful  Effects  Others  F  E<  B  3.62  .06  -2.56  .77  -.43  .04  4.27  <1 4.58  .001  <1  .90  -.25  Outcome v a l u e  .161  16.61  ,01  6.15  Situational Appraisals of C o n t r o l  .023  .12  -2.28  I n t e r n a l x Gender  .001  ,86  -.26  Chance x Gender  .011  1.15  .29  2.15  P o w e r f u l Others x Gender  .094  9.64  .01  I n t e r n a l x Outcome v a l u e  .001  <1  .72  -.74  Chance x Outcome v a l u e  .001  <1  .80  -.52  .001  <1  .93  .14  Powerful Others x Outcome v a l u e o C u m u l a t i v e R a d j u s t e d .42 Residual  Mean Square = 86.86  2.46  <1  ***  **  -6.06  d f = 12,48  Note. Gender i s coded l=men, -l=women. a The B v a l u e s a r e t h e u n s t a n d a r d i z e d c o e f f i c i e n t s from t h e f i n a l simultaneous  a n a l y s i s . The c o n s t a n t i n t h e e q u a t i o n i s 64.30. The d f a r e  1,60 f o r t h e stepped i n v a r i a b l e s .  ***£<.001, **E<.01, *E<.05  approached s i g n i f i c a n c e f o r e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d c o p i n g , F(1,60)=3.62, .06. F u r t h e r m o r e , a f t e r t h e e f f e c t s o f gender, i n t e r n a l , chance,  p < and  p o w e r f u l o t h e r s l o c u s of c o n t r o l were accounted f o r , outcome v a l u e 2 a c c o u n t e d f o r a s i g n i f i c a n t R change (.161) i n e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d c o p i n g (1=6.15) (see T a b l e 7 ) . In  summary, as e x p e c t e d , a f t e r h a v i n g accounted f o r t h e v a r i a n c e o f  gender, i n t e r n a l , chance, p o w e r f u l o t h e r s l o c u s o f c o n t r o l , outcome 2 value accounted f o r a s i g n i f i c a n t R i n c r e a s e i n the v a r i a n c e i n problemf o c u s e d c o p i n g . However, outcome v a l u e a l s o a c c o u n t e d f o r a s i g n i f i c a n t 2 R  i n c r e a s e i n the variance i n emotion-focused coping.  Test of Mediator Hypotheses for Study 1 fBurqlarv Victims) In g e n e r a l , t h e hypotheses were t e s t e d by c o n d u c t i n g z e r o - o r d e r c o r r e l a t i o n s and d e s c r i p t i v e d i s c r i m i n a n t f u n c t i o n a n a l y s i s .  The  hypotheses f o r t h e two groups ( e x p e r i m e n t a l l y i n d u c e d v i c t i m s and b u r g l a r y v i c t i m s ) were t e s t e d s e p a r a t e l y . To e s t a b l i s h m e d i a t i o n , t h e c o n d i t i o n s recommended by Baron and Kenny (1986) were f o l l o w e d : " F i r s t , t h e independent v a r i a b l e must a f f e c t the  m e d i a t o r i n t h e f i r s t e q u a t i o n ; second, t h e independent v a r i a b l e  must be shown t o a f f e c t t h e dependent v a r i a b l e i n t h e second e q u a t i o n ; and t h i r d , t h e m e d i a t o r must a f f e c t t h e dependent  variable i n the t h i r d  equation. I f these conditions a l l hold i n the p r e d i c t e d d i r e c t i o n , then the  e f f e c t o f t h e independent v a r i a b l e on t h e dependent  v a r i a b l e must be  l e s s i n t h e t h i r d e q u a t i o n t h a n i n t h e second. P e r f e c t m e d i a t i o n h o l d s i f t h e independent v a r i a b l e has no e f f e c t when t h e m e d i a t o r i s controlled"  (p. 1177).  H y p o t h e s i s 1: I n t e r n a l l o c u s o f c o n t r o l m e d i a t e s t h e gender  and  p r o b l e m - f o c u s e d c o p i n g r e l a t i o n . The f i r s t c o n d i t i o n f o r m e d i a t i o n — t h a t the  independent v a r i a b l e (gender) must a f f e c t t h e m e d i a t o r  (internal  l o c u s o f c o n t r o l ) was not met, r(61)=-.09, p > .25. F a i l u r e t o s a t i s f y the  f i r s t c o n d i t i o n e l i m i n a t e s t h e n e c e s s i t y t o e s t a b l i s h t h e second  c o n d i t i o n . H y p o t h e s i s 1 was not s u p p o r t e d f o r t h e b u r g l a r y v i c t i m  group  (see T a b l e 2 f o r b u r g l a r y v i c t i m group c o r r e l a t i o n s ) . H y p o t h e s i s 2: S i t u a t i o n a l a p p r a i s a l s l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and problem-focused condition  f o r m e d i a t i o n was met,  s i t u a t i o n a l appraisals condition—that  of c o n t r o l mediate  c o p i n g r e l a t i o n . The  affects  o f c o n t r o l , r(61)=.32, p < .01. The  must a f f e c t t h e dependent v a r i a b l e  second  ( i n t e r n a l locus of  control)  (problem-focused c o p i n g ) d i d not  h o l d , r(61)=.06, p > .32. T h e r e f o r e , h y p o t h e s i s 2 was not H y p o t h e s i s 3: S i t u a t i o n a l a p p r a i s a l s  supported.  o f c o n t r o l mediate t h e gender  c o p i n g r e l a t i o n . The f i r s t c o n d i t i o n  t h a t gender a f f e c t s s i t u a t i o n a l a p p r a i s a l s  for mediation—  of c o n t r o l was  r ( 6 1 ) = . 2 2 , 2 < .04. However, t h e second c o n d i t i o n a f f e c t s problem-focused  first  i n t e r n a l l o c u s of c o n t r o l  t h e independent v a r i a b l e  and p r o b l e m - f o c u s e d  internal  met,  o f m e d i a t i o n , gender  c o p i n g , d i d not h o l d , r(61)=-.16, p >  .11.  T h e r e f o r e , h y p o t h e s i s 3 was not supported f o r t h e b u r g l a r y v i c t i m  group.  H y p o t h e s i s 4: Chance l o c u s of c o n t r o l mediates t h e gender and emotion-focused  c o p i n g r e l a t i o n . The f i r s t c o n d i t i o n  gender a f f e c t s chance l o c u s o f c o n t r o l was not met,  for mediation—that r(61)=-.15, p >  H y p o t h e s i s 4 was not supported f o r t h e b u r g l a r y v i c t i m  .12.  group.  H y p o t h e s i s 5: P o w e r f u l Others l o c u s o f c o n t r o l mediates t h e gender and e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d  c o p i n g r e l a t i o n . The f i r s t c o n d i t i o n  t h a t gender a f f e c t s p o w e r f u l o t h e r s l o c u s o f c o n t r o l was  for mediation— not  met,  r ( 6 1 ) = - . 1 2 , E > .17. T h e r e f o r e , f o r t h e v i c t i m group h y p o t h e s i s 5 was not  supported. H y p o t h e s i s 6: S i t u a t i o n a l a p p r a i s a l s  l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and emotion-focused condition appraisals  o f c o n t r o l mediate t h e chance  c o p i n g r e l a t i o n . The  first  f o r m e d i a t i o n , chance l o c u s of c o n t r o l a f f e c t s s i t u a t i o n a l o f c o n t r o l , was not met,  r(61)=-.17, p > - l O ' T h e r e f o r e ,  h y p o t h e s i s 6 was not s u p p o r t e d . H y p o t h e s i s 7: S i t u a t i o n a l a p p r a i s a l s  o f c o n t r o l mediate  o t h e r s l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and emotion-focused condition  powerful  c o p i n g r e l a t i o n . The  f o r mediation, powerful others locus of c o n t r o l  affects  first  situational appraisals  o f c o n t r o l was not met, r ( 6 1 ) = - . 1 7 , p > .10.  T h e r e f o r e , h y p o t h e s i s 7 was not supported f o r t h e b u r g l a r y v i c t i m g r o u p . T e s t o f Moderator Hypotheses f o r Study 1 ( B u r g l a r y  Victims)  M o d e r a t i n g e f f e c t s were t e s t e d w i t h m u l t i p l i c a t i v e terms products) entered i n t o a m u l t i p l e  regression  analysis  (cross  hierarchically  f o l l o w i n g t h e c o r r e s p o n d i n g f i r s t o r d e r terms (Cohen & Cohen, 1983). The o r d e r o f e n t r y o f v a r i a b l e s was: gender, i n t e r n a l l o c u s o f c o n t r o l , chance l o c u s o f c o n t r o l , p o w e r f u l o t h e r s l o c u s o f c o n t r o l , outcome value, s i t u a t i o n a l appraisals  o f c o n t r o l . I n t e r n a l Locus o f C o n t r o l  Gender, Chance Locus o f C o n t r o l Control  by Gender, P o w e r f u l O t h e r s L o c u s o f  by Gender, I n t e r n a l Locus o f C o n t r o l  Locus o f C o n t r o l  by  by Outcome V a l u e , Chance  by Outcome V a l u e , and P o w e r f u l O t h e r s Locus o f  Control  by Outcome V a l u e . To f a c i l i t a t e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f i n t e r a c t i o n t e r m s , t h e c o n t i n u o u s v a r i a b l e s were s t a n d a r d i z e d p r i o r t o a n a l y s i s , and unstandardized regression  c o e f f i c i e n t s were  calculated.  H y p o t h e s i s 1: The r e l a t i o n s h i p between l o c u s o f c o n t r o l  (all 3  d i m e n s i o n s ) and e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d c o p i n g i s s t r o n g e r among i n d i v i d u a l s h o l d i n g h i g h outcome v a l u e , t h a n t h o s e w i t h low outcome v a l u e . R e s u l t s indicated  that  f o r t h e b u r g l a r y v i c t i m group t h e i n t e r a c t i o n e f f e c t s f o r  I n t e r n a l Locus o f C o n t r o l  by Outcome V a l u e , Chance Locus o f C o n t r o l  Outcome V a l u e , and P o w e r f u l O t h e r s Locus o f C o n t r o l  by  by Outcome V a l u e  were n o t s i g n i f i c a n t , Fs <1 (see T a b l e 7 ) . T h e r e f o r e , outcome v a l u e d i d not moderate t h e l o c u s o f c o n t r o l  ( a l l 3 d i m e n s i o n s ) and e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d  c o p i n g r e l a t i o n s and as a r e s u l t , h y p o t h e s i s 1, f o r t h e b u r g l a r y v i c t i m group, was not s u p p o r t e d . H y p o t h e s i s 2: The r e l a t i o n s h i p between l o c u s o f c o n t r o l  (all 3  d i m e n s i o n s ) and p r o b l e m - f o c u s e d c o p i n g i s s t r o n g e r among i n d i v i d u a l s h o l d i n g h i g h outcome v a l u e , t h a n t h o s e w i t h low outcome v a l u e . R e s u l t s indicated  t h a t t h e i n t e r a c t i o n e f f e c t s f o r I n t e r n a l Locus o f C o n t r o l  Outcome V a l u e , Chance Locus o f C o n t r o l O t h e r s Locus o f C o n t r o l  by  by Outcome V a l u e , and P o w e r f u l  by Outcome V a l u e were n o t s i g n i f i c a n t , Fs <1.65,  <1,  2.86, r e s p e c t i v e l y  (see Table 6 ) . T h e r e f o r e , outcome v a l u e d i d n o t  moderate t h e l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and problem-focused  r e l a t i o n s ; hypothesis  2 was n o t s u p p o r t e d . H y p o t h e s i s 3: The r e l a t i o n between i n t e r n a l l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and problem-focused  c o p i n g i s s t r o n g e r among men t h a n women. The i n t e r a c t i o n  term. Gender (code l=men and -l=women) by I n t e r n a l Locus o f C o n t r o l , was not s i g n i f i c a n t , F < 1. T h e r e f o r e , t h e r e was an absence o f a m o d e r a t o r e f f e c t and h y p o t h e s i s 3 was n o t supported  (see T a b l e 6 ) .  H y p o t h e s i s 4: The r e l a t i o n between chance l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and emotion-focused  c o p i n g i s s t r o n g e r among women t h a n men. R e s u l t s  i n d i c a t e d t h a t f o r t h e b u r g l a r y v i c t i m group t h e i n t e r a c t i o n  term.  Gender by Chance Locus o f C o n t r o l , was n o t s i g n i f i c a n t , F(1,60)=1.15, E>.29 (see T a b l e 7 ) . T h e r e f o r e , t h e r e was an absence o f a m o d e r a t o r e f f e c t and h y p o t h e s i s 4 was n o t s u p p o r t e d . Questions of Theoretical Interest f o r Study 1 (Burglary Victims) 1. Does gender moderate t h e p o w e r f u l o t h e r s l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and problem-focused  c o p i n g r e l a t i o n ? To t e s t t h i s q u e s t i o n o f t h e o r e t i c a l  i n t e r e s t , t h e P o w e r f u l Others Locus o f C o n t r o l by Gender i n t e r a c t i o n was entered into the regression analysis h i e r a r c h i c a l l y following t h e c o r r e s p o n d i n g f i r s t o r d e r terms. R e s u l t s (see T a b l e 6) i n d i c a t e d  that  t h e P o w e r f u l O t h e r s Locus o f C o n t r o l by Gender i n t e r a c t i o n was n o t s i g n i f i c a n t , F (1,60) = 3.20, p < .08. T h e r e f o r e , gender d i d n o t moderate t h e p o w e r f u l o t h e r s l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and p r o b l e m - f o c u s e d  coping  relation. 2. Does gender moderate t h e p o w e r f u l o t h e r s l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and emotion-focused  c o p i n g r e l a t i o n ? The Gender by P o w e r f u l O t h e r s Locus o f  C o n t r o l i n t e r a c t i o n was s i g n i f i c a n t , F (1,60) = 9.64, g < .01 (see T a b l e 7 ) . To examine t h e form o f t h e s i g n i f i c a n t i n t e r a c t i o n , t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p between gender and emotion-focused  c o p i n g were graphed f o r r e l a t i v e l y  low (minimum s t a n d a r d i z e d s c o r e ) and h i g h (maximum s t a n d a r d i z e d s c o r e ) l e v e l s o f powerful others locus of c o n t r o l . Unstandardized r e g r e s s i o n  c o e f f i c i e n t s (B v a l u e s ) were determined  from t h e r e s i d u a l s o f t h e  dependent v a r i a b l e when t h e reduced model had been a p p l i e d . The s i g n i f i c a n t i n t e r a c t i o n was graphed a c c o r d i n g t o t h e method suggested by Cohen and Cohen (1983). When graphed, i n s p e c t i o n o f t h e i n t e r a c t i o n r e v e a l e d t h a t p o w e r f u l o t h e r s l o c u s o f c o n t r o l b e l i e f s h e l d by women were p o s i t i v e l y r e l a t e d t o emotion-focused  coping; i n c o n t r a s t ,  p o w e r f u l o t h e r s l o c u s o f c o n t r o l b e l i e f s h e l d by men were n e g a t i v e l y r e l a t e d t o emotion-focused  c o p i n g (see F i g u r e 5 ) . T h e r e f o r e , f o r t h e  b u r g l a r y v i c t i m group, gender moderated t h e p o w e r f u l o t h e r s l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and emotion-focused  coping r e l a t i o n .  x=Women o=Men  Minimum  Maximum  P o w e r f u l O t h e r s Locus o f C o n t r o l  F i g u r e 5» M o d e r a t i n g e f f e c t o f gender on t h e p o w e r f u l o t h e r s  locus  o f c o n t r o l and e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d c o p i n g r e l a t i o n f o r b u r g l a r y v i c t i m s (N=61). The minimum and maximum s t a n d a r d i z e d s c o r e s f o r p o w e r f u l l o c u s o f c o n t r o l were -1.93 equations  and 1.78,  r e s p e c t i v e l y . The  f o r p o w e r f u l o t h e r s l o c u s of c o n t r o l f o r men:  -2.12; p o w e r f u l  others  regression y=-2.05(x) +  o t h e r s l o c u s of c o n t r o l f o r women: y=3.27(x) +  2.86.  T e s t o f Main E f f e c t s f o r Study 2 ( E x p e r i m e n t a l l y Induced V i c t i m s ) To t e s t main and moderating e f f e c t s f o r Study 2 ( e x p e r i m e n t a l l y i n d u c e d v i c t i m s ) two h i e r a r c h i c a l r e g r e s s i o n a n a l y s e s were c o n d u c t e d . The o v e r a l l r e g r e s s i o n was not s i g n i f i c a n t f o r p r o b l e m - f o c u s e d c o p i n g , F(12,89)=1.09, p >.38.  A l l v a r i a b l e s accounted f o r o n l y 1% o f  t h e v a r i a n c e found i n problem-focused c o p i n g . T h e r e f o r e , gender, l o c u s o f c o n t r o l , outcome v a l u e , and s i t u a t i o n a l a p p r a i s a l s o f c o n t r o l were not p r e d i c t o r s of problem-focused c o p i n g f o r t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l l y i n d u c e d victim  group.  The o v e r a l l r e g r e s s i o n was s i g n i f i c a n t f o r e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d c o p i n g , F(12,89)=2.89, p < .01. A l l v a r i a b l e s accounted f o r 28% (18% a d j u s t e d ) o f t h e v a r i a n c e i n emotion-focused c o p i n g (see T a b l e 1 0 ) . Gender was  a  s i g n i f i c a n t p r e d i c t o r f o r e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d c o p i n g , F(1,101)=5.78, p < .02. Women used more emotion-focused c o p i n g t h a n men.  After the e f f e c t s  f o r gender and i n t e r n a l l o c u s o f c o n t r o l were accounted f o r , chance 2 l o c u s o f c o n t r o l accounted f o r a s i g n i f i c a n t R change (.010) i n e m o t i o n f o c u s e d c o p i n g (B=3.91) (see T a b l e 8 ) . I n summary, gender accounted f o r a s i g n i f i c a n t amount o f v a r i a n c e i n e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d c o p i n g . Furthermore, a f t e r h a v i n g a c c o u n t e d f o r t h e v a r i a n c e by gender and i n t e r n a l l o c u s o f c o n t r o l , chance l o c u s o f 2 c o n t r o l accounted f o r a s i g n i f i c a n t R i n c r e a s e i n emotion-focused coping.  H i e r a r c h i c a l R e g r e s s i o n A n a l y s i s T e s t i n g Main and M o d e r a t i n g  Effects  P r e d i c t i n g Emotion-Focused Coping f o r E x p e r i m e n t a l l y Induced V i c t i m s (N=102)  2  Source  Change R  E<  S  a  *  Gender  .046  Internal  .001  Chance Powerful  F  Others  5.78  .02  -2.53  <1  .99  .01  .010  12.31  .01  3.91  .007  <1  .36  -1.10  .30  1.03  Outcome y a l u e  .009  Situational Appraisal of C o n t r o l  .006  <1  .40  -.87  I n t e r n a l x Gender  .007  <1  .34  1.05  Chance x Gender  .032  3.94  .05  2.23  P o w e r f u l O t h e r s x Gender  .028  3.50  .07  -2.16  I n t e r n a l x Outcome v a l u e  .002  <1  .64  .62  Chance x Outcome v a l u e  .002  <1  .61  .67  .17  -1.80  P o w e r f u l Others X Outcome v a l u e o Cumulative R adjusted . 1 8 Residual  1.09  .016  1.94  Mean Square = 8 6 . 8 6  df = 1 2 , 8 9  Note. Gender i s coded l=men, -l=women. a The B v a l u e s a r e t h e u n s t a n d a r d i z e d c o e f f i c i e n t s from t h e f i n a l s i m u l t a n e o u s a n a l y s i s . The c o n s t a n t i n t h e e q u a t i o n i s 6 4 . 9 8 . The d f a r e 1,101  f o r the  stepped  in variables.  *E<.05,  **p<.01  Test of Mediator Hypotheses for Study 2 (Experimentally Induced Victims) H y p o t h e s i s 1: I n t e r n a l l o c u s o f c o n t r o l m e d i a t e s t h e gender and problem-focused  c o p i n g r e l a t i o n . The f i r s t c o n d i t i o n f o r m e d i a t i o n — t h a t  t h e independent v a r i a b l e (gender) must a f f e c t t h e m e d i a t o r l o c u s o f c o n t r o l ) was not met,  (internal  r(102)=-.13, p > .10. T h i s i n f o r m a t i o n  can be found i n T a b l e 3. F a i l u r e t o s a t i s f y t h e f i r s t  condition  e l i m i n a t e s t h e n e c e s s i t y t o e s t a b l i s h t h e second c o n d i t i o n .  Thus,  h y p o t h e s i s 1 was not supported f o r t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l l y i n d u c e d v i c t i m group. H y p o t h e s i s 2: S i t u a t i o n a l a p p r a i s a l s o f c o n t r o l mediate l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and problem-focused  internal  coping r e l a t i o n . For the  e x p e r i m e n t a l l y i n d u c e d v i c t i m group t h e f i r s t c o n d i t i o n f o r m e d i a t i o n , i n t e r n a l locus of c o n t r o l a f f e c t s s i t u a t i o n a l a p p r a i s a l s of c o n t r o l , not met, for  r(102)=.08,  p > .21. T h e r e f o r e , h y p o t h e s i s 2 was  t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l l y induced v i c t i m H y p o t h e s i s 3:  and p r o b l e m - f o c u s e d  not  was  supported  group.  S i t u a t i o n a l a p p r a i s a l s of c o n t r o l mediate t h e gender c o p i n g r e l a t i o n . For t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l l y i n d u c e d  v i c t i m group t h e f i r s t c o n d i t i o n f o r m e d i a t i o n — t h a t gender a f f e c t s s i t u a t i o n a l a p p r a i s a l s o f c o n t r o l was met,  r (102)= -.36, p <  However, t h e second c o n d i t i o n o f m e d i a t i o n , gender a f f e c t s  .01.  problem-  f o c u s e d c o p i n g , d i d not h o l d , r=(102)=.01, p > .50. T h e r e f o r e , h y p o t h e s i s 3 was not s u p p o r t e d f o r t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l l y i n d u c e d v i c t i m group. H y p o t h e s i s 4: Chance l o c u s o f c o n t r o l mediates t h e gender and emotion-focused  c o p i n g r e l a t i o n . The f i r s t c o n d i t i o n f o r m e d i a t i o n — t h a t  gender a f f e c t s chance l o c u s of c o n t r o l was not s u p p o r t e d , r (102)=  -.04,  E > .34. T h e r e f o r e , h y p o t h e s i s 4 was not s u p p o r t e d f o r t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l l y induced v i c t i m H y p o t h e s i s 5: and e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d  group.  P o w e r f u l Others l o c u s of c o n t r o l mediates t h e gender coping r e l a t i o n . For the e x p e r i m e n t a l l y induced  v i c t i m group t h e f i r s t and second c o n d i t i o n f o r m e d i a t i o n were m e t —  gender a f f e c t s p o w e r f u l o t h e r s l o c u s of c o n t r o l , r ( 1 0 2 ) = -.19, p < and gender a f f e c t s emotion-focused  c o p i n g , r ( 1 0 2 ) = .29, p <  .03,  .001.  Moreover, Baron and Kenny (1986) argue t h a t a v a r i a b l e f u n c t i o n s as a m e d i a t o r t o t h e e x t e n t t h a t i t accounts f o r t h e r e l a t i o n between t h e p r e d i c t o r (gender) and c r i t e r i o n v a r i a b l e ( e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d c o p i n g ) . However, s t a n d a r d i z e d d i s c r i m i n a n t f u n c t i o n c o e f f i c i e n t s r e v e a l e d t h a t emotion-focused  c o p i n g (B=.54) c o n t r i b u t e s more t o gender d i f f e r e n c e s  t h a n does p o w e r f u l o t h e r s l o c u s of c o n t r o l (B=-.34) (see T a b l e 9 ) . Hence, p o w e r f u l o t h e r s l o c u s of c o n t r o l does not account f o r t h e r e l a t i o n between gender and emotion-focused  coping, therefore hypothesis  5 was n o t s u p p o r t e d . H y p o t h e s i s 6; S i t u a t i o n a l a p p r a i s a l s o f c o n t r o l mediate t h e chance l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and emotion-focused  c o p i n g r e l a t i o n . The  c o n d i t i o n f o r m e d i a t i o n , t h a t chance l o c u s o f c o n t r o l s i t u a t i o n a l a p p r a i s a l s o f c o n t r o l , was not met,  first  affects  r(102)=  .01, p >  .49.  T h e r e f o r e , h y p o t h e s i s 6 was not s u p p o r t e d f o r t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l l y i n d u c e d victim  group.  H y p o t h e s i s 7:  S i t u a t i o n a l a p p r a i s a l s o f c o n t r o l mediate  p o w e r f u l o t h e r s l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d  the  coping r e l a t i o n .  The f i r s t c o n d i t i o n f o r m e d i a t i o n , t h a t p o w e r f u l o t h e r s l o c u s o f c o n t r o l a f f e c t s s i t u a t i o n a l a p p r a i s a l s o f c o n t r o l , was not met, .22.  r(102)=  .08, p >  T h e r e f o r e , h y p o t h e s i s 7 was not s u p p o r t e d f o r t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l l y  induced v i c t i m  group.  Standardized  D i a c r i m i n a n t F u n c t i o n C o e f f i c i e n t s f o r Gender E f f e c t o f  E x p e r i m e n t a l l y Induced V i c t i m s (N=102).  Standardized Variable  Coefficients B  Emotion-focused coping  .54  I n t e r n a l locus of c o n t r o l  -.25  Powerful Others locus of c o n t r o l  -.34  Chance l o c u s o f c o n t r o l  -.15  Situational appraisals Outcome v a l u e  of control  -.62 . 19  Test of Moderator Hypotheses f o r Study 2 fExperimentally Induced Victims) The same p r o c e d u r e s f o r t e s t i n g moderator e f f e c t s i n Study 1 ( b u r g l a r y v i c t i m s ) were used f o r t e s t i n g m o d e r a t i n g e f f e c t s i n Study 2 ( e x p e r i m e n t a l l y induced v i c t i m s ) . H y p o t h e s i s 1: The r e l a t i o n s h i p between l o c u s o f c o n t r o l ( a l l 3 d i m e n s i o n s ) and e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d c o p i n g i s s t r o n g e r among i n d i v i d u a l s h o l d i n g h i g h outcome v a l u e , t h a n t h o s e h o l d i n g low outcome v a l u e . R e s u l t s o f t h e m u l t i p l e r e g r e s s i o n a n a l y s i s i n d i c a t e d t h a t t h e Locus o f C o n t r o l ( I n t e r n a l , Chance, and P o w e r f u l O t h e r s ) by Outcome V a l u e i n t e r a c t i o n s were n o t s i g n i f i c a n t i n p r e d i c t i n g e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d c o p i n g , F s ( l , 1 0 1 ) = <1, <1, 1.94, E>.17, r e s p e c t i v e l y (see T a b l e 8 ) . T h e r e f o r e , f o r t h e l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d c o p i n g r e l a t i o n s , outcome v a l u e was n o t a moderator. H y p o t h e s i s 2: The r e l a t i o n s h i p between l o c u s o f c o n t r o l  (all 3  d i m e n s i o n s ) and problem-focused c o p i n g i s s t r o n g e r among i n d i v i d u a l s h o l d i n g h i g h outcome v a l u e , t h a n t h o s e h o l d i n g low outcome v a l u e . R e s u l t s i n d i c a t e d that t h e o v e r a l l l i n e a r r e g r e s s i o n f o r problem-focused c o p i n g was n o t s i g n i f i c a n t . T h e r e f o r e , t h e r e was an absence o f a moderator e f f e c t and h y p o t h e s i s 2 was n o t s u p p o r t e d . H y p o t h e s i s 3: The r e l a t i o n between i n t e r n a l l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and p r o b l e m - f o c u s e d c o p i n g i s s t r o n g e r among men t h a n women. R e s u l t s i n d i c a t e d t h a t t h e o v e r a l l r e g r e s s i o n was n o t s i g n i f i c a n t . T h e r e f o r e , t h e r e was an absence o f a moderator e f f e c t and h y p o t h e s i s 3 was n o t supported. H y p o t h e s i s 4: The r e l a t i o n between chance l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d c o p i n g i s s t r o n g e r among women t h a n men. R e s u l t s i n d i c a t e d t h a t t h e i n t e r a c t i o n term. Gender by Chance Locus o f C o n t r o l , was s i g n i f i c a n t , F(1,101)=3.94, p < .05 (see T a b l e 8 ) . When graphed ( t h e same p r o c e d u r e s f o r g r a p h i n g i n Study 1 were a p p l i e d i n Study 2 ) , i n s p e c t i o n o f t h e i n t e r a c t i o n r e v e a l e d t h a t chance l o c u s o f c o n t r o l  b e l i e f s h e l d by both men and women were p o s i t i v e l y r e l a t e d t o e m o t i o n f o c u s e d c o p i n g . However, t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p was s t r o n g e r f o r men t h a n f o r women (see F i g u r e 6 ) . A l t h o u g h h y p o t h e s i s 4 was n o t s u p p o r t e d , d i d moderate t h e chance l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d  gender  coping  relation. Questions of Theoretical Interest f o r Study 2 (Experimentally Induced Victims) 1. Does gender moderate t h e p o w e r f u l o t h e r s l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and problem-focused  coping r e l a t i o n ?  To answer t h i s q u e s t i o n o f t h e o r e t i c a l  i n t e r e s t , t h e Gender by P o w e r f u l Others Locus o f C o n t r o l i n t e r a c t i o n was entered i n t o t h e regression a n a l y s i s h i e r a r c h i c a l l y f o l l o w i n g t h e c o r r e s p o n d i n g f i r s t o r d e r terms. R e s u l t s i n d i c a t e d t h a t f o r t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l l y induced v i c t i m group t h e P o w e r f u l O t h e r s L o c u s o f C o n t r o l by Gender i n t e r a c t i o n was not s i g n i f i c a n t , F <1. T h e r e f o r e , gender d i d not moderate t h e p o w e r f u l o t h e r s l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and p r o b l e m - f o c u s e d coping  relation.  2. Does gender moderate t h e p o w e r f u l o t h e r s l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and emotion-focused  coping r e l a t i o n ? Results indicated t h a t f o r t h e  e x p e r i m e n t a l l y i n d u c e d v i c t i m group, t h e P o w e r f u l O t h e r s Locus o f C o n t r o l by Gender i n t e r a c t i o n was s i g n i f i c a n t , F ( l , 1 0 1 ) = 3.50, p <.07 (see T a b l e 8 ) . When graphed, i n s p e c t i o n o f t h e i n t e r a c t i o n r e v e a l e d t h a t p o w e r f u l o t h e r s l o c u s o f c o n t r o l b e l i e f s h e l d by women were n o t r e l a t e d t o emotion-focused  coping; i n c o n t r a s t , powerful others locus o f c o n t r o l  b e l i e f s h e l d by men were n e g a t i v e l y r e l a t e d t o e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d  coping.  T h e r e f o r e , gender moderated t h e p o w e r f u l o t h e r s l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and emotion-focused (see F i g u r e 7 ) .  r e l a t i o n f o r t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l l y i n d u c e d v i c t i m group  F i g u r e 6. M o d e r a t i n g e f f e c t o f gender on t h e chance l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and emotion-focused coping r e l a t i o n f o r e x p e r i m e n t a l l y induced  victims  (N=102). The minimum and maximum s t a n d a r d i z e d s c o r e s f o r chance l o c u s o f c o n t r o l were -2.17 and 2.54, r e s p e c t i v e l y . The r e g r e s s i o n e q u a t i o n s f o r chance l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and men: Y=4.19(x) + -1.84; chance l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and women: Y=1.82(x) + 2.61.  x=Women o=Men  ^  I  !  Minimum  Maximum  P o w e r f u l O t h e r s Locus o f C o n t r o l  F i g u r e 7. M o d e r a t i n g  e f f e c t o f gender on t h e p o w e r f u l o t h e r s l o c u s o f  c o n t r o l and emotion-focused victims  coping r e l a t i o n f o r e x p e r i m e n t a l l y induced  (N=102). The minimum and maximum s t a n d a r d i z e d s c o r e s f o r  p o w e r f u l o t h e r s l o c u s o f c o n t r o l were -1.67 and 1.94, r e s p e c t i v e l y . The r e g r e s s i o n e q u a t i o n s f o r p o w e r f u l o t h e r s l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and men: Y=-2.47(x) + -1.48; p o w e r f u l o t h e r s l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and women:Y=.26(x) + 2.80.  DISCUSSION The purpose o f t h i s study was t o d e t e r m i n e t h e e x t e n t t o w h i c h c o n t r o l b e l i e f s account f o r i n d i v i d u a l d i f f e r e n c e s i n b u r g l a r y v i c t i m s ' s h o r t - t e r m use o f c o p i n g s t r a t e g i e s . Two s t u d i e s were conducted. I n Study 1, t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s were c o l l e g e s t u d e n t s who had been b u r g l a r i z e d w i t h i n t h e p r e v i o u s y e a r . I n Study 2, t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s , who had never been b u r g l a r i z e d , viewed a v i d e o o f a b u r g l a r y i n p r o g r e s s and a n t i c i p a t e d how t h e y would cope w i t h b u r g l a r y v i c t i m i z a t i o n . Because p r e v i o u s r e s e a r c h has found gender d i f f e r e n c e s i n r e a c t i o n t o c r i m i n a l v i c t i m i z a t i o n , i t was h y p o t h e s i z e d t h a t l o c u s o f c o n t r o l would account f o r (mediate) t h e gender and c o p i n g f u n c t i o n r e l a t i o n . I t was a l s o e x p e c t e d t h a t gender and outcome v a l u e would a f f e c t t h e d i r e c t i o n o r s t r e n g t h (moderate) o f t h e l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and c o p i n g f u n c t i o n r e l a t i o n . I n b o t h t h e v i c t i m group and e x p e r i m e n t a l l y i n d u c e d v i c t i m group, emotion-focused c o p i n g was s i g n i f i c a n t l y p r e d i c t e d by gender, l o c u s o f c o n t r o l , outcome v a l u e , and s i t u a t i o n a l a p p r a i s a l s o f c o n t r o l . However, problem-focused c o p i n g was s i g n i f i c a n t l y p r e d i c t e d by gender, l o c u s o f c o n t r o l , outcome v a l u e , and s i t u a t i o n a l a p p r a i s a l s o f c o n t r o l f o r t h e v i c t i m group o n l y . A l t h o u g h t h e m e d i a t i n g hypotheses were n o t s u p p o r t e d , s e v e r a l m o d e r a t i n g e f f e c t s were found. I n b o t h g r o u p s , p o w e r f u l o t h e r s l o c u s o f c o n t r o l b e l i e f s h e l d by men were n e g a t i v e l y r e l a t e d t o emotion-focused coping; i n c o n t r a s t , i n t h e b u r g l a r y v i c t i m group, p o w e r f u l o t h e r s l o c u s o f c o n t r o l b e l i e f s h e l d by women were p o s i t i v e l y r e l a t e d t o e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d c o p i n g and p o w e r f u l o t h e r s l o c u s o f c o n t r o l b e l i e f s h e l d by women i n t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l l y i n d u c e d v i c t i m group were n o t r e l a t e d t o e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d c o p i n g . F o r e x p e r i m e n t a l l y i n d u c e d v i c t i m s , chance l o c u s o f c o n t r o l b e l i e f s h e l d by women and men were p o s i t i v e l y r e l a t e d t o e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d c o p i n g ; y e t , t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p was s t r o n g e r f o r men t h a n f o r women. U n e x p e c t e d l y , i n b o t h g r o u p s , outcome v a l u e d i d n o t moderate t h e l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and coping r e l a t i o n .  P r e l i m i n a r y a n a l y s i s r e v e a l e d t h a t t h o s e who r e c a l l e d t h e b u r g l a r y v i c t i m i z a t i o n experience  ( b u r g l a r y v i c t i m group) d i f f e r e d from t h o s e  who  imagined b u r g l a r y v i c t i m i z a t i o n ( e x p e r i m e n t a l l y induced v i c t i m group) . E x p e r i m e n t a l l y induced v i c t i m s r e p o r t e d s i g n i f i c a n t l y more p r o b l e m f o c u s e d c o p i n g and c o n s i d e r e d t h e outcome o f t h e b u r g l a r y more i m p o r t a n t  experience  t h a n d i d t h e b u r g l a r y v i c t i m s . However, b u r g l a r y v i c t i m s  were s i g n i f i c a n t l y h i g h e r on p o w e r f u l o t h e r s l o c u s o f c o n t r o l t h a n e x p e r i m e n t a l l y induced v i c t i m s . As e x p e c t e d ,  burglary victims held a stronger powerful others  o f c o n t r o l o r i e n t a t i o n t h a n e x p e r i m e n t a l l y induced v i c t i m s . The  locus  powerful  o t h e r s l o c u s o f c o n t r o l o r i e n t a t i o n may have r e s u l t e d as a consequence of the b u r g l a r y v i c t i m s coping behaviour  i n response t o b u r g l a r y  v i c t i m i z a t i o n ( C o l l i n s e t a l . , 1990). B u r g l a r y v i c t i m s ' e x p e r i e n c e  with  t h e p o l i c e , i n s u r a n c e , and p o s s i b l y t h e c o u r t s ( i . e . , i f t h e o f f e n d e r was a r r e s t e d and d i s p u t e d t h e a l l e g a t i o n i n c o u r t ) may have d e m o n s t r a t e d t o them t h a t c o n t r o l i s n e i t h e r s e l f - d e t e r m i n e d nor i n t h e hands o f f a t e , b u t r a t h e r p o w e r f u l o t h e r s have a s t r o n g i n f l u e n c e . F u r t h e r m o r e , i t has been suggested t h a t v i c t i m i z a t i o n may g i v e r i s e t o a n e g a t i v e s e l f - t r u s t schema t h a t makes a v i c t i m v u l n e r a b l e t o p o w e r f u l (Janoff-Bulman  others  & F r i e z e , 1983; McCaan e t a l . , 1988).  A n o t h e r e x p e c t e d d i f f e r e n c e t h a t was supported  by t h e d a t a was t h a t  t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l l y induced v i c t i m s used more p r o b l e m - f o c u s e d c o p i n g  than  b u r g l a r y v i c t i m s . An e x p l a n a t i o n i s t h a t f o l l o w i n g v i c t i m i z a t i o n many b u r g l a r y v i c t i m s b e l i e v e t h a t c o n t r o l o v e r t h e i r l i f e has been suspended ( F i s c h e r , 1984; Papp, 1981; T y l e r , 1981). That i s , e f f o r t s t o use p r o b l e m - f o c u s e d c o p i n g f o l l o w i n g t h e b u r g l a r y may have been a l t e r e d o r s t o p p e d by p o w e r f u l o t h e r s  ( i . e . , p o l i c e , i n s u r a n c e ) . However, t h o s e  who  i m a g i n e d f a l l i n g v i c t i m t o b u r g l a r y d i d not have t h e i r b e l i e f systems a l t e r e d by u n f o r e s e e n r e a l i t i e s t h a t f o l l o w v i c t i m i z a t i o n . t h e y may have m a i n t a i n e d  Therefore,  t h a t t h e s i t u a t i o n was c o n t r o l l a b l e and  t h e r e f o r e used more p r o b l e m - f o c u s e d c o p i n g s t r a t e g i e s t h a n t h e b u r g l a r y  v i c t i m group  ( C a r v e r e t a l . , 1989; Folkman & L a z a r u s , 1980).  F u r t h e r m o r e , e x p e r i m e n t a l l y i n d u c e d v i c t i m s v a l u e d t h e outcome o f t h e b u r g l a r y e x p e r i e n c e more t h a n b u r g l a r y v i c t i m s . U n l i k e t h e b u r g l a r y v i c t i m group, t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l l y i n d u c e d v i c t i m s ' r e s p o n s e s may have been d i s p o s i t i o n a l as opposed t o s i t u a t i o n a l . Other r e s e a r c h e r s have found t h a t r e c a l l - m e m o r y (e.g., b u r g l a r y v i c t i m group) i s r i c h e r i n s e n s o r y and c o n t e x t u a l d e t a i l t h a n imagined memory ( e . g . , e x p e r i m e n t a l l y i n d u c e d v i c t i m group) and t h a t imagined memory c o n t a i n s more i n f o r m a t i o n t h a t i s i d i o s y n c r a t i c t h a n does recall-memory (Johnson & Raye, 1981; Johnson e t a l . ,  1988; S c h o o l e r e t a l . , 1986). T h e r e f o r e , w i t h o u t t h e  a c t u a l e x p e r i e n c e o f b u r g l a r y and t h e d e v a l u a t i o n o f t h e e v e n t from p o w e r f u l o t h e r s ( i . e . , p o l i c e , i n s u r a n c e companies), t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l l y i n d u c e d v i c t i m s b e l i e v e d t h a t t h e outcome o f b u r g l a r y v i c t i m i z a t i o n was more i m p o r t a n t t h a n d i d t h e b u r g l a r y v i c t i m s . A l t h o u g h t h e main e f f e c t s were o f secondary i n t e r e s t t o t h i s s t u d y , i t was e x p e c t e d t h a t f o r b o t h t h e v i c t i m group and e x p e r i m e n t a l l y i n d u c e d v i c t i m group women would use more e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d c o p i n g t h a n men and men would use more problem-focused c o p i n g t h a n women. I t was a l s o e x p e c t e d t h a t i n t e r n a l l o c u s o f c o n t r o l would be p o s i t i v e l y  related  t o p r o b l e m - f o c u s e d c o p i n g and t h a t chance and p o w e r f u l o t h e r s l o c u s o f c o n t r o l would be p o s i t i v e l y r e l a t e d t o e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d c o p i n g . I t was f u r t h e r e x p e c t e d t h a t outcome v a l u e would be p o s i t i v e l y r e l a t e d t o problem-focused coping. As e x p e c t e d , women used more e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d c o p i n g t h a n men i n b o t h t h e v i c t i m group and t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l l y i n d u c e d v i c t i m group. T h i s f i n d i n g i s consistent with several other studies (Blanchard-Fields & I r i o n , 1988; C a r v e r e t a l . , 1989; V i n g e r h o e t s & Van Heck, 1990). However, t h e r e were no gender d i f f e r e n c e s f o r p r o b l e m - f o c u s e d c o p i n g . An e x p l a n a t i o n f o r t h e f i n d i n g i s t h a t b o t h problem- and e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d c o p i n g a r e used i n any one event ( L a z a r u s & FoDonan, 1984). F u r t h e r m o r e , p r o b l e m - f o c u s e d c o p i n g may be r e l a t e d t o p e r c e i v e d c o n t r o l , whereas  emotion-focused  c o p i n g may be l i n k e d t o e m o t i o n a l d i s t r e s s (Compas &  Orosan, i n p r e s s ; Peacock and Wong, 1990). Men and women d i d n o t d i f f e r on c o n t r o l . Moreover, p r e v i o u s r e s e a r c h has found t h a t women b u r g l a r y v i c t i m s e x p e r i e n c e g r e a t e r d i s t r e s s f o l l o w i n g b u r g l a r y than male b u r g l a r y v i c t i m s (Maguire,1980; W a l l e r & O k i h i r o , 1978). T h e r e f o r e , men and women d i d n o t d i f f e r on t h e u s e o f problem-focused  coping, but  because women may have e x p e r i e n c e d g r e a t e r d i s t r e s s f o l l o w i n g b u r g l a r y t h e y u s e d more emotion-focused  c o p i n g than men. A l t e r n a t i v e l y , women may  have u s e d more emotion-focused  c o p i n g because t h i s form o f c o p i n g may be  a c q u i r e d t h r o u g h s o c i a l i z a t i o n ( G r e e n g l a s s , 1982; Vaughter, F o r t h e b u r g l a r y v i c t i m group, problem-focused  1979).  c o p i n g was  s i g n i f i c a n t l y p r e d i c t e d by gender, l o c u s o f c o n t r o l , outcome v a l u e , a n d s i t u a t i o n a l a p p r a i s a l s o f c o n t r o l . These v a r i a b l e s accounted ( a d j u s t e d ) o f t h e v a r i a n c e i n problem-focused  f o r 27%  coping. In p a r t i c u l a r ,  outcome v a l u e was a s i g n i f i c a n t p r e d i c t o r , a c c o u n t i n g f o r a s i g n i f i c a n t 2 R change (.252) i n problem-focused c o p i n g . As e x p e c t e d , t h e g r e a t e r t h e importance  o f t h e outcome, t h e more problem-focused  c o p i n g was used. The  more a b u r g l a r y v i c t i m v a l u e d t h e outcome o f t h e b u r g l a r y v i c t i m i z a t i o n e x p e r i e n c e t h e more t h e y used i n s t r u m e n t a l t y p e s o f c o p i n g changing  (i.e.,  l o c k s ) t o a c h i e v e t h e d e s i r e d outcome ( i . e . , t o n o t be  burglarized again). Emotion-focused  c o p i n g was s i g n i f i c a n t l y p r e d i c t e d by gender, l o c u s  o f c o n t r o l , outcome v a l u e , and s i t u a t i o n a l a p p r a i s a l s o f c o n t r o l f o r t h e b u r g l a r y v i c t i m group. These v a r i a b l e s accounted t h e v a r i a n c e found i n emotion-focused  f o r 35% ( a d j u s t e d ) o f  c o p i n g . A g a i n , outcome v a l u e was a 2  s i g n i f i c a n t p r e d i c t o r , a c c o u n t i n g f o r a s i g n i f i c a n t R change (.161) i n emotion-focused  c o p i n g . The g r e a t e r t h e importance  more e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d  o f t h e outcome t h e  c o p i n g was used. T h i s f i n d i n g i s c o n s i s t e n t w i t h  Peacock and Wong (1990), b u t some p r e v i o u s r e s e a r c h has found t h a t emotion-focused  c o p i n g was a s s o c i a t e d w i t h lower outcome v a l u e  1984). A p o s s i b l e e x p l a n a t i o n f o r t h e s e a p p a r e n t l y c o n f l i c t i n g  (Parkes, results  i s i n terms o f t h e congruence between c o p i n g and t h e s t r e s s o r (Peacock & Wong, 1990). When t h e outcome o f t h e s i t u a t i o n i s c o n s i d e r e d  important  t h i s may g i v e r i s e t o g r e a t e r d i s t r e s s , i n t u r n , g r e a t e r d i s t r e s s i s l i n k e d w i t h emotion-focused c o p i n g  (Compas & Orosan, i n p r e s s ; Peacock &  Wong, 1990). F o r t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l l y induced v i c t i m group, p r o b l e m - f o c u s e d was  n o t s i g n i f i c a n t l y p r e d i c t e d by l o c u s o f c o n t r o l ,  coping  situational  a p p r a i s a l s o f c o n t r o l , outcome v a l u e , and gender. I t i s n o t c l e a r why p r o b l e m - f o c u s e d c o p i n g was not s i g n i f i c a n t l y p r e d i c t e d . A p a r t i a l e x p l a n a t i o n i s t h a t p r e v i o u s r e s e a r c h has found t h a t age moderates t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p between c o n t r o l b e l i e f s and c o p i n g . I n p a r t i c u l a r , c o n t r o l b e l i e f s o f c o l l e g e age i n d i v i d u a l s i n f l u e n c e d e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d more t h a n problem-focused c o p i n g  coping  ( B l a n c h a r d - F i e l d s & I r i o n , 1988). I n  t h i s s t u d y t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s were c o l l e g e age, t h e r e f o r e i t i s n o t c o m p l e t e l y unexpected t h a t t h e i r c o n t r o l b e l i e f s d i d n o t p r e d i c t problem-focused coping. A l t e r n a t i v e l y , f o r experimentally  induced  v i c t i m s , competence b e l i e f s ( i . e . , s e l f - e f f i c a c y , a r e p e r c e p t i o n s o f an i n d i v i d u a l ' s a b i l i t y t o take the necessary outcome) and n o t c o n t i n g e n c y  actions t o obtain the desired  b e l i e f s ( i . e . , l o c u s o f c o n t r o l ) , may be  l i n k e d t o problem-focused coping  (Thompson & Spacapan, 1991).  F u r t h e r m o r e , because 60% o f t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s l i v e d w i t h t h e i r p a r e n t s i t i s c o n c e i v a b l e t h a t they d i d not p e r c e i v e t h a t t h e y had t h e c o n t r o l t o implement a c t i v e c o p i n g s t r a t e g i e s w i t h o u t t h e i r p a r e n t s '  consent.  E m o t i o n - f o c u s e d c o p i n g was s i g n i f i c a n t l y p r e d i c t e d by l o c u s o f control  ( a l l three dimensions),  situational appraisals of control,  outcome v a l u e , and gender f o r t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l l y i n d u c e d  v i c t i m group.  These v a r i a b l e s accounted f o r 17% ( a d j u s t e d ) o f t h e v a r i a n c e found i n e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d c o p i n g . Chance l o c u s o f c o n t r o l was a s i g n i f i c a n t p r e d i c t o r accounting  f o r 9% o f t h e v a r i a n c e found i n e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d  c o p i n g . As e x p e c t e d ,  t h e g r e a t e r t h e chance l o c u s o f c o n t r o l t h e more  e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d c o p i n g was used. F o r t h e most p a r t , t h i s f i n d i n g i s  c o n s i s t e n t e m p i r i c a l l y and c o n c e p t u a l l y . That i s , e x p e r i m e n t a l l y v i c t i m s who  b e l i e v e d c o n t r o l was  not p o s s i b l e endorsed e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d  c o p i n g f u n c t i o n s ( i . e . , d e n i a l , t u r n i n g t o r e l i g i o n ) . Anderson Blanchard  and  induced  (1977),  I r i o n (1988), and Parkes (1984) a l s o found t h a t  i n d i v i d u a l s h o l d i n g an e x t e r n a l l o c u s o f c o n t r o l b e l i e f  (i.e.,  chance  l o c u s o f c o n t r o l ) used c o p i n g s t r a t e g i e s s i m i l a r t o e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d coping. I n t h i s study i t was  e x p e c t e d t h a t l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and  situational  a p p r a i s a l s o f c o n t r o l would mediate t h e gender and c o p i n g r e l a t i o n , i n t h a t l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and s i t u a t i o n a l a p p r a i s a l s o f c o n t r o l would account f o r t h e r e l a t i o n between gender and c o p i n g . I n b o t h Study 1 ( b u r g l a r y v i c t i m group) and Study 2 ( e x p e r i m e n t a l l y i n d u c e d v i c t i m s ) t h e m e d i a t o r hypotheses were not supported c o n t r o l was  because, i n p a r t , l o c u s o f  not s t r o n g l y r e l a t e d t o c o p i n g . S i m i l a r t o C a r v e r e t a l .  (1989) and Folkman and L a z a r u s  (1980, 1985), t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p between  i n t e r n a l l o c u s of c o n t r o l and p r o b l e m - f o c u s e d c o p i n g was  not  s i g n i f i c a n t . However, r e s e a r c h e r s s t u d y i n g extreme s t r e s s f u l e v e n t s ( i . e . , war  and h u r r i c a n e s ) have found s i g n i f i c a n t r e l a t i o n s h i p s between  l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and c o p i n g S e v e r a l i s s u e s may  (Anderson, 1977;  Solomon e t a l . , 1989).  account f o r t h e f a i l u r e o f t h i s s t u d y t o f i n d a  s t r o n g r e l a t i o n s h i p between l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and c o p i n g . I n Study 1 ( b u r g l a r y v i c t i m s ) , t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p between i n t e r n a l l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and p r o b l e m - f o c u s e d c o p i n g was reasons.  First,  and c o p i n g , was  not s i g n i f i c a n t f o r t h r e e p o s s i b l e  B l a n c h a r d - F i e l d s and I r i o n (1988),  i n t h e i r study of  age  found t h a t f o r c o l l e g e age p a r t i c i p a n t s ' l o c u s o f c o n t r o l  not a s s o c i a t e d w i t h p r o b l e m - f o c u s e d c o p i n g s t r a t e g i e s but  was  a s s o c i a t e d w i t h e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d c o p i n g s t r a t e g i e s . They p o s i t t h a t young p e o p l e i n s t r e s s f u l s i t u a t i o n s equate i n t e r n a l c o n t r o l w i t h  self-blame  and t h e r e f o r e cope by a v o i d i n g t h e s i t u a t i o n , B l a n c h a r d - F i e l d s and f u r t h e r argue t h a t young p e o p l e w i t h a chance o r p o w e r f u l  others  Irion  locus  o f c o n t r o l o r i e n t a t i o n a r e l e s s l i k e l y t o engage i n p r o b l e m - f o c u s e d  c o p i n g t h a n emotion-focused c o p i n g because t h e young p e o p l e f e e l t h a t t h e c o n t r o l o f t h e s i t u a t i o n i s u l t i m a t e l y not i n t h e i r hands. T h i s f i n d i n g i s c o n s i s t e n t with t h e present  study.  Second, t h e l a c k o f s p e c i f i c i t y o f t h e items t h a t c o m p r i s e p r o b l e m focused  coping  (Stone e t a l . , 1990) may have d e t r a c t e d from t h e  r e l a t i o n s h i p between l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and c o p i n g . F a t t a h (1991) c o n t e n d s t h a t many v i c t i m s o f crime, even i f t h e r e c a l l p e r i o d i s l i m i t e d t o s i x months, f o r g e t d e t a i l s o f t h e v i c t i m i z a t i o n . As such, b u r g l a r y v i c t i m s i n t h i s study may have been a b l e t o remember s a l i e n t e m o t i o n a l  issues  r e f l e c t e d i n t h e s t r a t e g i e s t h a t comprise e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d c o p i n g , b u t c o u l d n o t remember t h e i r c o p i n g s t r a t e g i e s as r e f l e c t e d i n t h e items t h a t c o m p r i s e problem-focused c o p i n g . T h e r e f o r e , t h i s a s p e c t o f r e c a l l may have weakened t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p between l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and p r o b l e m focused  coping.  F i n a l l y , C o l l i n s e t a l . (1990) p r o v i d e d e m p i r i c a l support  for the  p o s i t i o n t h a t an i n d i v i d u a l ' s b e l i e f s may change f o l l o w i n g v i c t i m i z a t i o n as a r e s u l t o f t h e v i c t i m i z a t i o n e x p e r i e n c e  and subsequent  e f f o r t s . Hence, as a r e s u l t o f t h e b u r g l a r y e x p e r i e n c e  coping  and subsequent  c o p i n g e f f o r t s , t h e v i c t i m s ' l o c u s o f c o n t r o l may have changed and t h e r e f o r e was not r e l a t e d t o t h e c o p i n g s t r a t e g i e s t h a t were r e c a l l e d . Three i s s u e s may account f o r t h e f a i l u r e o f Study 2 ( e x p e r i m e n t a l l y i n d u c e d v i c t i m group) t o f i n d a s i g n i f i c a n t r e l a t i o n s h i p between l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and c o p i n g . F i r s t , t h e p r o c e s s o f b u r g l a r y v i c t i m i z a t i o n may not have been n o v e l t o t h e m a j o r i t y o f t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s . From a t h e o r e t i c a l b a s i s l o c u s o f c o n t r o l has i t s g r e a t e s t i n f l u e n c e on behaviour  i n n o v e l and/or ambiguous s i t u a t i o n s ( R o t t e r , 1966, 1975).  Moreover, as L a z a r u s  and Folkman (1984) argue, t h e n o v e l t y o f a  s i t u a t i o n i s r e l a t i v e rather than absolute. For t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l l y i n d u c e d v i c t i m s , 60% o f t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s had been v i c t i m s o f o t h e r c r i m e s , and as F a t t a h (1991) a r g u e s , many p e o p l e do n o t r e p o r t t h e i r v i c t i m i z a t i o n o f f i c i a l l y or through surveys. Therefore,  a l t h o u g h MANOVA  r e s u l t s (see Appendix E) were n o n s i g n i f i c a n t f o r p r e v i o u s  victimization,  i t i s d i f f i c u l t t o determine whether t h o s e who r e p o r t e d no p r e v i o u s v i c t i m i z a t i o n had a c t u a l l y never been v i c t i m i z e d o r whether t h e y were f a i l i n g t o r e p o r t p r e v i o u s v i c t i m i z a t i o n . Hence, because o f t h e t r a n s f e r a b i l i t y o f knowledge from p r e v i o u s v i c t i m i z a t i o n , t h e i n f l u e n c e o f l o c u s o f c o n t r o l on b u r g l a r y v i c t i m c o p i n g may have been  minimized  because t h e b u r g l a r y e x p e r i e n c e may n o t have been n o v e l . Second, t h e s t u d i e s reviewed  t h a t found a r e l a t i o n s h i p between  l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and c o p i n g may have d e a l t w i t h more extreme s t r e s s o r s t h a n b u r g l a r y ( i . e . , war, s u r v i v i n g a h u r r i c a n e ) , and as such i n c r e a s e d t h e n o v e l t y and a m b i g u i t y  o f t h e s t r e s s o r and i n c r e a s e d t h e p e r t i n e n c e  o f l o c u s o f c o n t r o l as a p r e d i c t o r o f c o p i n g b e h a v i o u r .  F i n a l l y , the  i n t e r n a l l o c u s o f c o n t r o l s c a l e had low i n t e r n a l c o n s i s t e n c y although  (.51),  s i m i l a r t o t h e i n t e r n a l c o n s i s t e n c y found by Levenson (1981)  w i t h a c o l l e g e p o p u l a t i o n , a low i n t e r n a l c o n s i s t e n c y does make a measure l e s s dependable (Shavelson,  1988).  To a l a r g e degree l o c u s o f c o n t r o l d i d n o t a c c o u n t f o r t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p between gender and c o p i n g because gender and l o c u s o f c o n t r o l were n o t s t r o n g l y r e l a t e d . V i t a l i a n o , Russo, and M a i u r o  (1987),  used M i r e l s ' (1970) 9-item l o c u s o f c o n t r o l measure and found t h a t e x t e r n a l i t y was a s s o c i a t e d w i t h female m e d i c a l male m e d i c a l  s t u d e n t s compared w i t h  s t u d e n t s . However, B l a n c h a r d - F i e l d s and I r i o n (1988), i n  t h e i r s t u d y o f age and c o p i n g , used Levenson's (1981) l o c u s o f c o n t r o l measure and found no d i f f e r e n c e between men and women on t h e i n t e r n a l and chance s c a l e s . Y e t , t h e y d i d f i n d t h a t men s c o r e d  significantly  h i g h e r on t h e p o w e r f u l o t h e r s s c a l e , i n d i c a t i n g t h a t men have a s t r o n g e r b e l i e f i n t h e c o n t r o l o f p o w e r f u l o t h e r s t h a n women. C o n c e i v a b l y , t h e use o f a m u l t i d i m e n s i o n a l powerful  l o c u s o f c o n t r o l s c a l e [Levenson's (1981)  o t h e r s s c a l e i s an e x t e r n a l l o c u s o f c o n t r o l o r i e n t a t i o n , b u t  a l s o a l l o w s f o r t h e o p p o r t u n i t y f o r c o n t r o l ] more r e a l i s t i c a l l y  captures  an i n d i v i d u a l ' s l o c u s o f c o n t r o l o r i e n t a t i o n t h a n does a dichotomous  l o c u s o f c o n t r o l measure. I t was e x p e c t e d t h a t gender and outcome v a l u e would a f f e c t t h e d i r e c t i o n and\or s t r e n g t h o f t h e r e l a t i o n between l o c u s o f c o n t r o l a n d c o p i n g . That i s , t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p between l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and e m o t i o n f o c u s e d c o p i n g was expected t o be s t r o n g e r among i n d i v i d u a l s h o l d i n g h i g h outcome v a l u e t h a n among i n d i v i d u a l s h o l d i n g low outcome v a l u e . A l s o , t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p between l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and p r o b l e m - f o c u s e d c o p i n g was e x p e c t e d t o be s t r o n g e r among i n d i v i d u a l s h o l d i n g h i g h outcome v a l u e t h a n among i n d i v i d u a l s h o l d i n g low outcome v a l u e . F u r t h e r m o r e , t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p between i n t e r n a l l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and p r o b l e m - f o c u s e d c o p i n g was expected t o be s t r o n g e r among men t h a n women. As w e l l , t h e r e l a t i o n between chance l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and e m o t i o n focused  c o p i n g was e x p e c t e d t o be s t r o n g e r among women t h a n men. Outcome  v a l u e d i d n o t moderate t h e l o c u s o f c o n t r o l ( a l l t h r e e d i m e n s i o n s ) and c o p i n g r e l a t i o n s h i p s f o r e i t h e r t h e b u r g l a r y v i c t i m group o r t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l l y induced v i c t i m group. T h i s f i n d i n g i s s i m i l a r t o P a r k e s ' (1984) s t u d y . However, t h e importance o f outcome v a l u e s h o u l d n o t be d i s m i s s e d . R o s o l a c k and Héimpson (1991) contend t h a t outcome v a l u e must r e a c h a c e r t a i n , y e t u n s p e c i f i e d , minimum l e v e l b e f o r e i t may i n f l u e n c e t h e d i r e c t i o n and/or s t r e n g t h o f t h e r e l a t i o n between l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and c o p i n g . A l t h o u g h  t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s i n t h i s study h e l d m o d e r a t e l y h i g h  outcome v a l u e , i t i s p o s s i b l e t h a t l e v e l o f i m p o r t a n c e a t t a c h e d t o outcome v a l u e by t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s was n o t s u f f i c i e n t l y s t r o n g enough t o a f f e c t t h e d i r e c t i o n and/or s t r e n g t h o f t h e r e l a t i o n between l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and c o p i n g . I n b o t h Study 1 ( b u r g l a r y v i c t i m s ) and Study 2 ( e x p e r i m e n t a l l y induced powerful  v i c t i m s ) gender a f f e c t e d t h e d i r e c t i o n o f t h e r e l a t i o n between o t h e r s l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d c o p i n g . I n b o t h  g r o u p s , p o w e r f u l o t h e r s l o c u s o f c o n t r o l b e l i e f s h e l d by men were n e g a t i v e l y r e l a t e d t o emotion-focused c o p i n g ; i n c o n t r a s t , i n t h e b u r g l a r y v i c t i m group, p o w e r f u l o t h e r s l o c u s o f c o n t r o l b e l i e f s h e l d by  women were p o s i t i v e l y r e l a t e d t o e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d c o p i n g and p o w e r f u l o t h e r s l o c u s o f c o n t r o l b e l i e f s h e l d by women i n t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l l y induced v i c t i m group were not r e l a t e d t o e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d c o p i n g .  These  f i n d i n g s suggest t h a t t h e b u r g l a r y group more a c c u r a t e l y r e f l e c t s t h e r e a l i t y o f b u r g l a r y v i c t i m c o p i n g t h a n does t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l l y  induced  v i c t i m group. The d i s o r d i n a l n a t u r e o f t h e i n t e r a c t i o n (see F i g u r e 5) o f t h e b u r g l a r y v i c t i m s i s c o n s i s t e n t b o t h t h e o r e t i c a l l y and e m p i r i c a l l y . Conceivably,  as a r e s u l t o f gender schema and n e g a t i v e s e l f - t r u s t schema  t h e d i r e c t i o n o f t h e r e l a t i o n between p o w e r f u l o t h e r s l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d c o p i n g was a f f e c t e d by gender (Bem, 1981; Bulman & F r i e z e - H a n s o n , support  1987;  Janoff-  McCann e t a l . , 1988). These f i n d i n g s  Levenson's (1981) c o n t e n t i o n t h a t p o w e r f u l o t h e r s l o c u s o f  c o n t r o l i s an e x t e r n a l l o c u s o f c o n t r o l o r i e n t a t i o n t h a t does have p o t e n t i a l f o r c o n t r o l . F o r example, u n l i k e women, men may have found through experience  that powerful others  desired reinforcement,  ( i . e . , p o l i c e ) may h e l p  achieve  t h u s p r o v i d i n g a sense o f c o n t r o l t o t h i s  e x t e r n a l o r i e n t a t i o n . Thus, s t r o n g p o w e r f u l o t h e r s l o c u s o f c o n t r o l b e l i e f s h e l d by men were n e g a t i v e l y r e l a t e d t o e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d  coping  because men w i t h t h i s b e l i e f saw p o t e n t i a l f o r c o n t r o l ; whereas women w i t h s i m i l a r b e l i e f s d i d n o t see p o t e n t i a l f o r c o n t r o l and t h e r e f o r e s t r o n g p o w e r f u l o t h e r l o c u s o f c o n t r o l b e l i e f s h e l d by women were p o s i t i v e l y r e l a t e d t o emotion-focused coping  ( L a z a r u s & Folkman, 1984).  F i n a l l y , as p r e d i c t e d , gender a f f e c t e d t h e s t r e n g t h o f t h e chance l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d c o p i n g r e l a t i o n f o r t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l l y induced v i c t i m group. However, c o n t r a r y t o what was hypothesized,  chance l o c u s o f c o n t r o l b e l i e f s h e l d by women and men were  p o s i t i v e l y r e l a t e d t o e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d c o p i n g , y e t t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p was s t r o n g e r f o r men t h a n women. T h i s f i n d i n g s u g g e s t s t h a t men who h o l d e x t e r n a l l o c u s o f c o n t r o l b e l i e f s use more e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d  coping  s t r a t e g i e s t o d e a l w i t h a s t r e s s o r t h a n do women. T h i s f i n d i n g i s i n keeping  w i t h Hoyenga and Hoyenga's (1979) r e v i e w o f t h e l o c u s o f c o n t r o l  l i t e r a t u r e . They found t h a t men who h e l d e x t e r n a l l o c u s o f c o n t r o l b e l i e f s had g r e a t e r i n h i b i t e d g o a l o r i e n t e d b e h a v i o u r  t h a n women.  However, gender d i d not a f f e c t t h e s t r e n g t h o f t h e r e l a t i o n between chance l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d c o p i n g f o r t h e b u r g l a r y v i c t i m group. A g a i n , t h i s f i n d i n g f u r t h e r d e m o n s t r a t e s t h e d i f f e r e n c e between e x p e r i e n c i n g v i c t i m i z a t i o n and i m a g i n g v i c t i m i z a t i o n ;  suggesting  t h a t e x p e r i e n c i n g v i c t i m i z a t i o n more a c c u r a t e l y r e f l e c t s t h e n a t u r e o f t h e r e l a t i o n between l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and c o p i n g t h a n does i m a g i n g v i c t i m i z a t i o n . Conceivably, experience  the d i s t r e s s of the burglary v i c t i m i z a t i o n  was s u f f i c i e n t l y s t r o n g i n t h e b u r g l a r y v i c t i m group t o  c r e a t e a n e g a t i v e s e l f - t r u s t schema t h a t emphasized t h e p o w e r f u l  others  l o c u s o f c o n t r o l o r i e n t a t i o n b u t d e t r a c t e d from t h e chance l o c u s o f c o n t r o l o r i e n t a t i o n f o r women v i c t i m s (Maguire,  1980;  McCann e t a l . ,  1988). As such, gender would o n l y a f f e c t t h e d i r e c t i o n o f t h e p o w e r f u l o t h e r s l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and c o p i n g r e l a t i o n and n o t t h e s t r e n g t h o f t h e chance l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and c o p i n g r e l a t i o n . T h e r e f o r e ,  i n t h e case o f  b u r g l a r y v i c t i m s , gender moderated t h e p o w e r f u l o t h e r s l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d c o p i n g r e l a t i o n , b u t d i d n o t moderate t h e chance l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and c o p i n g  relation.  I n summary, e x p e r i m e n t a l l y induced v i c t i m s r e p o r t e d  significantly  more p r o b l e m - f o c u s e d c o p i n g and h e l d g r e a t e r outcome v a l u e t h a n b u r g l a r y v i c t i m s . However, b u r g l a r y v i c t i m s were s i g n i f i c a n t l y h i g h e r on p o w e r f u l o t h e r s l o c u s o f c o n t r o l t h a n e x p e r i m e n t a l l y induced v i c t i m s . I n b o t h groups women used more emotion-focused c o p i n g t h a n men. F o r t h e v i c t i m group, outcome v a l u e accounted f o r a s i g n i f i c a n t amount o f v a r i a n c e found i n problem- and e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d c o p i n g . Chance l o c u s o f c o n t r o l a c c o u n t e d f o r a s i g n i f i c a n t amount o f v a r i a n c e found i n e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d c o p i n g f o r t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l l y induced v i c t i m group. F i n d i n g s i n d i c a t e d t h a t f o r b o t h t h e b u r g l a r y v i c t i m group and t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l l y  induced  v i c t i m group, l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and s i t u a t i o n a l a p p r a i s a l s o f c o n t r o l d i d not account f o r t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p between gender and c o p i n g . However, i n  b o t h g r o u p s , gender a f f e c t e d the d i r e c t i o n of t h e r e l a t i o n between powerful  o t h e r s l o c u s of c o n t r o l and e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d c o p i n g . Gender a l s o  a f f e c t e d t h e s t r e n g t h of t h e r e l a t i o n between chance l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d c o p i n g i n the e x p e r i m e n t a l l y induced v i c t i m group. Moreover, t h e m o d e r a t i n g e f f e c t o f gender o f f e r s some s u p p o r t  f o r the  c o n t e n t i o n t h a t d a t a from t h e b u r g l a r y v i c t i m group more r e a l i s t i c a l l y c a p t u r e s t h e r e l a t i o n between l o c u s of c o n t r o l and c o p i n g t h a n does t h e d a t a from t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l l y induced v i c t i m group. Implications for Counselling C o u n s e l l i n g v i c t i m s o f crime f a l l s d i r e c t l y w i t h i n t h e mandate o f c o u n s e l l i n g p s y c h o l o g y (Douce, 1988). A l t h o u g h  t h i s was  not  an  i n t e r v e n t i o n s t u d y , t h r e e main i m p l i c a t i o n s a r i s e from t h i s s t u d y f o r c o u n s e l l i n g b u r g l a r y v i c t i m s . F i r s t , t h e d i f f e r e n c e s between b u r g l a r y v i c t i m s and e x p e r i m e n t a l l y induced v i c t i m s demonstrates t h a t c o p i n g b u r g l a r y v i c t i m i z a t i o n may c o n t r o l o r i e n t a t i o n and may  i n c r e a s e the v i c t i m s ' p o w e r f u l o t h e r l o c u s o f decrease the value of the  importance  a t t a c h e d t o t h e outcome o f v i c t i m i z a t i o n . From t h e p e r s p e c t i v e o f b u r g l a r y v i c t i m , a c o u n s e l l o r may t h e c l i e n t may  with  r e p r e s e n t a p o w e r f u l o t h e r . As  the such,  l o o k t o t h e c o u n s e l l o r t o impose s o l u t i o n s t o t h e  problems t h e c l i e n t i s e x p e r i e n c i n g . C l e a r l y , from a p h e n o m e n o l o g i c a l understanding  o f s t r e s s and c o p i n g , such a r e l a t i o n s h i p between a c l i e n t  and c o u n s e l l o r would not be advantageous t o e i t h e r p a r t y .  Therefore,  c o u n s e l l o r s must be aware not t o f u r t h e r i n c r e a s e dependency i n t h e i r c l i e n t s who  have been v i c t i m s o f b u r g l a r y , but t o t r y and r e s t o r e a  sense o f agency. F u r t h e r m o r e , i t i s p o s s i b l e t h a t b u r g l a r y v i c t i m s  may  d i s c o u n t t h e importance o f t h e outcome of t h e b u r g l a r y v i c t i m i z a t i o n experience  even though they a r e e x p e r i e n c i n g p s y c h o l o g i c a l d i s t r e s s .  C o u n s e l l o r s may  w i s h t o t a k e t h i s i n t o c o n s i d e r a t i o n because t h e  c l i e n t ' s d i s c o u n t i n g o f outcome importance may p s y c h o l o g i c a l f u n c t i o n i n g and b e h a v i o u r  a f f e c t h i s o r her  ( i . e . , t h e c l i e n t may  current  place his  o r her p r o p e r t y o r p e r s o n a t unnecessary r i s k t o v i c t i m i z a t i o n because  he o r she b e l i e v e s t h a t v i c t i m i z a t i o n does n o t m a t t e r ) . E x p l o r a t i o n o f t h e v i c t i m ' s b e l i e f s r e g a r d i n g t h e importance o f t h e outcome o f t h e b u r g l a r y v i c t i m i z a t i o n experience understanding  o f h i s o r her coping  may p r o v i d e t h e v i c t i m g r e a t e r responses.  Second, women b u r g l a r y v i c t i m s use more e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d c o p i n g male b u r g l a r y v i c t i m s . R e c o g n i z i n g of c o p i n g ,  than  t h a t women and men u s e b o t h f u n c t i o n s  c o u n s e l l o r s should e s t a b l i s h t h a t women v i c t i m s a r e u s i n g  enough a c t i v e c o p i n g s t r a t e g i e s (e.g., changing l o c k s ) t o r e d u c e t h e r i s k o f subsequent v i c t i m i z a t i o n and t h a t men a r e a d d r e s s i n g emotional  their  needs ( e . g . , s o c i a l s u p p o r t ) . A l t h o u g h t h i s s t u d y d i d n o t  examine h e a l t h y p s y c h o l o g i c a l f u n c t i o n i n g f o l l o w i n g v i c t i m i z a t i o n , i t i s b e l i e v e d t h a t t h e b r o a d e r t h e range o f c o p i n g s t r a t e g i e s ( i . e . ,  problem-  and e m o t i o n - f o c u s e d coping) t h a t an i n d i v i d u a l has a v a i l a b l e , t h e b e t t e r a b l e t h e p e r s o n i s t o cope w i t h t h r e a t e n i n g s i t u a t i o n s ( P a r k e s , 1984) F i n a l l y , f i n d i n g s from t h i s study suggest t h a t imaging v i c t i m i z a t i o n may n o t r e f l e c t t h e r e a l i t i e s o f a c t u a l v i c t i m i z a t i o n . Because t h e r e a r e d i f f e r e n c e s between imaging and e x p e r i e n c i n g v i c t i m i z a t i o n , c o u n s e l l o r s who use v i s u a l i z a t i o n w i t h c l i e n t s who a r e a t r i s k o f v i c t i m i z a t i o n o r who f e a r v i c t i m i z a t i o n , may n o t a d e q u a t e l y prepare t h e c l i e n t t o deal with v i c t i m i z a t i o n . Therefore,  i n an e f f o r t  t o reduce t h e d i s t r e s s a s s o c i a t e d w i t h v i c t i m i z a t i o n , i t i s important f o r c o u n s e l l o r s and c r i m e p r e v e n t i o n p r a c t i t i o n e r s t o r e c o g n i z e  that  t h e r e may be l i m i t a t i o n s ( i . e . , may n o t a c c u r a t e l y r e f l e c t t h e v i c t i m i z a t i o n p r o c e s s ) i n h a v i n g c l i e n t s imagine o r v i s u a l i z e t h e v i c t i m i z a t i o n p r o c e s s (e.g., t o b u r g l a r y o r s e x u a l a s s a u l t ) . Limitations There were s i x main l i m i t a t i o n s w i t h Study 1 and Study 2. F i r s t , a l l t h e q u e s t i o n n a i r e s were s e l f - r e p o r t . Second, b o t h s t u d i e s were n o t c o n c e r n e d w i t h t h e p r o c e s s and change t h a t i s r e l a t e d t o c a u s a l i t y as a d v o c a t e d by L a z a r u s and Folkman (1984). of c o l l e g e students  T h i r d , t h e sample was c o m p r i s e d  from a homogeneous age group, t h a t i s n o t  r e p r e s e n t a t i v e o f t h e g e n e r a l p u b l i c . To determine whether age moderated t h e l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and c o p i n g r e l a t i o n i t would be n e c e s s a r y  t o have  p a r t i c i p a n t s from a broader range o f ages. F o u r t h , i t i s d i f f i c u l t t o compare v i c t i m s and n o n v i c t i m s because socioeconomic f a c t o r s ( i . e . , h o u s e h o l d income) may be, i n p a r t , a c o n t r i b u t i n g f a c t o r t h a t  separates  v i c t i m s from n o n v i c t i m s . F i f t h , many unmeasured p s y c h o s o c i a l v a r i a b l e s t h a t may a f f e c t how an i n d i v i d u a l copes w i t h b u r g l a r y were n o t t h e f o c u s o f t h i s s t u d y . F o r example, i n c l u s i o n o f n e g a t i v e a f f e c t i v i t y i n t o an expanded model may prove u s e f u l i n u n d e r s t a n d i n g  individual differences  i n t h e u s e o f emotion-focused c o p i n g . F i n a l l y , because t h e number o f p a r t i c i p a n t s i n t h e b u r g l a r y v i c t i m group was r e l a t i v e l y s m a l l (N=61), t h e power o f t h e m u l t i p l e r e g r e s s i o n a n a l y s e s was r e d u c e d . Future  Research  C l a r i f i c a t i o n o f t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p between l o c u s o f c o n t r o l and c o p i n g f o r b u r g l a r y v i c t i m c o p i n g may b e s t be a c c o m p l i s h e d by p r o s p e c t i v e r e s e a r c h . I n f u t u r e r e s e a r c h , r e s e a r c h e r s s h o u l d measure t h e l o c u s o f c o n t r o l o f i n d i v i d u a l s i n a p a r t i c u l a r community p r i o r t o b u r g l a r y v i c t i m i z a t i o n and t h e n g a t h e r t h e p e r t i n e n t i n f o r m a t i o n on outcome v a l u e , s i t u a t i o n a l a p p r a i s a l s o f c o n t r o l , and c o p i n g f o l l o w i n g b u r g l a r y v i c t i m i z a t i o n . Furthermore, l o c u s o f c o n t r o l s h o u l d be measured b e f o r e and a f t e r b u r g l a r y v i c t i m i z a t i o n t o d e t e r m i n e t h e a f f e c t t h a t v i c t i m i z a t i o n and subsequent c o p i n g e f f o r t s have on an i n d i v i d u a l ' s l o c u s o f c o n t r o l . However, p r a c t i c a l c o n s t r a i n t s may n o t make such research p o s s i b l e , therefore researchers conducting  analogue r e s e a r c h  could incorporate d e t a i l e d v i s u a l i z a t i o n of the burglary  experience  u s i n g s m a l l group s e t t i n g s . F u t u r e r e s e a r c h s h o u l d be d i r e c t e d towards t h e development o f a c o p i n g measure t h a t c o n t a i n s p r o b l e m - and e m o t i o n focused  c o p i n g items t h a t a r e r e p r e s e n t a t i v e o f b u r g l a r y v i c t i m ' s c o p i n g  e f f o r t s . T h i s may h e l p c l a r i f y t h e r e l a t i o n between c o n t r o l b e l i e f s and c o p i n g f o r b u r g l a r y v i c t i m s . T h i s r e s e a r c h f o c u s e d on c o p i n g f o r t h e f i r s t seven days f o l l o w i n g v i c t i m i z a t i o n , f u t u r e r e s e a r c h s h o u l d be  d i r e c t e d towards u n d e r s t a n d i n g how v i c t i m s o f b u r g l a r y cope o v e r t h e c o u r s e o f t h e s t r e s s f u l encounter. F i n a l l y , c o n t r o l i s a multidimensional construct,  composed of c o n t i n g e n c y , competence, and  c o n t r o l b e l i e f s (Thompson & Spacapan, 1991). F u r t h e r i n v e s t i g a t i o n i s required influence  t o determine how t h e s e d i f f e r e n t a s p e c t s o f c o n t r o l i n t e r a c t t o burglary v i c t i m coping.  Agnew, S. (1985). N e u t r a l i z i n g t h e impact o f c r i m e . C r i m i n a l J u s t i c e and Behavior,  12, 221-239.  American P s y c h o l o g y A s s o c i a t i o n . (1985).  F i n a l r e p o r t on t h e APA  task  f o r c e on t h e v i c t i m s o f crime and v i o l e n c e . American P s y c h o l o g i s t . 40,  107-112.  Amir, Y., & Sharon, I . (1991). R e l i c a t i o n r e s e a r c h : A 'must' f o r t h e s c i e n t i f i c advancement o f p s y c h o l o g y . I n J . W. N e u l i e p R e p l i c a t i o n research i n the s o c i a l sciences  (Ed.),  (pp.51-71). London; Sage.  Anderson, C. R. (1977). Locus o f c o n t r o l , c o p i n g b e h a v i o r s ,  and  performance i n a s t r e s s s e t t i n g : A l o n g i t u d i n a l s t u d y . J o u r n a l o f A p p l i e d P s y c h o l o g y . 62. 446-451. Archer,  R. P. (1979). R e l a t i o n s h i p s between l o c u s o f c o n t r o l , t r a i t  a n x i e t y and s t a t e a n x i e t y : An i n t e r a c t i o n i s t p e r s p e c t i v e . J o u r n a l o f P e r s o n a l i t y . 47, 305-316. B a r d , M., & Sangrey, D. (1986). The c r i m e v i c t i m ' s book (2nd e d . ) . New Y o r k : B r u n n e r / M a z e l . B a r o n , R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986).  The m o d e r a t o r - m e d i a t o r v a r i a b l e  d i s t i n c t i o n i n s o c i a l p s y c h o l o g i c a l research: Conceptual, and  statistical  strategic,  c o n s i d e r a t i o n s . J o u r n a l o f P e r s o n a l i t y and S o c i a l  P s y c h o l o g y . 51, 1173-1182. Bem, S. L. (1981). Gender schema t h e o r y : A c o g n i t i v e account o f sex t y p i n g . P s y c h o l o g i c a l Review. 88. 354-364. B e r g e r , M.S.,  & Koocher, G. P. (1972).  Locus o f c o n t r o l i n n a r c o t i c  a d d i c t s : S t a t e o r t r a i t phenomenon? J o u r n a l o f C l i n i c a l 28,  Psychology.  468-469.  B l a n c h a r d - F i e l d s , F., & I r i o n , J . C. (1988).  The r e l a t i o n between l o c u s  o f c o n t r o l and c o p i n g i n two c o n t e x t s : Age as a m o d e r a t o r v a r i a b l e . P s y c h o l o g y and A g i n g . 3, 192-203.  B o l g e r , N.  (1990). Coping as a p e r s o n a l i t y p r o c e s s : A  p r o s p e c t i v e s t u d y . J o u r n a l o f P e r s o n a l i t y and S o c i a l P s y c h o l o g y .  59.  525-537. B r e w i n , C. R. Sussex:  (1988). C o g n i t i v e f o u n d a t i o n s o f c l i n i c a l p s y c h o l o g y .  East  U.K.  Brown, B. B., & H a r r i s , P. B. (1989). R e s i d e n t i a l b u r g l a r y v i c t i m i z a t i o n : Reactions t o the i n v a s i o n of primary t e r r i t o r y . J o u r n a l o f E n v i r o n m e n t a l P s y c h o l o g y . 9, 119-132. Burgess, A. W., American  & Holmstrom, L. L. (1974). Rape trauma syndrome.  J o u r n a l of P s y c h i a t r y . 131. 981-985.  Campbell, D. T.,  & F i s k e , D. W.  (1959). Convergent  and d i s c r i m i n a n t  v a l i d a t i o n by t h e m u l t i t r a i t - m u l t i m e t h o d m a t r i x . P s y c h o l o g i c a l B u l l e t i n . 56/ 81-105. Canadian Crime S t a t i s t i c s (1989). (Catalogue 85205). Ottawa, Canadian C e n t r e f o r J u s t i c e C a r v e r , C. S.,  ON:  Statistics.  S c h e i e r , M. F., & Weintraub, J . K.  (1989).  A s s e s s i n g c o p i n g s t r a t e g i e s : A t h e o r e t i c a l l y based approach. J o u r n a l o f P e r s o n a l i t y and S o c i a l P s y c h o l o g y . 56. 267-283. C l a r k e , R., Kluwer  & Hope, T . ( E d s . ) . (1984). Coping w i t h b u r g l a r y . B o s t o n : Nijhoff.  Cohen, J . , & Cohen, P.  (1983). A p p l i e d m u l t i p l e  r e g r e s s i o n / c o r r e l a t i o n a n a l y s i s f o r the behavioral sciences (2nd e d . ) . H i l l s d a l e , NJ: Cohn, Y.  (1974).  Erlbaum.  C r i s i s i n t e r v e n t i o n and t h e v i c t i m o f  r o b b e r y . I n I . D r a p k i n & E. V i a n o ( E d s . ) , V i c t i m o l o g y : A new V o l . I I : S o c i e t y ' s r e a c t i o n t o v i c t i m i z a t i o n (pp.17-28). D.C.  focus  Toronto:  Heath.  C o l l i n s , R. L., T a y l o r , S. E., & Skokan, L. A.  (1990). A b e t t e r w o r l d o r  a s h a t t e r e d v i s i o n ? Changes i n l i f e p e r s p e c t i v e s f o l l o w i n g v i c t i m i z a t i o n . S o c i a l C o g n i t i o n . 8, 263-285.  Compas, B. E., F o r s y t h e , C. J . , & Consistency  Wagner, B. W.  (1988).  and v a r i a b i l i t y i n c a u s a l a t t r i b u t i o n s and c o p i n g  with  s t r e s s . C o g n i t i v e Therapy and R e s e a r c h , 12, 305-318. Compas, B. E., & Orosan, P. G. ( i n p r e s s ) . C o g n i t i v e a p p r a i s a l s and coping w i t h s t r e s s : Implications f o r understanding  women and  employment s t r e s s . I n B. Long & S. E. Kahn ( E d s . ) , Women, work, and c o p i n g ; A m u l t i d i s c i p l i n a r v approach t o w o r k p l a c e s t r e s s . M o n t r e a l : McGill-Queens U n i v e r s i t y Press. Cook, R. F., Smith, B. E., & H a r r e l l , A. V. (1987). H e l p i n g  crime  v i c t i m s l e v e l s o f trauma and e f f e c t i v e n e s s o f s e r v i c e s . U.S. Department o f J u s t i c e : N a t i o n a l I n s t i t u t e o f J u s t i c e . Cozby, P. C. (1981). Methods i n b e h a v i o r a l r e s e a r c h . P a l o A l t o , CA: Mayfield. Crano, W. D., & Brewer, M. B. (1986). P r i n c i p l e s and methods o f s o c i a l r e s e a r c h . Boston: A l l y n and Bacon. Crowne, D. P., & Marlowe, D. (1960). A new s c a l e o f s o c i a l  desirability  independent o f p s y c h o p a t h o l o g y . J o u r n a l o f C o n s u l t i n g P s y c h o l o g y . 24. 349-354. Darroch,  R. K., & S t e i n e r , I . D. (1970). R o l e - p l a y i n g : An a l t e r n a t i v e  t o l a b o r a t o r y r e s e a r c h ? J o u r n a l o f P e r s o n a l i t y . 38. 302-311. Douce, L. A. (1988). V i c t i m i z a t i o n : Our 'hidden'  c l i e n t s . The C o u n s e l i n g  P s y c h o l o g i s t . 16, 630-634. E n d l e r , N. S., & P a r k e r , J . D. A. (1990). M u l t i d i m e n s i o n a l assessment o f c o p i n g ; A c r i t i c a l e v a l u a t i o n . J o u r n a l o f P e r s o n a l i t y and S o c i a l Psychology,  58, 844-854.  F a t t a h , E. A. (1991). U n d e r s t a n d i n g c r i m i n a l v i c t i m i z a t i o n . S c a r b o r o u g h , ON: P r e n t i c e - H a l l . F i s c h e r , C. T. (1984). A phenomenological study o f b e i n g c r i m i n a l l y v i c t i m i z e d : C o n t r i b u t i o n and c o n s t r a i n t s o f c j u a l i t a t i v e r e s e a r c h . J o u r n a l o f S o c i a l I s s u e s , 40. 161-178.  Folkman, S.  (1984). P e r s o n a l c o n t r o l and s t r e s s and c o p i n g p r o c e s s e s : A  t h e o r e t i c a l a n a l y s i s . J o u r n a l of P e r s o n a l i t y and  Social  P s y c h o l o g y , 46, 839-852, Folkman, S., A l d w i n , C ,  & L a z a r u s , R. S.  (1981, A u g u s t ) .  The  r e l a t i o n s h i p between l o c u s o f c o n t r o l , c o g n i t i v e a p p r a i s a l  and  c o p i n g . Paper p r e s e n t e d a t meetings o f t h e American P s y c h o l o g i c a l A s s o c i a t i o n , Los A n g e l e s , Folkman, S.,  CA.  & L a z a r u s , R. S.  (1980). An a n a l y s i s o f c o p i n g i n a m i d d l e -  aged community sample. J o u r n a l o f H e a l t h and S o c i a l B e h a v i o r . 21, 219-239. Folkman, S.,  & L a z a r u s , R. S. (1985). I f i t changes i t must be a  p r o c e s s : Study o f emotion and c o p i n g d u r i n g t h r e e s t a g e s o f a c o l l e g e e x a m i n a t i o n . J o u r n a l o f P e r s o n a l i t y and S o c i a l P s y c h o l o g y . 48.  150-  170. Folkman, S., L a z a r u s , R. S., D u n k e l - S c h e t t e r , C.,  DeLongis, A.,  & Gruen,  R. J . (1986). Dynamics of a s t e s s e n c o u t e r : C o g n i t i v e a p p r a i s a l , c o p i n g , and encounter outcomes. J o u r n a l o f P e r s o n a l i t y and  Social  P s y c h o l o g y . 50, 992-1003. F r i e z e , I . H.,  Hymer, S.,  & Greenberg,  M.S.  (1987). D e s c r i b i n g t h e c r i m e  victim: Psychological reactions to victimization.  Professional  P s y c h o l o g y : Research and P r a c t i c e . 18, 299-315. G o t t f r e d s o n , G, D.,  R e i s e r , M.,  & Tsegaye-Spates,  C. R.  (1987).  P s y c h o l o g i c a l help f o r v i c t i m s of crime. P r o f e s s i o n a l P s y c h o l o g y : Research and P r a c t i c e . 18. 316-325. Greenberg,  M. S.  (1967). R o l e p l a y i n g : An a l t e r n a t i v e t o d e c e p t i o n ?  Journal of P e r s o n a l i t y G r e e n g l a s s , E.R.  and S o c i a l P s y c h o l o g y . 7, 152-157.  (1982). A w o r l d o f d i f f e r e n c e . Gender r o l e s i n  p e r s p e c t i v e . T o r o n t o , ON: Haase, R. F., & E l l i s , M. V,  John W i l e y & Sons. (1987). M u l t i v a r i a t e a n a l y s i s o f  v a r i a n c e . J o u r n a l o f C o u n s e l i n g P s y c h o l o g y . 34. 404-413.  H a n s o n - F r i e z e , I . , Hymer, S., & Greenberg,  M. S.  (1987), D e s c r i b i n g t h e  crime v i c t i m : P s y c h o l o g i c a l Reactions t o V i c t i m i z a t i o n .  Professional  P s y c h o l o g y ; Research and P r a c t i c e , 18. 299-315. H a r t , K. E., & Cardozo, S. R.  (1986, A u g u s t ) . Ways o f c o p i n g w i t h anger-  p r o v o k i n g s i t u a t i o n s . C o g n i t i v e c o r r e l a t e s . Paper p r e s e n t e d a t t h e American  P s y c h o l o g i c a l C o n v e n t i o n , Washington,  H a r t , K. E., & Cardozo, S. R.  DC.  (1988, March). Convergent  and d i v e r g e n t  v a l i d i t y e v i d e n c e f o r a new measure o f t h r e a t e n i n g and c h a l l e n g i n g s t r e s s a p p r a i s a l s . Paper p r e s e n t e d a t t h e C o n v e n t i o n o f S o u t h e a s t e r n P s y c h o l o g i c a l A s s o c i a t i o n , New H e n d r i c k , C.  O r l e a n s , LA.  (1991). R e p l i c a t i o n s , s t r i c t  replications,  c o n c e p t u a l r e p l i c a t i o n s : Are t h e y i m p o r t a n t ? I n J . W.  and N e u l i e p (Ed.),  R e p l i c a t i o n r e s e a r c h i n t h e s o c i a l s c i e n c e s (pp. 41-51).  London;  Sage. H e r s c h , P. D.,  & S c h e i b e , K. E. (1967). V a l i d i t y o f i n t e r n a l  and  e x t e r n a l c o n t r o l as a p e r s o n a l i t y d i m e n s i o n . J o u r n a l o f C o n s u l t i n g P s y c h o l o g y . 31. 609-613. H e r r i n g t o n , L. H.  (1985). V i c t i m s o f c r i m e ; T h e i r p l i g h t  our  r e s p o n s e . American P s y c h o l o g i s t . 40. 99-103. H o r o w i t z , I . A.,  & R o t h s c h i l d , B. H.  (1970). E f f e c t o f i n s t r u c t i o n s  on i n t e r n a l - e x t e r n a l c o n t r o l o f r e i n f o r c e m e n t on c o n d i t i o n e d f i n g e r w i t h d r a w a l response. P s y c h o l o g i c a l R e p o r t s , 26, 395-400. Hoyenga, K. B.,  & Hoyenga, K. T.  (1979). The g u e s t i o n o f sex  d i f f e r e n c e s . Boston: L i t t l e , Brown. J a n o f f - B u l m a n , R.,  & F r i e z e - H a n s o n , I . (1987). The r o l e o f gender i n  r e a c t i o n s t o c r i m i n a l v i c t i m i z a t i o n s . I n R. C. B a r n t t , L. B i e n e r , & G. K. Baruch  ( E d s . ) , Gender and s t r e s s (pp. 159-184). New  York:  Free  Press. J a n o f f - B u l m a n , R.,  & F r i e z e , I . H.  (1983). A t h e o r e t i c a l  p e r s p e c t i v e f o r u n d e r s t a n d i n g r e a c t i o n s t o v i c t i m i z a t i o n . J o u r n a l of S o c i a l I s s u e s , 39,  1-17.  Johnson, M. K.,  & Raye, C. L. (1981). R e a l i t y m o n i t o r i n g .  P s y c h o l o g i c a l Review. 88f 67-85. Johnson, M. K.,  F o l e y , M. A.,  Suengas, A. G.,  & Raye, C.  L.  (1988). Phenomenal c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f memories f o r p e r c e i v e d and imagined a u t o b i o g r a p h i c a l e v e n t s . J o u r n a l o f E x p e r i m e n t a l P s y c h o l o g y . 117.  371-376.  Kahn, R. L., Wolfe, D. M., R o s e n t h a l , R. A.  Quinn, R. P., Snoek, T. C ,  &  (1964). O r g a n i z a t i o n a l s t r e s s : S t u d i e s i n r o l e  c o n f l i c t and a m b i g u i t y . New  York: W i l e y  Lamal, P. L. (1991). On t h e importance o f r e p l i c a t i o n . I n J . W.  Neuliep  ( E d . ) , R e p l i c a t i o n i n t h e s o c i a l s c i e n c e s (pp.31-37). London: Sage. L a z a r u s , R. S.,  & Folkman, S.  (1984). S t r e s s , a p p r a i s a l and c o p i n g .  New  York: S p r i n g e r . L e f c o u r t , H. M.  (1976). Locus o f c o n t r o l : C u r r e n t t r e n d s i n t h e o r y and  r e s e a r c h . New L e f c o u r t , H. M.  York: Lawrence  Erlbaum.  ( E d . ) . (1983). Research w i t h t h e l o c u s o f c o n t r o l  c o n s t r u c t developments and s o c i a l problems. London: Academic P r e s s . Levenson,  H.  (1981). D i f f e r e n t i a t i n g among i n t e r n a l i t y , p o w e r f u l o t h e r s ,  and chance.  I n H. L e f c o u r t ( E d . ) , Research w i t h t h e l o c u s o f c o n t r o l  c o n s t r u c t : V o l . 1. Assessment Methods (pp. 15-59). New  Y o r k : Academic  Press. Long, B. C.  (1990). R e l a t i o n between c o p i n g s t r a t e g i e s ,  sex-typed  t r a i t s , and e n v i r o n m e n t a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s : A comparison  o f male and  female managers. J o u r n a l o f C o u n s e l i n g P s y c h o l o g y . 37. 185-194. Long, B. C.,  & G e s s a r o l i , M. E.  (1989). The r e l a t i o n s h i p between t e a c h e r  s t r e s s and p e r c e i v e d c o p i n g e f f e c t i v e n e s s : Gender and m a r i t a l d i f f e r e n c e s . A l b e r t a J o u r n a l o f E d u c a t i o n a l R e s e a r c h . 35, 308-324. M a g u i r e , M.  (1980). The impact o f b u r g l a r y upon v i c t i m s . B r i t i s h J o u r n a l  o f C r i m i n o l o g y . 20, 261-275.  McCann, I . L., Sakheim, D. K.,  & Abrahamson, D. J . (1988). Trauma and  v i c t i m i z a t i o n : A model o f p s y c h o l o g i c a l The C o u n s e l i n g P s v c h o l o a i s t . M i l l e r , A. G.  adaptation.  16. 531-594.  (1972). R o l e p l a y i n g : An a l t e r n a t i v e t o d e c e p t i o n ? A  r e v i e w o f t h e e v i d e n c e . American P s v c h o l o g i s t . M i l l e r , C. T.  (1984). Self-schemas, gender,  and  27, 623-636. social  comparison: A c l a r i f i c a t i o n o f t h e r e l a t e d a t t r i b u t e s h y p o t h e s i s . J o u r n a l o f P e r s o n a l i t y and S o c i a l P s v c h o l o g y . 46. 1222-1229. M i r e l s , H. L. (1970). Dimensions Journal of Consulting N o r r i s , F. H.,  Kaniasty,  of i n t e r n a l versus e x t e r n a l c o n t r o l .  and C l i n i c a l P s y c h o l o g y . 34, 226-228. K. Z.,  & Scheer, D.  (1990). Use o f m e n t a l  h e a l t h s e r v i c e s among v i c t i m s o f c r i m e : Frequency, subsequent  r e c o v e r y . J o u r n a l of C o n s u l t i n g  c o r r e l a t e s , and  and C l i n i c a l  Psvchology.  58, 538-547. Papp, W.  (1981). B e i n g b u r g l a r i z e d : An account o f v i c t i m i z a t i o n .  Victimology. P a r k e s , K. R.  6, 297-305. (1984). Locus o f c o n t r o l , c o g n i t i v e a p p r a i s a l and  coping  i n s t r e s s f u l e p i s o d e s . J o u r n a l o f P e r s o n a l i t y and S o c i a l P s y c h o l o g y . 40, 655-668. Peacock,  E. J . , & Wong, T. P.  (1990, J u n e ) . A p p r a i s a l , c o p i n g and  p s y c h o l o g i c a l d i s t r e s s ; A s t r u c t u r a l modeling approach. p r e s e n t e d a t t h e annual meeting of t h e Canadian A s s o c i a t i o n , Ottawa, P h a r e s , E. J . (1976).  Paper  Psychology  ON. Locus o f c o n t r o l i n p e r s o n a l i t y . M o r r i s t o w n , NJ:  General Learning Press. Pruchno, R. A.,  & Resch, N. L.  (1989). M e n t a l h e a l t h o f  c a r e g i v i n g spouses: Coping as m e d i a t o r , moderator o r main e f f e c t ? P s y c h o l o g y and A g i n g . 4, 454-463. R a n d l e , K. J . (1985). M e n t a l h e a l t h a s s i s t a n c e t o v i c t i m s o f c r i m e t h e i r f a m i l i e s . Ottawa, ON: Development.  The Canadian C o u n c i l on S o c i a l  and  Reppetto, T. A. (1974). R e s i d e n t i a l c r i m e . S p r i n g f i e l d , MA: R e v e l l e , W.,  Ballinger.  & R o c k l i n , T. (1979). Very s i m p l e s t r u c t u r e : An a l t e r n a t i v e  p r o c e d u r e f o r e s t i m a t i n g t h e o p t i m a l number o f interprétable  factors.  M u l t i v a r i a t e B e h a v i o r a l Research, 14, 403-414. R o s o l a c k , T. K., & Hampson, S. E. (1991). A new t y p o l o g y o f h e a l t h b e h a v i o u r s f o r p e r s o n a l i t y - h e a l t h p r e d i c t i o n s : t h e case o f l o c u s o f c o n t r o l . European J o u r n a l o f P e r s o n a l i t y . 5, 151-168. R o t t e r , J . B. (1966). G e n e r a l i z e d e x p e c t a n c i e s f o r i n t e r n a l v s . e x t e r n a l c o n t r o l o f r e i n f o r c e m e n t . P s y c h o l o g i c a l Monographs. 80. 1-28. R o t t e r , J . B. (1975). Some problems and m i s c o n c e p t i o n s r e l a t e d t o t h e construct of i n t e r n a l vs. external control of reinforcement. Journal o f C o n s u l t i n g and C l i n i c a l P s y c h o l o g y . 43, 56-67. R o t t e r , J . B. (1990). I n t e r n a l v e r s u s e x t e r n a l c o n t r o l o f r e i n f o r c e m e n t . A case h i s t o r y o f a v a r i a b l e . American P s y c h o l o g i s t . 145.  489-493.  Sacco, V. F. (1990). Gender, f e a r , and v i c t i m i z a t i o n : A p r e l i m i n a r y a p p l i c a t i o n o f p o w e r - c o n t r o l t h e o r y . S o c i o l o g i c a l Spectrum. 10. 485-506 S c h o o l e r , J . W.,  Gerhard, D., & L o f t u s , E. F. (1986). Q u a l i t i e s o f t h e  u n r e a l . J o u r n a l o f E x p e r i m e n t a l P s y c h o l o g y . 12, 171-181. S h a v e l s o n , R. J . (1988). S t a t i s t i c a l r e a s o n i n g f o r t h e b e h a v i o r a l s c i e n c e s (2nd e d . ) . Boston, MA: A l l y n & Bacon. S m i t h , R. E., S m o l l , F. L., & P t a c e k , J . T. (1990). C o n j u n c t i v e moderate v a r i a b l e s i n v u l n e r a b i l i t y and r e s i l i e n c y r e s e a r c h : L i f e s t r e s s , s o c i a l support and c o p i n g s k i l l s , and a d o l e s c e n t s p o r t i n j u r i e s . J o u r n a l o f P e r s o n a l i t y and S o c i a l P s y c h o l o g y . 58. 360-370. S n a l e , G. J . A. (1984). P s y c h o l o g i c a l e f f e c t s and b e h a v i o r a l changes i n t h e c a s e o f v i c t i m s o f s e r i o u s c r i m e s . I n R. B l o c k ( E d . ) , V i c t i m i z a t i o n and f e a r o f c r i m e . World p e r s p e c t i v e s (pp. 87-29). U.S. Department o f J u s t i c e .  Solomon, Z., M i k u l i n c e r , M.,  & B e n b e n i s h t y , R.  (1989). Locus o f c o n t r o l  and c o m b a t - r e l a t e d p o s t - t r a u m a t i c s t r e s s d i s o r d e r : The  intervening  r o l e o f b a t t l e i n t e n s i t y , t h r e a t a p p r a i s a l , and c o p i n g . B r i t i s h J o u r n a l o f C l i n i c a l Psychology. 28, 131-144. Stone, A. A., Greenberg, M.,  Kennedy-Moore, E., & Newman, M.  (1991).  S e l f - r e p o r t , s i t u a t i o n - s p e c i f i c c o p i n g q u e s t i o n n a i r e s : What a r e t h e y measuring?.  J o u r n a l o f P e r s o n a l i t y and S o c i a l P s y c h o l o g y .  61,  648-658. S t r a h a n , R.,  & G e r b a s h i , K. C.  (1972). S h o r t , homogenous v e r s i o n o f t h e  Marlowe-Crowne s o c i a l d e s i r a b i l i t y s c a l e . J o u r n a l o f C l i n i c a l P s y c h o l o g y . 28, 191-199. S t r i c k l a n d , B. R.  (1978). I n t e r n a l - e x t e r n a l e x p e c t a n c i e s and  r e l a t e d b e h a v i o r s . J o u r n a l o f C o n s u l t i n g and C l i n i c a l  health-  Psychology.  46, 1192-1211. S t r i c k l a n d , B. R.  (1989). I n t e r n a l - e x t e r n a c o n t r o l e x p e c t a n c i e s from  c o n t i n g e n c y t o c r e a t i v i t y . American Suengas, A. G.,  & Johnson, M. K.  P s y c h o l o g i s t , 44.  1-12.  (1988). Q u a l i t a t i v e e f f e c t s on  r e h e a r s a l on memories f o r p e r c e i v e d and imagined complex e v e n t s . J o u r n a l o f E x p e r i m e n t a l P s y c h o l o g y . 117. T a y l o r , S. E., Wood, J . V.,  & L i c h t m a n , R.R.  377-389. (1983). I t c o u l d be worse:  S e l e c t i v e e v a l u a t i o n as a response t o v i c t i m i z a t i o n . J o u r n a l o f S o c i a l I s s u e s . 39. 19-40. T a y l o r , S. E., & S c h n e i d e r , S. K.  (1989). Coping and t h e s i m u l a t i o n o f  e v e n t s . S o c i a l C o g n i t i o n , 2, 174-194. T h o i t s , P. A.  (1991). P a t t e r n s i n c o p i n g w i t h c o n t r o l l a b l e  and  u n c o n t r o l l a b l e e v e n t s . I n E. M. Cummings, A. L. Greene, & K.  H.  K a r r a k e r ( E d s . ) , L i f e - s p a n developmental p s y c h o l o g y : p e r s p e c t i v e s on s t r e s s and c o p i n g (pp. 235-258). H i l l s d a l e , NJ: Thompson, S. C.,  & Spacapan, S.  Erlbaum.  (1991). P e r c e p t i o n s o f c o n t r o l i n  v u l n e r a b l e p o p u l a t i o n s . J o u r n a l o f S o c i a l I s s u e s , 47.  1-21.  T o b i n , D, L., H o l r o y d , K. A., R e y n o l d s , R. V.,  & W i g a l , J . K.  (1989).  The h i e r a r c h i c a l f a c t o r s t r u c t u r e o f t h e c o p i n g s t r a t e g i e s i n v e n t o r y . C o g n i t i v e Therapv and Research. 13. 343-361. T y l e r , T. R.  (1981). P e r c e i v e d c o n t r o l and b e h a v i o r a l r e a c t i o n s t o  c r i m e . P e r s o n a l i t y and S o c i a l P s v c h o l o g v B u l l e t i n , 7.» 212-217. V a u g h t e r , R.  (1979). P s y c h o l o g y . I n J.H. W i l l i a m s ( E d . ) ,  P s y c h o l o g y o f women; S e l e c t e d r e a d i n g s (pp. 149-171). T o r o n t o , W.W.  ON.  Norton.  V i n g e r h o e t s , A. J . M., psychosomatic  & Van Heck, G. L. (1990). Gender, c o p i n g and  symptoms. P s y c h o l o g i c a l M e d i c i n e . 20. 125-135.  V i t a l i a n o , P. P., Russo, J . , M a i u r o , R. D.  (1987). Locus o f c o n t r o l ,  t y p e o f s t r e s s o r , and a p p r a i s a l w i t h i n a c o g n i t i v e - p h e n o m e n o l o g i c a l model o f s t r e s s . J o u r n a l o f Research i n P e r s o n a l i t y . 21, 224-237. V i t a l i a n o , P. P., Maiuro, R.D.,  Russo, J . , & Becker, J . (1987).  Raw  v e r s u s r e l a t i v e s c o r e s i n t h e assessment o f c o p i n g s t r a t e g i e s . J o u r n a l o f B e h a v i o r a l M e d i c i n e . 10, W a l l e r , T.,  & O k i h i r o , N.  1-18.  (1978). B u r g l a r y ; The v i c t i m and t h e p u b l i c .  T o r o n t o ; U n i v e r s i t y o f Toronto. W a l l s t o n , K. A., W a l l s t o n , B. S., Smith, S.,  & Dobbins, C.J.  (1987).  P e r c e i v e d c o n t r o l and h e a l t h . C u r r e n t P s y c h o l o g i c a l R e s e a r c h Reviews,  5,  W i l l i s , R. H.,  and  5-25. & W i l l i s , Y. A.  (1970). R o l e p l a y i n g v e r s u s d e c e p t i o n : An  e x p e r i m e n t a l comparison. J o u r n a l o f P e r s o n a l i t y and  Social  P s y c h o l o g y , 16, 472-477. W i r t z , P. W.,  & H a r r e l l , A. V.  (1987). V i c t i m and c r i m e  characteristics,  c o p i n g r e s p o n s e s , and s h o r t - and long-term r e c o v e r y from v i c t i m i z a t i o n . J o u r n a l o f C o n s u l t i n g and C l i n i c a l P s v c h o l o g y , 866-871.  55,  Appendix A Informed Consent Demographic Q u e s t i o n n a i r e Locus o f C o n t r o l Measure  Informed Consent T i t l e o f t h e Study:  B u r g l a r y V i c t i m Coping  Date: Purpose o f t h e Study: T h i s i n v e s t i g a t i o n i s b e i n g conducted t o g a i n a b e t t e r o f how b u r g l a r y v i c t i m s cope w i t h t h e b u r g l a r y e x p e r i e n c e .  understanding  Procedure: As a p a r t i c i p a n t you w i l l be asked t o do t h e f o l l o w i n g : 1.  View a 2 minute v i d e o .  2. Do paper and p e n c i l q u e s t i o n n a i r e s b e f o r e and a f t e r view the video. The q u e s t i o n n a i r e s w i l l t a k e 25 t o 30 m i n u t e s t o complete.  you  This i s to c e r t i f y that I, , agree t o v o l u n t a r i l y p a r t i c i p a t e i n t h i s i n v e s t i g a t i o n on b u r g l a r y . I u n d e r s t a n d t h a t I do not have t o p a r t i c i p a t e and t h a t I am f r e e t o w i t h d r a w my consent and may t e r m i n a t e my p a r t i c i p a t i o n a t any t i m e . T h i s w i l l not j e o p a r d i z e my s t a n d i n g nor my o p p o r t u n i t y t o p a r t i c i p a t e i n any o t h e r programs sponsored by t h e U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a o r Douglas C o l l e g e . Data t h a t a r e c o l l e c t e d w i l l remain c o n f i d e n t i a l w i t h r e g a r d t o my i d e n t i t y . P a r t i c i p a n t s w i l l be i d e n t i f i e d by number o n l y and a l l q u e s t i o n n a i r e s w i l l be kept i n a l o c k e d f i l e c a b i n e t . Only the i n v e s t i g a t o r and h i s s u p e r v i s o r w i l l have access t o t h e f i l e s . I w i l l have a chance t o ask any q u e s t i o n s I want about t h i s r e s e a r c h project. Q u e s t i o n s I ask w i l l be answered t o my s a t i s f a c t i o n . I will r e c e i v e a copy o f t h i s consent form. Date:  Participant's Faculty Supervisor: Dr. B. Long Dept. o f C o u n s e l l i n g P s y c h o l o g y 228-4756  signature  Investigator's Signature Randy M a c k o f f , MA, Dept. of C o u n s e l l i n g Psychology, UBC 527-5328  Demographic I n f o r m a t i o n Directions:  Please c i r c l e the l e t t e r that i s appropriate  f o r each i t e m . 1.  Sex:  2.  Age:  3.  M a r i t a l Status  4.  [A] male  female  years  [A]  single  [B]  m a r r i e d ( i n c l u d e s common law)  [C]  separated  [D]  divorced  [E]  remarried  [F]  widow(er)  Do you l i v e a t home w i t h your p a r e n t s ? [A]  5.  [B]  yes  [B] no  Do you pay r e n t where you l i v e ? [A]  yes  [B] no  6.  How many persons do you l i v e w i t h ?  7.  What i s your y e a r l y household income?  8.  [A]  under $10,000 p e r y e a r  [B]  $10,000 - $20,000 p e r y e a r  [C]  $21,000 - $30,000 p e r y e a r  [D]  $31,000 - $40,000 p e r year  [E]  o v e r $40,000 p e r y e a r  persons  Have you e v e r been a v i c t i m o f b u r g l a r y ( b u r g l a r y i s d e f i n e d as when a p e r s o n ( s ) e n t e r s your r e s i d e n c e w i t h o u t p e r m i s s i o n i n o r d e r t o commit a c r i m e ) ? [A]  yes  [B] no  B u r g l a r y V i c t i m s Only 9.  Were you i n your home a t t h e t i m e o f t h e b u r g l a r y ? [A]  yes  [B] no  10. Were you c o n f r o n t e d by t h e s u s p e c t ( s ) a t t h e t i m e o f  the  burglary? [A] 11. What was  yes  [B]  no  t h e t o t a l v a l u e of items  stolen?  dollars 12. How  s e v e r e was  t h e damage t o your p r o p e r t y as a r e s u l t o f  burglary? [A]  severe  [B]  moderate  [C]  light  [D]  none  B u r g l a r y V i c t i m s and E x p e r i m e n t a l l v Induced V i c t i m s 13. Have you been a v i c t i m o f any c r i m e o t h e r t h a n b u r g l a r y ? [A] 14.  yes  [B]  no  I f you answered yes t o 13, p l e a s e s p e c i f y t h e  crime(s).  the  Locus of Control  On  t h e next  page  is a  series  r e p r e s e n t s a commonly h e l d o p i n i o n .  of  attitude  statements.  Each  There a r e no r i g h t o r wrong answers.  You w i l l p r o b a b l y agree w i t h some i t e m s and d i s a g r e e w i t h o t h e r s .  We a r e  i n t e r e s t e d i n t h e e x t e n t t o which you agree o r d i s a g r e e w i t h such m a t t e r s of  opinion. Read each statement c a r e f u l l y . Then i n d i c a t e t h e e x t e n t t o w h i c h you  agree o r d i s a g r e e by c i r c l i n g t h e number f o l l o w i n g each s t a t e m e n t .  The  numbers and t h e i r meanings a r e i n d i c a t e d below: I f you agree s t r o n g l y : I f you agree somewhat: I f you agree s l i g h t l y :  c i r c l e +3 c i r c l e +2 c i r c l e +1  I f you d i s a g r e e s l i g h t l y : I f you d i s a g r e e somewhat: I f you d i s a g r e e s t r o n g l y :  c i r c l e -1 c i r c l e -2 c i r c l e -3  F i r s t impressions are u s u a l l y best.  Read each s t a t e m e n t , d e c i d e i f  you agree o r d i s a g r e e and t h e s t r e n g t h o f your o p i n i o n , and t h e n the  circle  a p p r o p r i a t e number.  Give Your Opinion On Every Statement If  you  find  that  t h e numbers  t o be  used  i n answering  do n o t  a d e q u a t e l y r e f l e c t your own o p i n i o n , use t h e one t h a t i s c l o s e s t t o t h e way you f e e l .  Thank you.  Disagree Strongly  Disagree Somewhat  Disagree Slightly  -3  -2  -1  Agree Slightly  Agree Somewhat  Agree Strongly  +2  +3  +1  1.  Whether o r not I g e t t o be a l e a d e r depends m o s t l y on my a b i l i t y .  -3  -2  -1  +1  +2  +3  2.  To a g r e a t e x t e n t my l i f e i s c o n t r o l l e d by a c c i d e n t a l happenings.  -3  -2  -1  +1  +2  +3  3.  I f e e l l i k e what happens i n my l i f e i s m o s t l y d e t e r mined by p o w e r f u l p e o p l e .  -3  -2  -1  +1  +2  +3  4.  Whether o r not I g e t i n t o a c a r a c c i d e n t depends m o s t l y on how good a d r i v e r I am.  -3  -2  -1  +1  +2  +3  5.  When I make p l a n s , I am almost c e r t a i n t o make them work.  - 3 - 2  -1  +1  +2  +3  6.  O f t e n t h e r e i s no chance of p r o t e c t i n g my p e r s o n a l i n t e r e s t s from bad l u c k happenings.  -3  -2  -1  +1  +2  +3  7.  When I g e t what I want, i t ' s u s u a l l y because I'm lucky.  -3  -2  -1  +1  +2  +3  8.  A l t h o u g h I might have good a b i l i t y , I w i l l not be given leadership responsib i l i t y without appealing t o those i n p o s i t i o n s of power.  -3  -2  -1  +1  +2  +3  9.  How many f r i e n d s I have depends on how n i c e a p e r s o n I am.  -3  -2  -1  +1  +2  +3  10. I have o f t e n found t h a t what i s g o i n g t o happen w i l l happen.  -3  -2  -1  +1  +2  +3  Disagree Strongly  Disagree Somewhat  Disagree Slightly  -3  -2  -1  Agree Slightly  Agree Somewhat  Agree Strongly  +2  +3  +1  11. My l i f e i s c h i e f l y cont r o l l e d by p o w e r f u l o t h e r s .  -3  -2  -1  +1  +2  +3  12. Whether o r not I g e t i n t o a c a r accident i s mostly a matter of luck.  -3  -2  -1  +1  +2  +3  13. P e o p l e l i k e m y s e l f have v e r y l i t t l e chance o f p r o t e c t i n g our personal i n t e r e s t s when t h e y conf l i c t w i t h those of strong p r e s s u r e groups.  -3  -2  -1  +1  +2  +3  14.  -3  -2  -1  +1  +2  +3  15. G e t t i n g what I want r e q u i r e s p l e a s i n g those p e o p l e above me.  -3  -2  -1  +1  +2  +3  16. Whether o r not I g e t t o be a l e a d e r depends on whether I'm l u c k y enough t o be i n t h e r i g h t p l a c e a t the r i g h t time.  -3  -2  -1  +1  +2  +3  17.  I f i m p o r t a n t p e o p l e were t o decide they didn't l i k e me, I p r o b a b l y wouldn't make f r i e n d s .  -3  -2  -1  +1  +2  +3  18.  I c a n p r e t t y much determine what w i l l happen i n my life.  -3  -2  -1  +1  +2  +3  19.  I am u s u a l l y a b l e t o p r o t e c t my p e r s o n a l i n t e r e s t s .  -3  -2  -1  +1  +2  +3  I t ' s n o t always w i s e f o r me t o p l a n t o o f a r ahead because many t h i n g s t u r n out t o be a m a t t e r o f good o r bad f o r t u n e .  Disagree Strongly  Disagree Somewhat  Disagree Slightly  Agree Slightly  Agree Somewhat  Agree Strongly  -3  -2  -1  +1  +2  +3  20. Whether o r n o t I g e t i n t o a c a r a c c i d e n t depends m o s t l y on t h e o t h e r d r i v e r .  -3  -2  -1  +1  +2  +3  21. When I g e t what I want, i t ' s u s u a l l y because I worked hard f o r i t .  -3  -2  -1  +1  +2  +3  22. I n o r d e r t o have my p l a n s work, I make s u r e t h a t they f i t i n w i t h the d e s i r e s o f p e o p l e who have power o v e r me.  -3  -2  -1  +1  +2  +3  23. My l i f e i s determined by my own a c t i o n s .  -3  -2  -1  +1  +2  +3  24. I t ' s c h i e f l y a matter o f f a t e whether o r not I have a few f r i e n d s o r many friends.  -3  -2  -1  +1  +2  +3  Appendix B Video D e s c r i p t i o n Video Viewing I n s t r u c t i o n s Coping Measure S i t u a t i o n a l A p p r a i s a l s o f C o n t r o l Measure Outcome v a l u e Measure Social Desirability Burglary  Scale  I n t e n s i t y Measure  D e s c r i p t i o n of Video Two C a u c a s i a n males i n t h e i r l a t e t e e n s attempt t o p r y open t h e s i d e door o f a house.  Unable t o g a i n e n t r y , one o f t h e males smashes open t h e  a d j a c e n t window and u n l o c k s t h e door. d i r e c t l y t o t h e master bedroom. empties  Both males e n t e r t h e house and  Once i n s i d e t h e bedroom one o f t h e males  a c l o t h i n g drawer on t h e bed  second male opens a desk drawer and  and  s c a t t e r s the belongings.  f i n d s a cheque i n an e n v e l o p e .  opens t h e envelope and s t e a l s t h e cheque.  apparent  The He  Both males drop t h e socks t h a t  t h e y had used t o cover t h e i r hands and r u n out t h e f r o n t door stolen property.  go  carrying  The b u r g l a r y t a k e s p l a c e i n t h e n i g h t and t h e r e i s no  s i g n o f anyone b e i n g a t home.  There i s d r a m a t i c music i n t h e background and t h e e x c i t e d b r e a t h i n g o f t h e s u s p e c t s can be heard. 24" s c r e e n .  The v i d e o i s i n c o l o u r and i s shown on a  The v i d e o l a s t s a p p r o x i m a t e l y 2 m i n u t e s .  Video Viewing Instructions for Burglary  Victims  "You a r e about t o watch a 2 minute v i d e o o f a t y p i c a l b u r g l a r y .  While  v i e w i n g t h i s b u r g l a r y t r y t o remember, i n as much d e t a i l as p o s s i b l e , what y o u r own e x p e r i e n c e s were when you were b u r g l a r i z e d . " Video Viewing Instructions for Experimentally  Induced Victims  "You a r e about t o watch a 2 minute v i d e o o f a t y p i c a l b u r g l a r y .  Imagine,  as you s i t here a s i m i l a r b u r g l a r y as t h e one you a r e about t o w i t n e s s i s t a k i n g p l a c e a t your r e s i d e n c e . return  home  to  discover  that  When you g e t out o f c l a s s t o n i g h t you your  residence  has  been  burglarized.  P e r s o n a l and p r i v a t e items have been touched by a s t r a n g e r and some i t e m s have been s t o l e n . " The v i e w i n g o f t h i s v i d e o took p l a c e i n a maximum group s i z e o f 35 p a r t i c i p a n t s i n a classroom.  The p a r t i c i p a n t s were s e a t e d a t t a b l e s .  v i d e o was p l a y e d on a 24" c o l o u r s c r e e n .  The  COPE (Victim Group) Instructions: Remember back t o when you were a v i c t i m o f b u r g l a r y .  I n the  following  q u e s t i o n n a i r e , r a t e each i t e m a c c o r d i n g t o what y o u d i d and f e l t o v e r t h e f i r s t 7 days f o l l o w i n g t h e b u r g l a r y . Then  respond  t o each  of the following  a p p r o p r i a t e number a t t h e end o f each i t e m . i t e m separately  In your  items  by c i r c l i n g t h e  P l e a s e t r y t o r e s p o n d t o each Choose y o u r  answers  t h o u g h t f u l l y , and make your answers as t r u e FOR YOU as you can.  Please  answer e v e r y i t e m .  mind from each other  Item.  There a r e no " r i g h t " o r "wrong" answers, so choose t h e  most a c c u r a t e answer f o r YOU - not what you t h i n k "most p e o p l e " would s a y or do.  I n d i c a t e what you d i d when YOU were b u r g l a r i z e d . COPE (Experimentally Induced Victim Group)  Instructions : Imagine  a similar  b u r g l a r y t o t h e one you have viewed  o c c u r r e d a t your r e s i d e n c e .  has j u s t  When you get out o f c l a s s t o n i g h t you r e t u r n  home t o d i s c o v e r t h a t your r e s i d e n c e has been b u r g l a r i z e d .  P e r s o n a l and  p r i v a t e i t e m s have been touched by a s t r a n g e r and some i t e m s have been stolen.  I n t h e f o l l o w i n g q u e s t i o n n a i r e , r a t e each i t e m a c c o r d i n g t o what  you would do and f e e l over t h e f i r s t 7 days f o l l o w i n g t h e b u r g l a r y . Then  respond  t o each  of the following  a p p r o p r i a t e number a t t h e end o f each i t e m . i t e m separately  in your  items  by c i r c l i n g t h e  P l e a s e t r y t o r e s p o n d t o each Choose y o u r  answers  t h o u g h t f u l l y , and make your answers as t r u e FOR YOU as you can.  Please  answer e v e r y i t e m .  mid from each other  item.  There a r e no " r i g h t " o r "wrong" answers, so choose t h e  most a c c u r a t e answer f o r YOU - not what you t h i n k "most p e o p l e " would s a y o r do.  I n d i c a t e what you would do i f YOU  were b u r g l a r i z e d .  E x p e r i m e n t a l l y Induced V i c t i m s I w i l l n o t do t h i s at a l l 1  I w i l l do t h i s a little bit  I w i l l do t h i s a medium amount  2  I w i l l do this a l o t  3  4  Burglary Victims I d i d n o t do t h i s at a l l  I did this a little bit  I didthis a medium amount  I did this alot  1.  I t r i e d t o grow as a p e r s o n as a r e s u l t of the experience.  3  4  2.  I t u r n e d t o work o r o t h e r subs t i t u t e a c t i v i t i e s t o t a k e my mind o f f t h i n g s .  3  4  3.  I g o t u p s e t and l e t my emotions out.  3  4  4.  I t r i e d t o g e t a d v i c e from someone about what t o do.  3  4  5.  I c o n c e n t r a t e d my e f f o r t s on d o i n g something about i t .  3  4  6.  I s a i d t o myself " t h i s i s n ' t r e a l . "  3  4  7.  I p u t my t r u s t i n God.  3  4  8.  I admitted t o myself t h a t I c o u l d n ' t d e a l w i t h i t , and q u i t trying.  3  4  9.  I r e s t r a i n e d m y s e l f from d o i n g anything too q u i c k l y .  3  4  10. I d i s c u s s e d my f e e l i n g s w i t h someone.  3  4  11. I g o t used t o t h e i d e a t h a t i t happened.  3  4  12. I t a l k e d t o someone t o f i n d out more abut t h e s i t u a t i o n .  3  4  13. I k e p t m y s e l f form g e t t i n g d i s t r a c t e d by o t h e r t h o u g h t s or a c t i v i t i e s .  3  4  14.  3  4  3  4  I daydreamed about t h i n g s o t h e r than t h i s .  15. I g o t u p s e t , and was r e a l l y aware of i t .  1  2  3  16.  I sought God's h e l p .  1  17.  I made a p l a n o f a c t i o n .  1  18.  I a c c e p t e d t h a t t h i s had happened and t h a t i t c o u l d n ' t be changed.  1  19. I h e l d o f f d o i n g a n y t h i n g about i t u n t i l the s i t u a t i o n permitted.  1  20.  1  I t r i e d t o g e t e m o t i o n a l support from f r i e n d s o r r e l a t i v e s .  21. I j u s t gave up t r y i n g t o r e a c h my g o a l .  1  22.  I took a d d i t i o n a l a c t i o n t o t r y t o g e t r i d o f t h e problem.  1  23.  I r e f u s e d t o b e l i e v e t h a t i t had happened.  1  24.  I l e t my f e e l i n g s o u t .  1  25.  I t r i e d t o see i t i n a d i f f e r e n t l i g h t , t o make i t seem more positive.  1  26.  I t a l k e d t o someone who c o u l d do something c o n c r e t e about t h e problem.  1  27.  I s l e p t more t h a n u s u a l .  1  28.  I t r i e d t o come up w i t h a s t r a t e g y about what t o do.  1  29.  I f o c u s e d on d e a l i n g w i t h t h i s p r o b l e m , and i f n e c e s s a r y l e t other things s l i d e a l i t t l e .  1  30.  I g o t sympathy and u n d e r s t a n d i n g from someone.  1  1  2  3  31. I gave up t h e attempt t o g e t what I wanted.  1  32. I l o o k e d f o r something good i n what was happening.  1  33. I thought about how I might b e s t h a n d l e t h e problem.  1  34. I p r e t e n d e d t h a t i t hadn't r e a l l y happened.  1  35. I made s u r e n o t t o make m a t t e r s worse by a c t i n g t o o soon.  1  36. I t r i e d h a r d t o p r e v e n t o t h e r t h i n g s from i n t e r f e r i n g w i t h my e f f o r t s at dealing with t h i s .  1  37. I went t o movies o r watched TV, t o t h i n k about i t l e s s .  1  38. I a c c e p t e d t h e r e a l i t y o f t h e f a c t t h a t i t happened.  1  39. I asked p e o p l e who have had s i m i l a r e x p e r i e n c e s what t h e y d i d .  1  40. I f e l t a l o t o f e m o t i o n a l d i s t r e s s and I found m y s e l f e x p r e s s i n g those f e e l i n g s a l o t .  1  41. I t o o k d i r e c t a c t i o n t o g e t around t h e problem.  1  42. I t r i e d t o f i n d comfort i n my religion.  1  43. I f o r c e d m y s e l f t o w a i t f o r t h e r i g h t t i m e t o do something.  1  44. I r e d u c e d t h e amount o f e f f o r t I put i n t o s o l v i n g the problem.  1  1  2  45. I t a l k e d felt.  3 t o someone about how  I  1  46. I l e a r n e d t o l i v e w i t h i t .  1  47. I p u t a s i d e o t h e r a c t i v i t i e s i n o r d e r t o c o n c e n t r a t e on t h i s .  1  48. I thought to take.  1  hard about what s t e p s  49. I a c t e d as though i t hadn't even happened.  1  50. I d i d what had t o be done, one step at a time.  1  51. I l e a r n e d something from t h e experience.  1  52. I p r a y e d more than u s u a l .  1  Situational Appraisals of Control (Victim Group) Instructions : Remember  back t o when you were  a victim of burglary.  In the  f o l l o w i n g q u e s t i o n n a i r e , r a t e each i t e m a c c o r d i n g t o how you f e l t o v e r t h e f i r s t 7 days f o l l o w i n g t h e b u r g l a r y . S i t u a t i o n a l Appraisals of Control (Experimentally Induced Victim Group) Instructions : Imagine a s i m i l a r  burglary  o c c u r r e d a t your r e s i d e n c e .  t o t h e one you have v i e w e d  When you g e t o u t o f c l a s s t o n i g h t you r e t u r n  home t o d i s c o v e r t h a t your r e s i d e n c e has been b u r g l a r i z e d . p r i v a t e i t e m s have been touched by a s t r a n g e r stolen.  has j u s t  P e r s o n a l and  and some i t e m s have been  I n t h e f o l l o w i n g q u e s t i o n n a i r e , r a t e each i t e m a c c o r d i n g t o what  you would f e e l o v e r t h e f i r s t 7 days f o l l o w i n g t h e b u r g l a r y .  Rate each item  according  t o the following scale.  Indicate  r e s p o n s e by c i r c l i n g t h e a p p r o p r i a t e number a t t h e end o f each i t e m . Strongly disagree  1 2  3  4  5  6  S t r o n g l y Agree  1.  D u r i n g t h e week a f t e r t h e burglary I f e l t i n control o f my emotions.  1 2  3  4  5  6  2.  D u r i n g t h e week a f t e r t h e burglary I f e l t i n control of what i t was t h a t I was d o i n g .  1 2  3  4  5  6  3.  D u r i n g t h e week a f t e r t h e burglary I f e l t i n control of the s i t u a t i o n .  1 2  3  4  5  6  your  Outcome Value (Victim Group)  Remember back t o when you were a v i c t i m o f b u r g l a r y . Outcome Value (Experimentally Induced Victim Group) Instructions : Imagine  a similar  b u r g l a r y t o t h e one  o c c u r r e d a t your r e s i d e n c e .  you  have v i e w e d  has  just  When you get out o f c l a s s t o n i g h t you r e t u r n  home t o d i s c o v e r t h a t your r e s i d e n c e has been b u r g l a r i z e d .  Personal  and  p r i v a t e i t e m s have been touched by a s t r a n g e r and some i t e m s have been stolen.  Rate each i t e m a c c o r d i n g t o t h e f o l l o w i n g s c a l e .  Indicate  your r e s p o n s e by c i r c l i n g t h e a p p r o p r i a t e number a t t h e end o f each  item.  Strongly Disagree 1.  3  T h i s s i t u a t i o n was one o f great personal to  2.  1 2  4  5  6  S t r o n g l y Agree  1 2  3  4  5  6  1 2  3  4  5  6  1 2  3  4  5  6  importance  me.  The s i t u a t i o n m a t t e r e d a g r e a t d e a l t o me.  3.  The outcome o f my a c t i o n s a f t e r the b u r g l a r y mattered a g r e a t d e a l t o me.  M-CiriO) (Victim and Experimentally Induced Group) Instructions: Listed  below  a t t i t u d e s and t r a i t s .  are a  number  of  statements  concerning personal  Read each i t e m and d e c i d e whether t h e s t a t e m e n t i s  t r u e o r f a l s e as i t p e r t a i n s t o you p e r s o n a l l y .  P l a c e a T f o r True o r an  F f o r F a l s e on t h e space t o t h e l e f t o f each s t a t e m e n t . 1.  I'm always w i l l i n g t o admit i t when I make a m i s t a k e .  2.  I always t r y t o p r a c t i c e what I p r e a c h .  3.  I never r e s e n t b e i n g asked t o r e t u r n a f a v o u r .  4.  I have never been i r k e d when p e o p l e e x p r e s s e d i d e a s v e r y d i f f e r e n t from my own.  5.  I have never d e l i b e r a t e l y s a i d something t h a t  hurt  someone's f e e l i n g s . 6.  I l i k e t o gossip at times.  7.  There have been o c c a s i o n s when I t o o k advantage o f someone. I sometimes t r y t o g e t even r a t h e r t h a n f o r g i v e and forget.  8. 9.  A t t i m e s I have r e a l l y i n s i s t e d on h a v i n g t h i n g s my own way.  10.  There have been o c c a s i o n s when I f e l t l i k e things.  smashing  B u r g l a r y I n t e n s i t y Measure ( V i c t i m Group) P l e a s e c i r c l e t h e response which b e s t i n d i c a t e s t h e e x t e n t t o w h i c h you were a b l e t o r e c a l l t h e b u r g l a r y 1.  I was a b l e t o r e c a l l t h a t I was a b u r g l a r y v i c t i m . Not a t a l l 1 2  2.  3  4  5  6  7  With great  accuracy  I i n t e n s e l y r e c a l l e d when I was a b u r g l a r y v i c t i m . Not a t a l l  3.  experience,  1 2  3  4  5  6  7  With great  accuracy  The v i d e o a s s i s t e d me i n r e c a l l i n g when I was a v i c t i m of burglary. Not  1.  at a l l 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Greatly  Was your r e a c t i o n t o t h e b u r g l a r y e x p e r i e n c e  as you  e x p e c t e d i t t o be? Not a t all f(N=61)  1 3  Very different  Somewhat different  2 6  Slightly different  3 8  E x a c t l y as expected  4 25  5 19  B u r g l a r y I n t e n s i t y Measure ( E x p e r i m e n t a l l y Induced V i c t i m Group) P l e a s e c i r c l e t h e . r e s p o n s e which b e s t i n d i c a t e s t h e e x t e n t t o w h i c h you e x p e r i e n c e d  1.  I was a b l e t o imagine t h a t I was a b u r g l a r y v i c t i m . Not  2.  at a l l  1 2  3  4  5  6  7  With great  accuracy  I i n t e n s e l y imagined t h a t I was a b u r g l a r y v i c t i m . Not  3.  i m a g i n i n g t h a t you were a b u r g l a r y v i c t i m .  at a l l  The v i d e o  1 2  3  4  5  6  7  With great  a s s i s t e d me i n imaging t h a t I was a v i c t i m o f  burglary. Not  at a l l  accuracy  1 2  3  4  5  6  7  Greatly  APPENDIX C I n t e r c o r r e l a t i o n s o f Coping S u b s c a l e s o f V i c t i m s I n t e r c o r r e l a t i o n s o f Coping S u b s c a l e s o f E x p e r i m e n t a l l y Induced V i c t i m s  I n t e r c o r r e l a t i o n s o f Coping S u b s c a l e s o f t h e B u r g l a r y V i c t i m Group (N=61)  5  6  7  8  9  10  .28  .49 -.06  .33  .31  .05  .01  .05  .09  .14  -.07  .49  .45 -.10  .43  .21  .27  .14 -.01  .01  .18  -.22  .44  .14  .24  .14  .50  .39 -.24  .14  .32  -.02  .24  .26  .25  .17 -.06  -.07  .26  .29  -.01  Variable  2  3  1.Active  .74  2.Plan 3.Seekins  4  4.Suppres S.Behdis  12  11  13  .33 -.02  .13  .21  .05  .39  .28  .46  .27  .15  .24  .10  .34  .05  .06  .21  .22  .43  .27  .05  .22  .37 -.02  .26  .51  .01  .10  .27  .10  .20  .02 --.17  .04  6.Restra 7.Posit 8.Seekemo g.Relig 10.Accept  .28  11.Mdiseng  .39 .24  12.Focus 13.Denial  Note. A c t i v e = A c t i v e c o p i n g ; P l a n = P l a n n i n g ; S e e k i n s = S e e k i n g s u p p o r t - i n s t r u m e n t a l ; Suppres = S u p p r e s s i o n  social  o f competing a c t i v i t i e s ;  B e h d i s = B e h a v i o r a l disengagement; R e s t r a = R e s t r a i n t c o p i n g ; P o s i t = P o s i t i v e r e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n and growth; Seekemo = S e e k i n g support-emotional;  social  R e l i g = Turning t o r e l i g i o n ; Accept = Acceptance;  Mdiseng = M e n t a l disengagement; Focus = Focus on and v e n t i l a t i o n o f e m o t i o n s . V a r i a b l e s 1 t o 6 a r e problem-focused c o p i n g s u b s c a l e s . V a r i a b l e s 7 t o 13 a r e emotion-focused  coping  subscales.  r { 6 0 ) . 2 1 , 2<.05 r ( 6 0 ) . 2 9 , 2<.01 Shavelson,  1988)  ( B o n f e r r o n i a d j u s t e d r ( 6 0 ) . 5 3 , 2<.05, r ( 6 0 ) . 5 8 ,  p<.01,  I n t e r c o r r e l a t i o n s o f Coping S u b s c a l e s o f E x p e r i m e n t a l l y Induced  Victims  (N=102)  5  6  7  8  .37  .35 -.16  .02  .23  .41  .42 -.22  .13  .30  .03 -.08  Variable  2  3  1.Active  .68  2.Plan 3.Seekins 4.Suppres  4  9  10  11  12  13  .22  .26  .07  -.01  .13  -.26  .25  .12  .14  .19  -.11  .07  -.23  .14  .29  .58  .15  .05  .27  .03  .22  .14  .09  .09 -.10  .04  .05  .22 -.03  S.Behdis  .21 -.01  .11  .22 -.16  .20  .08  .32  e.Restra  .21  .15  .10  .15  .19  .03  -.02  .21  .21  .49  .18  -.03  -.19  .25  .05  .19  .54  .10  -.02  .12  .14  .17  .19  -.05  7.Posit 8.Seekemo 9.Relig 10.Accept  .13  ll.Mdiseng 12.Focus  -.31 .36 .17  13.Denial  Note. A c t i v e = A c t i v e c o p i n g ; P l a n = P l a n n i n g ; S e e k i n s = S e e k i n g s o c i a l s u p p o r t - i n s t r u m e n t a l ; Suppres = S u p p r e s s i o n o f competing a c t i v i t i e s ; B e h d i s = B e h a v i o r a l disengagement; R e s t r a = R e s t r a i n t c o p i n g ; P o s i t = P o s i t i v e r e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n and growth; Seekemo = S e e k i n g s o c i a l s u p p o r t - e m o t i o n a l ; R e l i g = T u r n i n g t o r e l i g i o n ; Accept =  Acceptance;  Mdiseng = M e n t a l disengagement; Focus = Focus on and v e n t i l a t i o n o f emotions. V a r i a b l e s 1 t o 6 a r e problem-focused 7 t o 13 a r e emotion-focused  coping subscales. V a r i a b l e s  coping subscales.  r ( 1 0 0 ) . 1 6 , E<.05 r ( 1 0 0 ) . 2 3 , E<.01 ( B o n f e r r o n i a d j u s t e d r ( l O O ) . 4 3 , 2<.05, r ( 1 0 0 ) . 4 7 , 2<.01, Shavelson,  1988).  Appendix D Correlation Matrix of S o c i a l D e s i r a b i l i t y w i t h Independent and Dependent  Variables  C o r r e l a t i o n s o f S o c i a l D e s i r a b i l i t y w i t h Independent and  Dependent V a r i a b l e s o f B u r g l a r y  Victims  (N=61) and  Experimentally  Induced Victims(N=102)  Social Variable  Desirability  Burglary Victims  E x p e r i m e n t a l l y Induced V i c t i m s  a Gender  -.04  -.17  .08  -.02  Powerful Others locus of c o n t r o l  -.15  .02  Chance l o c u s of c o n t r o l  -.24  -.07  .15  -.12  Outcome V a l u e  -.06  -.04  Problem-focused coping  -.27  -.10  Emotion-focused coping  -.21  -.05  Internal locus of c o n t r o l  Situational Appraisals of c o n t r o l  Gender was coded 1 (men) and 2 (women) r ( 6 0 ) . 2 1 , 2<.05 r ( 6 0 ) . 2 9 , E<.01  r ( 1 0 0 ) . 1 6 , 2<.05 r ( 1 0 0 ) . 2 3 , 2<.01  B o n f e r r o n i a d j u s t e d : r ( 6 0 ) . 4 3 , E<.05, r ( 6 0 ) . 4 9 , 2<.01, r ( 1 0 0 ) . 3 4 , r ( 1 0 0 ) . 3 9 , 2<.01 ( S h a y e l s o n ,  1988).  2<.05,  Appendix E M u l t i v a r i a t e and U n i v a r i a t e F-Tests f o r P r e v i o u s V i c t i m i z a t i o n and I n t e n s i t y o f E x p e r i e n c e  Effects  M u l t i v a r i a t e and U n i v a r i a t e  F - T e s t s f o r P r e v i o u s V i c t i m i z a t i o n and  I n t e n s i t y of Experience E f f e c t s  df  Multvariate  (7,92)  Univariate  (1,98)  (N=102)  Previous V i c t i m i z a t i o n F E<  I n t e n s i t y of Experience F 2<  <1  .81  Emotionfocused coping  <1  .59  Problemfocused coping  <1  .73  Internal locus of c o n t r o l  <1  .85  Chance locus of c o n t r o l  <1  .33  <1  .89  Powerful Others locus of c o n t r o l  <1  .46  <1  .49  .26  <1  .77  .90  <1  .59  Situational Appraisals of c o n t r o l Outcome value  1.25  <1  <1  .69  1.25  <1  .27  .49  2.55  .11  Note. No p r i o r v i c t i m i z a t i o n (n=38) v s . p r i o r v i c t i m i z a t i o n (n=64). Below median f o r I n t e n s i t y  (n=43) v s . above median f o r I n t e n s i t y  (n=59).  Appendix F I n t e r c o r r e l a t i o n s o f P r e d i c t o r and C r i t e r i o n V a r i a b l e s o f Combined Groups  I n t e r c o r r e l a t i o n s o f P r e d i c t o r and C r i t e r i o n V a r i a b l e s o f Combined Groups (N=163>.  Variable  1 a  1.Gender 2.Intenal  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  -.12  -.14  -.07  -.30  .01  -.09  .23  -.17  -.25  .18  .01  .11  -.15  .60  -.03  .08  -.01  .18  -.06  -.01  -.02  .32  -.21  -.03  -.25  .45  .30  3.Powerful Others 4.Chance 5.Situational appraisals of c o n t r o l 6.Outcome value 7. P r o b l e m focused coping  ,37  8. E m o t i o n focused coping a Gender was c o d e d l  (men) and 2 (women)  r ( 1 0 0 ) . 1 6 , E<.05 r ( 1 0 0 ) . 2 3 , E<.01 ( B o n f e r r o n i a d j u s t e d r ( 1 5 0 ) . 3 1 , E<.05; r ( 1 5 0 ) . 3 5 , p<.01, Shavelson,  1988).  

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0103799/manifest

Comment

Related Items