{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.028014616321559074, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0048721071863581, 'mean_word_length': 5.737704918032787, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Comparison of Covert Reinforcement, Covert Assertion, and Overt Reinforcement in Changing External Locus of Control

This study compared the effectiveness of covert reinforcement, overt reinforcement, and covert assertion in modifying locus of control. The I-E scale was administered to 40 subjects who were then randomly assigned to one of five treatment groups: covert reinforcement (response irrelevant) for self-statements reflecting internality, overt reinforcement for internal statements, covert assertion of internal statements, attention control, and no-treatment control. The 1-E scale was given after treatment and at a 2-wk. follow-up. Data showed that overt reinforcement and covert assertion tended to increase internality, but that response irrelevant covert reinforcement and control instructions did not.