{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.019280205655526992, 'fraction_numerical': 0.005141388174807198, 'mean_word_length': 5.6581196581196584, '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}}
Interaction effects of internal vs. external locus of control and directive vs. nondirective therapy: fact or fiction?

Examined critically studies that claim that internals are more successful in nondirective therapy and externals in directive therapy. Deficiencies in the design, statistical analysis, and outcome measures employed in these studies led to the conclusion that only slim support exists currently for the interaction hypothesis. Rotter's (1975) discussion of common misunderstandings of the locus of control construct and misuses of the Internal-External Locus of Control Scale provided one context within which to explain the equivocal results. Finally, the ingredients of a research design considered adequate to test the interaction hypothesis were presented.