{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02821869488536155, 'fraction_numerical': 0.010582010582010581, 'mean_word_length': 5.202185792349726, '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}}
Internal-external control and temporal orientation among southeast Asians and white Americans.

This study examined ethnic group differences with the use of the Model of Human Occupation (Kielhofner, 1985b). Three groups--immigrants from Thailand, immigrants from Cambodia, and white Americans--were contrasted on two constructs--internal versus external control and temporal orientation. The study attempted to identify whether nonpatient subjects have an internal locus of control and a strong future orientation, as the Model of Human Occupation would predict. No differences were found with the use of the Internal-External Scale (Rotter, 1966). The Thai and white Americans differed significantly on the Time Reference Inventory (Roos & Albers, 1965b). The Thai selected more items referring to the past, and the white Americans chose more statements applying to the present. There were no differences for past or future time extensions between groups. All the groups had a greater past extension than future extension. It was proposed that a larger future time perspective was not a requisite for functional temporal adaptation.