Who needs control? A cultural perspective on the process of compensatory control

Abstract

Compensatory control theory (CCT) provides a framework for understanding the mechanisms at play when one's personal control is challenged. The model suggests that believing the world is a structured and predictable place is fundamental, insofar as it provides the foundation upon which people can believe they are able to exert control over their environment and act agentically towards goals. Because of this, CCT suggests, when personal control is threatened people try to reaffirm the more foundational belief in structure/predictability in the world, so that they then have a strong foundation to reestablish feelings of personal control and pursue their goals. This review seeks to understand how the basic assumptions of these compensatory control processes unfold in different cultural contexts. Drawing on research and theorizing from cultural psychology, we propose that cultural models of self and agency, culturally prevalent modes of control, and culture‐specific motivations all have implications for compensatory control processes. Culture determines, in part, whether or not personal control deprivation is experienced as a threat to perceiving an orderly world, how/whether individuals respond to low personal control, and the function that responses to restore a sense of order in the world serve. A theoretical model of compensatory control processes across cultures is proposed that has implications for how people cope with a wide range of personal and societal events that potentially threaten their personal control.

What do we manipulate when reminding people of (not) having control? In search of construct validity

“…This aligns with some theoretical perspectives highlighting the crucial role of a match between the control-threat domain and a domain in which specific (collective) actions to restore control can be taken (e.g., the domain of ecological threat; Potoczek et al, 2022 ). Moreover, contextual factors such as the culture in which participants are embedded in, can activate different models of self and agency, thereby influencing the very experience of control and how individuals respond to recall-based control threat manipulations (Gibbs et al, 2023 ). Thus, it seems important to focus more closely on the contextual and domain specific aspects of experimental manipulations of control, particularly when attempting to replicate existing research findings.…”