1. Three Views of the Agentic Self: A Developmental Synthesis Todd D
Three Views of the Agentic Self: A Developmental Synthesis Todd D. Little Key Collaborators: Patricia H. Hawley Southern Connecticut State University Christopher C. Henrich and Katherine Marsland Yale University

2. Goals & Organization Integrate Three Seemingly Disparate Theories
Self-Determination Theory (i.e., Deci & Ryan, 1980 to date)
Action-Control Theory (e.g., Little, 1998; Brandtstaedter, 1998)
Resource-Control Theory (Hawley, 1999)
SDT
ACT
RCT
Organismic Model of
Human Nature
Highlight Some Developmental Aspects of the Agentic Self

3. The Little Engine that Could
Puff, Puff, Chug, Chug,
went the Little Blue Engine.
“I think I can--
I think I can--
I think I can…”
-Watty Piper (1930)

4. Organismic Metatheory
Behavior is seen as volitional and goal-directed action
Individuals are inherently active and self-regulating
Actions are purposive, planful, and self-initiated
Development is predominantly self-guided
One gives form and meaning to actions along the way
Actions result from selective choices that emanate primarily from the individual
Research focuses on
Inter-individual differences
Intra-individual differences
sub-types or sub-groups of individuals
contextual influences
(see e.g., Gariepy, 1996; Little, in press; Overton, 1984, Reese, 1991)

5. Mechanistic Metatheory
Stimulus-Response, Stimulus-Response.
Don't you ever think?

6. Organismic Metatheory
Mechanisms of change include
Assimilation
Accommodation
Equilibration
Schema formation
Hierarchical integration
And so on…
Guiding Developmental principles include
Homotypic vs heterotypic expressions
Surface-structure vs deep-structure roots of behavior
Different paths can lead to same outcome
Same path can lead to different outcomes

7. Organismic Goal Attainment: Achieving an Intimate Relationship
Young 18-39
Mid-age
40-59
Older-age
60 and up

8. Control Judgments across the Life Span-2 -1 1 2 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Predicted Mean Rating and Standard Errors -2 -1 1 2 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 -2 -1 1 2 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Age-Cohort
Control Expectancy
Goal Importance
Comparative Control
Control Striving -2 -1 1 2 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Age-Cohort
Personal
Social
Societal
& Societal
Societal
From Grob, Little, & Wanner, 1999

9. Needs and Their Origins
The Need for Competence
Negotiating and effecting one’s environment
Has a direct evolutionary basis
The Need for Relatedness
Close emotional bond with another individual
The Need for Autonomy
Being the origin of one’s own behavior
Byproduct of higher cortical activity
Resource Control Theory
Acquiring and utilizing material and social resources
Necessary for survival and reproduction of individual

10. What is Agency? Agents act, we are agents
We have needs and goals
We also have motives, wants, & desires
We have intentions and are volitional in our actions
We interpret & evaluate our actions and their consequences
From our actions (actual & symbolic), we learn:
Contingencies (personal, general, environmental)
Personal beliefs about own capabilities
Agency is a sense of personal empowerment
Knowing what it takes and whether one's got it

11. Intrinsic & Extrinsic Motivation
REGULATORY STYLES:
Introjection
Identification
Integration
Extrinsic
External
regulation
Amotivation
ASSOCIATED PROCESSES:
Perceived non-contingency
Low perceived competence
Non-relevance
Non-intentionality
Salience of extrinsic rewards or punishments
Compliance/ Reactance
Ego involvement
Focus on approval from self and others
Conscious valuing of activity
Self-endorsement of goals
Hierarchical synthesis of goals
Congruence
Interest & Enjoyment
Inherent satisfaction
Impersonal
External
Somewhat
Internal
PERCEIVED LOCUS OF CAUSALITY:
From: Ryan & Deci (in press)

12. Differentiation of Resource Control Strategies
Prosocial strategies emerge over time.
Coercion
Coercion
Coercion
Prosociality
Prosociality
Years 1 to Years 4 to Years 8 to 11
(Hawley, 1999a, 1999b)

13. (Hawley, Little, & Pasupathi, 2000)
Types of Children
“Social Dominants”
Coercive
Bistrategic
Coercive Control
Typical
Prosocial
Subordinate
Prosocial Control
(Hawley, Little, & Pasupathi, 2000)

14. Social Motivations by Type
(Hawley, Little, & Pasupathi, 2000)

15. Social and Personal Consequences by Type
(Hawley, Little, & Pasupathi, 2000)

16. Action-Control BeliefsMe
Others
Means
Means can include, for example: effort, ability, luck, teachers, parents, peers, looks, etc.
Agency
Beliefs
Control
Expectancy
Strategy
General Agency
General
Control Expectancy
Causality
(Little, 1998)
Agent
Goal

17. The Development of Agency
Autonomy
Competence
Relatedness
Action-Control Beliefs; Intra-agent Means
Action-Control Beliefs; Extra-agent Means
Volitional / Goal-
directed Activity;
Material and
Social Resources
Agency
(Little, Hawley, Henrich, & Marsland, in press)

18. How They Come Together Action-Control Self-Determination
Resource-Control
Action-Control

19. Conclusions
Integrating these and other organismic perspectives on behavior suggest novel foci for research
Personality types (e.g., Bistrats)
Understanding the Agentic self requires a contextual approach
Interpersonal contexts (e.g., dominance)
Life-course contexts (e.g., retirement)

21. Nonagentic vs. Agentic Profiles
Nonagentic Profile
Agentic Profile
Have low aspirations
Feel helpless when challenged
Hindered by problem solving blinders
Perform poorly
Accept failures
Have greater ill-being
Have little sense of personal empowerment
Have high aspirations
Persist in the face of obstacles
See more and varied options
Perform well
Learn from failures
Have greater well-being
Have a greater sense of personal empowerment

22. Acquiring a sense of Personal Agency
Direct Experiences
Successes and failures
Performance Feedback
teachers, parents, peers, & self
Direct Instruction
Vicarious Observations
TV, at school, work, local Seven-Eleven, family
Social Comparisons
veridical opportunities, upwards, downwards
Emotional Reactions
feelings or rejection/acceptance, reprimands
Symbolic Actions
personal thoughts, interpretations, rehearsals of actions

23. Personality and Social Skills by Type
(Hawley, Pasupathi, & Little, 1999)

24. Low Personal Agency