Multidimensional Health Locus of Control Scale
Also known as: MHLC, Health Locus of Control
The Multidimensional Health Locus of Control Scale (MHLC) is an 18-item measure developed by Wallston, Wallston, and DeVellis (1978) to assess individual differences in health-related beliefs about the locus of control—that is, to whom or what people attribute responsibility for their health. The MHLC measures three dimensions: Internal control (belief that health is determined by one's own actions and responsibility), Powerful Others control (belief that health is determined by healthcare providers, family, or powerful authority figures), and Chance control (belief that health is determined by fate, luck, or uncontrollable events). These beliefs profoundly influence health behavior engagement, treatment adherence, and response to health information. The MHLC is widely used in health behavior research, patient education evaluation, and clinical practice to understand how beliefs about health control shape behavior and to tailor communication styles.
Read the full method
Sign in with a free account to read this section.
Method map
The neighbourhood of related methods — select a node to explore.
When to use it
Use the MHLC questionnaire to understand health belief patterns underlying behavior, particularly when patients are not engaging in recommended health behaviors despite clear information. Administer MHLC in primary care, chronic disease clinics, patient education programs, and research to assess how locus of control beliefs predict adherence and health outcomes. It is particularly valuable for understanding cultural differences in health beliefs (some cultures emphasize family/provider authority more than individualism; high Powerful Others MHLC is normative, not problematic). Use MHLC to tailor health communication: for high-internal individuals, emphasize personal choice and control; for high-powerful-others individuals, involve trusted providers and authorities; for high-chance individuals, acknowledge fatalism but present evidence that certain actions reduce uncontrollable factors. MHLC is less useful in acute emergency contexts where immediate treatment is non-negotiable. Choose MHLC when you need to understand belief-based barriers to health behavior engagement.
Strengths & limitations
- Theoretical grounding: Rotter's Locus of Control theory is well-established in psychology; multidimensional assessment (internal, powerful others, chance) is more sophisticated than unidimensional approaches.
- Psychometric quality: internal consistency (Cronbach α = 0.65–0.75 per subscale), test-retest reliability (r = 0.70–0.80), and construct validity are well-documented.
- Predictive validity: locus of control beliefs predict health behavior, treatment adherence, and health outcomes across diverse populations and health conditions.
- Culturally adaptable: while item wording may require cultural tailoring (e.g., 'powerful others' may include family in collectivist cultures), the three-dimensional structure is applicable across cultures.
- Actionable: understanding a person's locus of control beliefs enables targeted communication strategies and identifies belief-based barriers to behavior change.
- Static beliefs: MHLC captures beliefs at a single time point; beliefs may shift in response to major health events (diagnosis of serious illness may increase fatalism) or successful treatment experiences.
- Self-report bias: social desirability may inflate internal locus scores (people know internal control is valued) and suppress chance/powerful others scores.
- Limited behavioral predictability: locus of control predicts health behavior moderately well (r ≈ 0.20–0.40), but other factors (knowledge, self-efficacy, barriers, social support) also influence behavior.
- Multidimensional complexity: three separate scales are less parsimonious than a single score; interpretation requires understanding interaction effects (e.g., high internal + high chance may produce different behavior than high internal + low chance).
- Cultural assumptions: the scale assumes individual health responsibility (internal) is the ideal; in some cultures, family or provider responsibility is normative and functional.
Frequently asked
Is high internal locus of control always better for health?
Generally, yes—individuals with high internal locus of control tend to engage more in health promotion and adhere better to treatment. However, extreme internal locus without realistic appraisal of uncontrollable factors can lead to self-blame (e.g., if illness occurs despite healthy lifestyle, the person may blame themselves unrealistically). Some balance—believing you have significant control while acknowledging real limitations—is healthiest. Powerful Others locus is also adaptive when providers are trustworthy and available.
Can I change someone's locus of control?
Locus of control is relatively stable but can shift in response to major life events, successful experiences, or targeted interventions. Successful mastery experiences (practicing health behaviors and seeing positive results) and supportive healthcare relationships can increase internal locus. However, expecting dramatic belief change through education alone is unrealistic; combine belief interventions with structural support (removing barriers, providing resources) for effectiveness.
What if someone scores high on all three subscales?
This is a 'high-need' locus profile indicating the person believes health is determined by all three factors: their actions, powerful others, and chance. This person might be responsive to multi-faceted interventions: personal responsibility messaging, provider recommendations, and acknowledgment that some uncertainty is inherent in health. They may also experience conflict or confusion about who is responsible for their health.
How do I use locus of control information to improve adherence?
Match your messaging to their dominant locus: For high-internal patients, emphasize personal choice and benefit of their actions. For high-powerful-others patients, involve trusted providers or family members in counseling. For high-chance patients, acknowledge that some factors are uncontrollable but also present evidence that specific actions reduce uncontrollable variation. Avoid generic 'just take responsibility' messaging; align with the patient's belief system.
Sources
- Wallston, B. S., Wallston, K. A., & DeVellis, R. (1978). Development of the Multidimensional Health Locus of Control (MHLC) Scales. Health Education Monographs, 6(2), 160-170. DOI: 10.1177/109019817800600107 ↗
How to cite this page
ScholarGate. (2026, June 3). Multidimensional Health Locus of Control Scale. ScholarGate. https://scholargate.app/en/health-behavior/health-locus-of-control
Which method?
Set this method beside its closest kin and read them side by side — the library lays the books on the table; the choice is yours.
- Basic Psychological Needs ScaleHealth Behavior↔ compare
- Exercise Self-Efficacy ScaleHealth Behavior↔ compare
- Health Belief Model ScaleHealth Behavior↔ compare