Gangloff, B., University of Rouen, France
To present oneself in an intern manner was initially, and is still often today, considered as the reflection, either of a personality's feature (concerning locus of control), either of an error (concerning attribution). However, since the years 1980, a general alternative is proposed: internality, as well concerning LOC as concerning attribution, would refer to a norm, named "norm of internality". Numerous studies showed thus that the rate of internality varies according to the social groups, that a lot of situations of training (so much in the family that at school) encourage the acquisition of intern explanatory attitudes, that intern people are socially valorised, etc. However, leaving from validity analyses, as well concerning the variable intern/extern as concerning the norm of internality, other researches showed that intern people are not systematically more appreciated that extern ones : it is only when their intern explanations do not result in a rebel internality reflecting a desire to transform the social environment that intern people are more appreciated : in the inverse case, extern passive people are privileged. These last researches drove thus to speak not any more of "norm of internality" but of "allegiance norm". This one would be defined as the social valorization of people who, either in an intern or in an extern manner, exclude, as well in their explanations of what happen to them as of what they make, all critical responsibility belonging to social environment; i.e. all responsibility questioning the well-founded of this environment and driving the wish to transform it. The present communication reviews the studies of organizational psychology that are about these different notions.