@ws1022 I’m not inherently opposed to an update to the syntax here, though the suggested edit’s phrasing seems a bit off to my eyes?
Yes thats correct, thats my fault. I reedited it and it should make more sense now, I left a part out. Its basically supposed to summarize that reciprocal determinism these three factors are all determined by each other
All gravy, thanks for doubling-back.
I played with the wording a little bit, just to add some formality. It’s still a little stilted, I think, but arguably still in line with your feeling that the card could be improved upon (which I agree with).
If you think there’s a better wording, though, I’m open to still tinkering with it so we get it right. Let me know your thoughts. 
No I think that still works and gets the point I was trying to make across. Good work!