Ego identity status research in the new millennium - CiteSeerX [PDF]

International Journal of Behavioral Development 2000, 24 (2), 145–148

© 2000 The International Society for the

Study of Behavioural Development

http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals/pp/01650254.html

Ego identity status research in the new millennium Jane Kroger University of Tromsø, Norway The present brief report overviews developments in the Želd of ego identity status research over the past 35 years and suggests directions for identity status research as we enter the new millenium. In the mid 1960s, James Marcia (1966, 1967) expanded Erik Erikson’s (1968) concept of ego identity to suggest four qualitatively different styles by which late adolescents undertake identity-deŽning psychosocial commitments. Over the ensuing decades, identity status research focused primarily on validating the identity statuses and Žnding associated personality correlates, examining patterns of change over time, and investigating familial communication patterns associated with each of the identity positions. Research in the new millennium might fruitfully address the course and contents of identity beyond late adolescence as well as predictors of developmental arrest. A greater range of developmental contexts in which identity formation occurs is also in need of examination. Ultimately, an individual’s interpretation of context and further mediating events that may be associated with identity status resolutions are critical to a more complete understanding of the identity formation process.

In the mid 1960s, James Marcia (1966, 1967) offered a model for expanding our understanding of the ways in which adolescents engage in the task of identity formation. Over the past 35 years, Marcia’s model has captured the attention of researchers, students, and practitioners interested in how asolescents develop (or not) meaningful vocational aspirations, ideological values, and forms of sexual expression appropriate within given social contexts. Prior to this time, Erik Erikson (1963, 1968) had conceptualised the primary psychosocial task of adolescence as one of Žnding an optimal balance between identity achievement and role confusion (‘‘Identity vs. Role confusion’’, the Žfth stage in Erikson’s epigenetic sequence of personality development over the lifespan). To Erikson, identity was thus something an individual possessed to a greater or lesser degree; one could assess an individual’s identity as lying on a continuum somewhere between positive and negative poles. However, Marcia’s approach suggested the possibility of qualitatively different styles in the way adolescents engage in the identity formation process. These styles of identity resolution (called identity statuses) have given rise to a great volume of research over the past three decades on questions of associated personality variables, antecedent conditions, and consequences of the varied identity resolutions. This brief report will address questions that have driven identity status research to the present time and then turn to issues still demanding attention as we enter the new millennium. Comments related to the contents, course, and contexts of identity will serve as the general, organising framework for this report.

Identity status research: 1966–1999 Identity status research through the late 1960s and early 1970s was undertaken to establish the validity of four identity resolutions (statuses), based on the variables of exploration

and commitment (Marcia, 1966, 1967). Using a semistructured but focused interview covering issues of vocational, religious, and political values, Marcia identiŽed two styles of committed and two styles of noncommitted late adolescents. Identity-achieved individuals had adopted their commitments on the basis of a thoughtful, exploration process, with identitydeŽning directions constructed on their own terms. Foreclosed individuals were equally committed to identity-deŽning roles and values, but no genuine exploration process was involved prior to commitment. These individuals had assumed an identity based on their identiŽcations with signiŽcant others, most commonly parents. Moratorium and diffuse individuals both were non-committed in terms of key, identity-deŽning roles and values. However, moratorium adolescents were very much in the process of exploring or ‘‘trying on’’ potential vocational roles and ideological values for Žt, whereas diffusions were not. Early identity status studies were conducted entirely with late adolescent men, and the 1970s witnessed several attempts to Žnd interview domains more suitable for capturing women’s identity-deŽning concerns. Based on Erikson’s (1968) controversial discussion of ‘‘womanhood and the inner space’’, ‘‘attitudes toward premarital intercourse’’ was added to the identity status interview for women. This move helped to establish both the relevance of this new content area as well as the predictive validity of the identity statuses for women (e.g. Marcia & Friedman, 1970; Schenkel & Marcia, 1972; Toder & Marcia, 1973). Josselson’s (1973) psychodynamic portraits of young women within each identity status offered further evidence for the relevance of this new domain for women. However, it was not long before sexual and sex role decisions were found to be important for men as well as women (Matteson, 1977). Research over the following two decades has primarily supported this Žnding (e.g. Hopkins, 1982; Kroger, 1997).

Correspondence should be addressed to Dr Jane Kroger, Department atofPENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on March 4, 2016 Downloaded from jbd.sagepub.com Psychology, University of Tromsø, Asgardv. 9, Tromsø, N-9037 , Norway.

146

KROGER / IDENTIT Y ST AT US RESEARCH

An interest in relevant identity-deŽning contents (domains) between students enrolled in the same university subjects over continued through the 1980s, as the identity status interview very different historical epochs (Kroger, 1993). Although some was extended for use with new age and cultural groups and a associations have been found between identity status and new paper-and-pencil measure of identity status was develcontext, however, it is not possible to make deductions about oped. Grotevant, Thorbecke, and Meyer (1982) used an the causal direction of the relationship. Valuable theoretical extended identity status interview with high school students to writings have recently appeared to stress new ways of underprobe the domains of friendships, dating, and sex roles in standing the relationship between identity and context (e.g. addition to the more traditional domains of occupation, Coˆte´, 1996), but little empirical research has been undertaken politics, and religion. Archer (1985, 1989) also added the to examine the relationship between single, let alone, multiple domain of ‘‘family/career priorities’’ to her interviews with contexts and the identity formation process. junior and senior high school students, Žnding this content The past three decades of identity status research have paid area to be one that allowed for differentiation according to considerable attention to such issues as cognitive and exploration and commitment variables. Interpersonal issues personality variables, family communication patterns, styles also were more generally examined in identity status interviews of intimacy, forms of peer interaction, and feasible intervenwith adults (Whitbourne, 1980). Studies initiated in the late tions associated with each of the identity statuses. (See Marcia 1980s by Phinney have clearly demonstrated the importance of et al., 1993 for an extensive review of these issues as well as ethnicity as an identity domain contributing to the differentiadeŽnitive interview guidelines). Generally, those in the more tion of identity statuses within the ethnic minority groups mature identity statuses (moratorium and achievement) have tested (e.g. Phinney & Tarver, 1988). The paper-and-pencil shown higher levels of moral reasoning (Skoe & Marcia, 1991), measure of ego identity status (EOM-EIS-2) by Adams, intimacy (e.g. Orlofsky, Marcia & Lesser, 1976), ego developBennion, and Huh (1989) found the ideological areas of ment, self-esteem, and personal autonomy (e.g. Adams & occupation, religion, politics, and philosophy of life and the Shea, 1979), and more adaptive defence mechanisms (e.g. interpersonal areas of friendship, dating, sex roles, and Cramer, 1995). Moratorium adolescents have consistently recreation to be relevant identity domains for North American shown the highest levels of anxiety and openness to new adolescents. Bosma (1985) has found the domains of school, experience compared to those in other identity statuses, occupation, leisure time, parents, philosophy of life, friendship, whereas foreclosures have evidenced the highest levels of personal characteristics, and intimate relationships to be most authoritarianism, use of an external locus of control, and relevant for assessing identity status among adolescents in normative approaches to personal problem solving and Central Europe. Ultimately, Marcia has stressed that exibility decision making compared with other identity groups (e.g. of identity content in terms of personal relevancy and Berzonsky & Neimyer, 1994; Cramer, 1995; Marcia, 1966, variability of response across individuals are key to meaningful 1967; Tesch & Cameron, 1987). Diffusion adolescents have ego identity status research (Marcia Waterman, Matteson, relied more on nonadaptive defence mechanisms and have Archer & Orlofsky, 1993). shown low levels of intimacy, self-esteem, personal autonomy, The course of identity development began to be examined in and ego development (Adams & Shea, 1979; Marcia 1966, the 1970s by Waterman and his colleagues through long1967; Orlofsky et al., 1976). Adolescent identity exploration itudinal research over the years of university study (Waterman, (characteristic of those in moratorium and achievement Geary, & Waterman, 1974; Waterman & Goldman, 1976; identity statuses) has also been strongly linked to parental Waterman & Waterman, 1971). All of these longitudinal communication styles; parental expression of moderate levels of investigations found the identity achievement and moratorium both connectedness and individuality has been associated with statuses to increase and the foreclosure and diffusion statuses adolescent identity exploration (Grotevant & Cooper, 1985). to decrease in frequency over time across both vocational and ideological domains. Longitudinal work through the 1980s and 1990s following individuals from late adolescence through Identity status research: 2000 and beyond early adulthood found individuals who changed identity status to move most commonly from a position of foreclosure or The contents, course, and contexts in which the identity diffusion to moratorium or achievement (Cramer, 1998; formation process occurs have been sketched and Žlled in Josselson, 1996; Kroger, 1988, 1995; Marcia, 1976). Cross(with varying degrees of detail) for late adolescents and young sectional and retrospective work in this time period also found adults by identity status researchers over the past 35 years. We similar results. One interesting result common to all longare now entering a new millennium, where the social itudinal investigations has been the fact that at least half of all conditions of choice, giving rise to the need for identitythose sampled at the end of tertiary study have remained deŽning decisions among adolescents and young adults, also foreclosed or diffuse across all identity domains. This Žnding increasingly give rise to identity concerns among those in their suggests considerable scope for identity development in the middle and later adulthood years. This section will identify years beyond late adolescence. some of the issues related to identity’s contents, course, and The relationship between identity formation and context has contexts that need further attention during the years of late received little research attention. Only in the 1980s and 1990s adolescence/young adulthood. It will then highlight some of did questions begin to arise regarding contexts and circumthe important and relatively unexplored areas for identity stances associated with various identity resolutions. Research research in an older age population continuing to grow even investigating the relationship between academic departmental older. All proposed areas of research in this new millennium environment and identity status distributions found different hold important social implications for future human service identity distributions present in selected departmental envirproviders and social policy-makers. onments (Adams & Fitch, 1983; Costa & Campos, 1990). Many contents have been well elaboDownloaded from jbd.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE key, UNIV onidentity-deŽning March 4, 2016 Different identity status distributions have also been found rated in a range of different national contexts. One interesting

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF BEHAVIORAL DEVELOPMENT, 2000 , 24 (2), 145–14 8

147

new research direction, however, may be to examine the quality develop in the light of such interacting contexts awaits of identity decisions made within the different identity domains research. Ultimately, research on social context and identity (see Waterman, 1992, for a discussion of this theme). The formation must consider the individual’s interpretation or expressive versus instrumental quality of one’s identity-deŽnexperience of context as an important mediating variable. The ing choices may prove a fruitful direction for future research. same context will not be associated with a uniform pattern of Many questions related to the course of identity formation in identity development for all individuals therein. Much valuable late adolescence and young adulthood remain. One important information about identity formation will be gained by issue that has only begun to be examined is pathways of examining the meaning an adolescent makes of elements in identity status change over time (identity trajectories) and the his/her social context. conditions associated with these varied patterns of movement. Last, the contents, course, and contexts of ego identity status in Analyses in some early longitudinal studies of identity status the years of middle and later adulthood are important and movement did not enable one to examine intra-individual relatively untouched areas for future research investigation. patterns of change. The shift to longitudinal studies which When a vast array of lifestyle possibilities are currently allowed the examination of intra-individual identity status sanctioned for many midlife adults living in Western, change over two data collection points has been very technologically advanced nations, how, why, and by whom instructive. However, efforts to examine longitudinal identity are the main psychosocial pillars of one’s identity re-evaluated? status trajectories over at least three or four data collection What are the conditions giving rise to re-evaluation and how points and to identify circumstances associated with such does the identity (re)formation process take place? Will the trajectories is badly needed in future identity status research. identity statuses be a meaningful way to evaluate styles of Preliminary work by Adams, Montemayor, and Brown (1992) identity resolutions in the years beyond young adulthood? and Goossens (1994) offers interesting insights into conditions When paid employment no longer provides a key frame for the associated with progression, stability, and regression of identity structuring of one’s time and energy in the post-retirement status over time, and such work needs to be continued by years, what identity content areas will then provide the future generations of researchers. In addition, possible means framework for one’s psychosocial deŽnition of self? As the for predicting developmental arrest in the adolescent identity old grow even older, what will identity status trajectories over formation process is badly needed. Although preliminary work time illuminate? What are the individual and contextual in this area has been undertaken (e.g. Kroger 1995), the ability conditions associated with ongoing identity development over to predict those likely to remain stable in less mature identity the course of the lifespan?These are major questions within the statuses holds important social implications and must be Želd of identity status research that await answers beyond year pursued. 2000. A further issue related to the course of identity over the Manuscript received March 1999 Revised manuscript received June 1999 adolescent years is the need for greater knowledge of the moratorium transition process itself. First, there is need to address factors associated with the very initial phases of identity exploration. Researchers have often noted that the experience of conict stimulates change (e.g. Marcia et al., References 1993); yet too much conict may actually impede optimal Adams, G.R., Bennion, L., & Huh, K. (1989). Objective measure of ego identity identity development. Efforts to examine tolerance of experistatus: A reference manual. Unpublished manuscript, University of Guelph, enced conict and/or the ability to imagine alternative future Canada. selves (e.g. Kalakoshki & Nurmi, 1998) may prove fruitful lines Adams, G.R., & Fitch, S.A. (1983). Psychological environments at university of preliminary research on this issue. Preliminary research has departments: Effects on college students’ identity status and ego stage development. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44, 1266 –1275 . also suggested the possibility of qualitatively distinct phases in Adams, G.R., Montemayor, R., & Brown, B.B. (1992). Adolescent ego identity: An the moratorium process itself; data collection at points analysis of patterns of development and the contributions of the family to identity sufŽciently close in time through individual moratorium formation during middle and late adolescence. Unpublished manuscript, process may help elaborate phase speciŽc issues and again University of Guelph, Canada. Adams, G.R., & Shea, J.A. (1979). T he relationship between identity status, hold important implications for intervention in a multitude of locus of control, and ego development. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 8, contexts. 81–89. The need to examine the process of identity development in Archer, S.L. (1985). Identity and the choice of sex roles. In A.S. Waterman (Ed.), Identity in adolescence: Process and contents (pp. 79–99). New Directions a far greater range of social contexts has been noted in the for Child Development, No. 30. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. previous section. To date, much is known about identity Archer, S.L. (1989). Gender differences in identity development: Issues of formation for Caucasian, middle and upper class adolescents process, domain, and timing. Journal of Adolescence, 12, 117–138. enrolled in tertiary study. However, very little is known about Berzonsky, M.D., & Neimyer, G.J. (1994). Ego identity status and identity processing orientation: The moderating role of commitment. Journal of identity development for those adolescents who do not Research in Personality, 28, 425–435. undertake tertiary education and proceed immediately to work Bosma, H. (1985). Identity development in adolescence: Coping with commitments. or become unemployed following high school. SpeciŽcally, one Groningen, the Netherlands: University of Groningen Press. Costa, M.E., & Campos, B. (1990). Socioeducational contexts and beginning might examine conditions within various social contexts that university students’ identity development. In C. Vandenplaus-Holper & do or do not provide support for identity exploration and then B.P. Campos (Eds.), Interpersonal and identity development: New directions note associated patterns of identity development. Furthermore, (pp. 79–85). Porto, Portugal: Faculty of Psychology and Education. identity status research has not yet begun to explore the Coˆte´, J.E. (1996). Identity: A multidimensional analysis. In G.R. Adams, R. Montemayor, & T .P. Gullotta (Eds.), Psychological development during interaction of multiple social contexts. Contexts such as the adolescence: Progress in developmental contextualism. Advances in Adolescent family, peer group, and school climate with conicting values Development (Vol. 8, pp. 130–180). Newbury Park, CA: Sage. or contexts with varied levels of support for identity exploration Downloaded from jbd.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE on MarchIdentity, 4, 2016 Cramer, P. UNIV (1995). narcissism, and defense mechanisms in late adolescence. Journal of Research in Personality, 29, 341–361. are a likely experience for many youths. How identity may

148

KROGER / IDENTIT Y ST AT US RESEARCH

Cramer, P. (1998). Freshman to senior year: A follow-up of identity, narcissism, and defense mechanisms. Journal of Research in Personality, 32, 156–172. Erikson, E.H. (1963). Childhood and society. New York: Norton. Erikson, E.H. (1968). Identity: Youth, and crisis. New York: Norton. Goossens, L. (1994, June). Identity status trajectories and students’ perception of the university environment: A cross-sequential analysis. Poster session presented at Biennial Meetings of the International Society for the Study of Behavioral Development, Amsterdam, the Netherlands. Grotevant, H.D., & Cooper, C.R. (1985). Patterns of interaction in family relationships and the development of identity exploration in adolescence. Child Development, 56, 415–428. Grotevant, H.D., Thorbecke, W.L., & Meyer, M.L. (1982). An extension of Marcia’s identity status interview into the interpersonal domain. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 11, 33–47. Hopkins, L. (1982). Assessment of identity status in college women using outer space and inner space interviews. Sex Roles, 8, 557–566. Josselson, R.L. (1973). Psychodynamic aspects of identity formation in college women. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 2, 3–52. Josselson, R. (1996). Revising herself: The story of women’s development from college to midlife. New York: Oxford University Press. Kalakoshki, V., & Nurmi, J.E. (1998). Identity and educational transitions: Age differences in adolescent exploration and commitment related to education, occupation, and family. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 8, 29–47. Kroger, J. (1988). A longitudinal study of ego identity status interview domains. Journal of Adolescence, 11, 49–64. Kroger, J. (1993). The role of historical context in the identity formation process of late adolescence. Youth and Society, 24, 363–376. Kroger, J. (1995). The differentiation of ‘‘Žrm’’ and ‘‘developmental’’ foreclosure identity statuses: A longitudinal study. Journal of Adolescent Research, 10, 317–337. Kroger, J. (1997). Gender and identity: The intersection of structure, content, and context. Sex Roles, 36, 747–770. Marcia, J.E. (1966). Development and validation of ego identity status. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 3, 551–558. Marcia, J.E. (1967). Ego identity status: relationship to change in self-esteem , ‘‘general maladjustment’’, and authoritarianism. Journal of Personality, 35, 118–133. Marcia, J.E. (1976). Identity six years after: A follow-up study. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 5, 145–150.

Marcia, J.E., & Friedman, M. (1970). Ego identity status in college women. Journal of Personality, 38, 249–262. Marcia, J.E., Waterman, A.S., Matteson, D.R., Archer, S.L., & Orlofsky, J.L. (1993). Ego identity: A handbook for psychosocial research. New York: Springer. Matteson, D.R. (1977). Exploration and commitment: Sex differences and methodological problems in the use of the identity status interview. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 6, 353–379. Orlofsky, J.L., Marcia, J.E., & Lesser, I.M. (1976). Ego identity status and the intimacy versus isolation crisis of young adulthood. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 27, 211–219. Phinney, J.S., & Tarver, S. (1988). Ethnic identity search and commitment in Black and White eighth graders. Journal of Early Adolescence, 8, 265–277. Schenkel, S., & Marcia, J.E. (1972). Attitudes toward premarital intercourse in determining ego identity status in college women. Journal of Personality, 3, 472–482. Skoe, E.E., & Marcia, J.E. (1991). A measure of care-based morality and its relation to ego identity. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 37 , 289–304. Tesch, S.A., & Cameron, K.A. (1987). Openness to experience and development of adult identity. Journal of Personality, 55, 615–630. Toder, N.L., & Marcia, J.E. (1973). Ego identity status and response to conformity pressure in college women. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 26 , 287–294. Waterman, A.S. (1992). Identity as an aspect of optimal psychological functioning. In G.R. Adams, T.P. Gullotta, & R. Montemayor (Eds.), Adolescent identity formation (pp. 50–72). Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Waterman, A.S., & Goldman, J.A. (1976). A longitudinal study of ego identity development at a liberal arts college. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 5, 361–369. Waterman, A.S., Geary, P.S., & Waterman, C.K. (1974). Longitudinal study of changes in ego identity status from the freshman to the senior year at college. Developmental Psychology, 10 , 387–392. Waterman, A.S., & Waterman, C.K. (1971). A longitudinal study of changes in ego identity status during the freshman year at college. Developmental Psychology, 5, 167–173. Whitbourne, S.K. (1980). Identity status interview: Adult form. Unpublished manuscript, University of Rochester, New York.

Downloaded from jbd.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on March 4, 2016