Six Processes of Identity
Formation
Testing the identity formation model
from cross-cultural perspective
Nino Skhirtladze, Nino Javakhishvili, Seth
Schwartz, Koen Luyckx
Process-oriented model of identity
formation (Luyckx 2008)
Based on Erikson’s and Marcia’s theoretical frameworks
Ruminative exploration
Identity exploration and emerging
adulthood
The model is developed in Belgium and being tested
on adolescents and emerging adults (13-29)
From the cross-cultural perspective the model was
tested in:
Switzerland (Zimmerman, Lannegrand-Willems,
Safont-Mottay, Connard 2013),
Italy (Crocceti, Luyckx, Scrignaro, Sica 2011),
The United States (Schwartz et al, 2011),
Philippines (Pesigan, Luyckx, Alampay 2014).
The model was confirmed, except Switzerland, were
6 processes were identified
The present study
The aim of the present study is to investigate identity
formation processes of late adolescents and young adults
in Georgia and its connection to psychological
adjustment, psychological needs satisfaction and parenting
dimensions.
To test the model for its reliability and validity
METHOD- Participants and procedure
Participants
Data were gathered in a sample of 295 Georgian late
adolescents and young adults between the ages 17-29
(M= 22.3 SD=3.2). The distribution by gender was 82.6%
female and 17.4 % male participants.
Procedure
Participants were recruited via e-mail and social
networking sites and directed to the electronic link of the
survey, where they filled the instrument electronically.
METHOD-Measure
Personal identity. All participants completed the
Dimensions of Identity Development Scale
(DIDS)(Luyckx et al 2012);
Anxiety. Spilberberg state-trait anxiety Inventory’s
Georgian version (Spielberger 1989, Arutinov &
Grigolava1999);
Depression. Beck Depression Inventory’s Georgian
version (BDI-II; Beck, Steer, & Brown, 1996, Arutinov &
Grigolava 1999);
Life satisfaction. Satisfaction with life scale (Diener
1985, Tsereteli et al 2012).
METHOD-Measures
Identity Style. Identity style inventory (ISI-5)(Berzonsky
et al 2013);
Basic psychological needs scale (Chen et al 2013);
Parenting dimensions (Soenens et al 2006).
Were successfully adapted
Dimensions of Identity Development
Scale (DIDS) (sample items)
Exploration in breadth
I think about different things I might do in the future.
I think about different goals that I might pursue.
Commitment making
I know which direction I am going to follow in my life.
I have made a choice on what I am going to do with my life.
Exploration in depth
I think about the future plans I already made.
I think about whether the aims I already have for life really suit me.
Identification with commitment
I sense that the direction I want to take in my life will really suit me.
I am sure that my plans for the future are the right ones for me.
Ruminative exploration
I am doubtful about what I really want to achieve in life.
It is hard for me to stop thinking about the direction I want to follow in my life.
DIDS adaptation and results
Translation - Dimensions of Identity Development Scale
(DIDS) was translated into Georgian, back translated
into English and after revision final version was composed.
Cronbach’s alphas of the 5 subscales:
.84– for exploration in breadth,
.56 - for exploration in depth,
.89 – for commitment making,
.87– for identification with commitment and
.84– for ruminative exploration
RESULTS
Factorial validity-DIDS
The five-factor model did not converge.
Six factor model with two exploration in depth
dimensions following Zimmerman et al study (2013)-
.
Indices for six factor model: 2= 678 df= 259, p<0.001,
CFI=.90, RMSEA=.07.
Two Exploration in Depth factors
1)Exploration in depth a(EDa) exploration in depth -
represented content about reflection on already
made commitments:
. I think about the future plans I already made
. I talk with other people about my plans for the future
Two Exploration in Depth factors
2) Exploration in depth b(EDb) represented items about
reconsideration of commitments:
. I think about whether the aims I already have for life really
suit me.
. I try to find out what other people think about the specific
direction I decided to take in my life.
. I think about whether my future plans match with what I really
want.
Two Exploration in Depth factors
Reliability
Cronbach’s alphas of the exploration in depth subscales:
For scales with less than 10 questions lower alphas are expected.
Briggs and Cheek (1986), recommend an optimal range
for the inter-item correlation of .2 to .4
In depth a –positive ED-.29
In depth b –negative ED-.41
This model coincides with the Swiss model (Zimmerman,
Lannegrand-Willems, Safont-Mottay, Connard 2013 )
Internal Validity
Table1. Correlations among DIDS six dimensions:
CM IwC EB EDa EDb
IwC .63**
EB -.03 .03
EDa .43** .51** .04
EDb -.25 -.19** .36** .11
RE -.49** -.34** .52** -.18** .51**
*p<.05; **p<.01; ***p<.001
CM –commitment making, EB –exploration in breadth, IwC-identification with commitment, EDa and
EDb-exploration in depth dimensions, RE-ruminative exploration.
External Validity
Table2. Correlations among DIDS and outcome variables:
Depression Trait Life
anxiety Satisfaction
CM -.35** -.18** .21**
IwC -.28** -.12 .26**
EB .13* .19** .09
EDa -.21** .04 .25**
EDb .12* .19** -.13*
RE .52** .31** -.24**
*p<.05; **p<.01; ***p<.001
External Validity
Table3. Correlations among DIDS and psychological
needs and identity styles
lux Autonomy Connectedn Competenc Diffusive Informative Normative
e need style style Style
need ess need
satisfaction
satisfaction satisfaction
CM .35** .25** .41** -.27** .15** -.09
IwC .41** .19** .44** -.17** .22** -.18**
EB -.17** -.06 -.09 .19** .23** .01
EDa .16** .18** .19** -.05 .14** -.09
EDb -.25** .15* -.31** .30** .19** .22**
RE -.38** -.26** -.39** .40** .10 .13*
*p<.05; **p<.01; ***p<.001
External Validity
Table 4. Correlations among DIDS and parenting
dimensions
Father Mother Father Mother Father Mother Father Mother
Psycho. Psycho. Autonomy Autonomy Behavioral Behavioral
support support control support support Control Control
control
CM .03 .14* -.09 -.15** -.09 .18. ** -.11 .004
IwC .004 .15** -.08 -.16** .06 .18** -.07 -.08
EB .06 .07 .09 .13* .02 .04 .17** .18**
EDa -.01 .17** .04 -.13** -.003 .11 .06 .03
EDb .15** .03 .25** .22** .10 .05 .35** .25**
RE .07 -.004 .16** .24** .08 -.09 .21** .19**
*p<.05; **p<.01; ***p<.001
Discussion
The six factor model is confirmed
Its reliability, internal and external validity is confirmed
Two exploration in depth dimensions –
one expressing positive reflection on existing
commitments and
another dimension – expressing negative reflection on
commitments made.
Discussion
Two exploration in depth dimensions show negative
correlation with each other and different pattern of
relation to outcome measures.
Positive exploration in depth is negatively associated with
depression and positively to life satisfaction,
Negative exploration in depth is positively related to
depression, anxiety and negatively - to life satisfaction.
Discussion
Positive exploration in depth seems to imply
commitments which are not doubted, at least at the
moment,
Negative exploration in depth is more about doubts on
existing commitments that makes this factor closer to the
ruminative exploration factor.
Discussion
Negative exploration in depth –is it a second type of
ruminative exploration?
Exploration in breadth Commitment making Negative exploration in
Depth No exploration in breadth and commitment-making
Discussion
Other issues to discuss:
Exploration in breadth is somewhat problematic:
This subscale does not show correlations with most of the
other subscales, unlike data from other countries.
Exploration in breadth is linked with rumination
Exploration linked with anxiety; commitments protective
against anxiety.
Exploration opportunities are restricted in Georgian
context due to economic life pressers and cultural
elements such as high importance of social norms and
collectivist family patterns.
Discussion
It is in positive correlation with Mother’s psychological
control and behavioral control, while it shows negative
correlation with autonomy need satisfaction and no
correlation with parental support of any kind.
Model to be checked with the data:
Mother Control
“Reactive” Exploration in Breadth
Low level of autonomy need satisfaction
THANK YOU!
