Abstract
We examined the relationships between family structure, gender and age and profiles of identity exploration and commitment in the ideological (occupation, values, politics, religion, gender roles) and interpersonal identity (dating, friendships, and family) domains among 388 young adults. The general profile revealed low exploration in both domains, with ideological exploration being the lower, compared to high and comparable levels of commitment in the two domains. Older participants explored more than younger ones, and females gave more attention to the interpersonal domain than did males. Participants from original families explored more in the interpersonal domain than in the ideological domain, but their commitment was the same for the two domains. Participants from non-original families explored in equal amounts in the two domains, but were more committed in the interpersonal domain compared to participants from original families. Participants from non-original families explored more in the ideological domain than did participants from original families. Our findings indicate that individuals from non-original families exhibit positive outcomes and strengths that are often overlooked in the literature.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Adams, G. R. (1985). Family correlates of female adolescents’ ego-identity development. Journal of Adolescence, 8, 69–82.
Amato, P. (2003). Reconciling divergent perspectives: Judith Wallerstein, qualitative family research, and children of divorce. Family Relations, 52, 332–339.
Amato, P., & Booth, A. (1996). A prospective study of divorce and parent–child relationships. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 53, 43–58.
Anthis, K. (2003). On the calamity theory of growth: The relationship between stressful life events and changes in identity over time. Identity: An International Journal of Theory and Research, 2, 229–240.
Balistreri, E., Bush-Rossnagel, N., & Geisinger, K. (1995). Development and preliminary validation of the Ego Identity Process Questionnaire. Journal of Adolescence, 18, 179–192.
Bennion, L. D., & Adams, G. R. (1986). A revision of the extended version of the objective measure of ego identity status: An identity instrument for use with late adolescents. Journal of Adolescent Research, 1, 183–198.
Bluestein, D. L., & Palladino, D. E. (1991). Self and identity in late adolescence: A theoretical and empirical integration. Journal of Adolescence Research, 6, 437–453.
Côté, J. E. (2006). Emerging adulthood as an institutionalized moratorium: Risks and benefits to identity formation. In J. J. Arnett & J. L. Tanner (Eds.), Emerging adults in America (pp. 85–116). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Craig-Bray, L., & Adams, G. R. (1986). Different methodologies in the assessment of identity: Congruence between self-report and interview techniques. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 15, 191–204.
Emery, R. E. (1999). Marriage, divorce, and children’s adjustment. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
Erikson, E. H. (1968). Youth in crisis. New York: Norton.
Grotevant, H. D., Thorbecke, W., & Meyer, M. L. (1982). An extension of Marcia’s identity status interview into the interpersonal domain. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 11, 33–47.
Hetherington, M., & Kelly, J. (2002). For better or for worse. New York: Norton.
Imbimbo, P. V. (1995). Sex differences in the identity formation of college students from divorced families. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 24, 745–761.
Kogos, J., & Snarey, J. (1995). Parental divorce and the moral development of adolescents. Journal of Divorce and Remarriage, 23, 177–186.
Kroger, J. (2000). Ego identity status research in the millennium. International Journal of Behavior Development, 24(2), 145–148.
Luyckx, K., Goossens, L., Soenens, B., & Beyers, W. (2006). Unpacking commitment and exploration: Preliminary validation of an integrative model of late adolescent identity formation. Journal of Adolescence, 29, 361–378.
Marcia, J. E. (1966). Development and validation of ego identity status. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 3, 551–558.
Marcia, J. E. (1993). The ego identity status approach to ego identity. In J. E. Marcia, A. S. Waterman, D. R. Matterson, S. L. Archer, & J. L. Orlofsky (Eds.), Ego identity: A handbook for psychosocial research (pp. 3–21). New York: Springer.
Oshman, H., & Manosevitz, M. (1976). Father absence: Effects of stepfathers upon psychosocial development in males. Developmental Psychology, 12, 479–480.
Pastorino, E., Dunham, R. M., Kidwell, J., Bacho, R., & Lamborn, S. D. (1997). Domain specific gender comparisons in identity development among college youth: Ideology and relationships. Adolescence, 32, 559–578.
Streitmatter, J. (1987). The effects of gender and family status on ego identity: Development among early adolescents. Journal of Early Adolescence, 7, 179–189.
Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2006). Using multivariate statistics (5th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
van Hoof, A. (1999). The identity status field re-reviewed. An update of unresolved and neglected issues with a view on some alternative approaches. Developmental Review, 19, 497–556.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Bartoszuk, K., Pittman, J.F. Profiles of Identity Exploration and Commitment Across Domains. J Child Fam Stud 19, 444–450 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-009-9315-5
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-009-9315-5