Luyckx 2013 Personal Identity Process From Adolescence
Luyckx 2013 Personal Identity Process From Adolescence
4, 701-721
2013doi: 10.1111/sode.12027
Abstract
Personal identity formation constitutes a crucial developmental task during the teens
and 20s. Using a recently developed five-dimensional identity model, this cross-
sectional study (N = 5834) investigated age trends from ages 14 to 30 for different
commitment and exploration processes. As expected, results indicated that, despite
some fluctuations over time, commitment processes tended to increase in a linear
fashion. Exploration in breadth and exploration in depth were characterized by quad-
ratic trends, with the highest levels occurring in emerging adulthood. Further, the
functionality of these identity processes, and especially of exploration, changed over
time. Exploration in breadth and exploration in depth were strongly related to com-
mitment processes especially in adolescence and emerging adulthood, but these explo-
ration processes became increasingly associated with ruminative exploration and
depressive symptoms in the late 20s. Theoretical implications and suggestions for
future research are outlined.
Introduction
Identity formation is a core developmental challenge for adolescents and emerging
adults (Erikson, 1968). Establishing a strong sense of identity provides individuals
with a sense of continuity and sameness, and plays favourably into psychosocial
functioning. However, identity confusion is associated with a disorganized or haphaz-
ard sense of self. Identity-confused individuals seem to be out of touch with their inner
needs and lack the energy to invest in identity-related exploration and to commit to
life-defining choices (Erikson, 1968). Abundant research to date focused on processes
The fourth author is a doctoral researcher at the Fund for Scientific Research Flanders (FWO).
Correspondence should be addressed to Koen Luyckx, KU Leuven, School Psychology and Child
and Adolescent Development, Tiensestraat 102, 3000 Leuven, Belgium. Email: Koen.Luyckx@
ppw.kuleuven.be
Methods
Participants and Procedure
We used 13 cross-sectional samples collected between 2007 and 2011 in Flanders (the
Dutch-speaking part of Belgium). Table 1 gives an overview of demographic charac-
teristics for each sample. The total combined sample size was 5834 (66.2 percent
female). Mean age of the combined sample was 17.99 (SD = 3.25), ranging from 14 to
30 years. Table 2 gives an overview of the different age cohorts and how they are
distributed among the different contexts assessed (i.e., high school, college or univer-
sity, employment, and unemployment). The high school students from samples 6, 8, 10,
12, and 13 were from different regions in Flanders. Participation was voluntary and
anonymity was guaranteed. Parents and adolescents provided consent to participate.
Questionnaires were administered during a regular class period. A total of 55.3 percent
of high school students were from the academic track whereas 44.7 percent followed
the technical or vocational track. The college students from samples 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, and
10 were mostly from the KU of Leuven and, although the majority was from the faculty
of psychology and educational sciences, students from a wide variety of other majors
were also included. Informed consent from the students of the different samples was
again obtained. For the employed individuals of samples 3, 4, and 9, questionnaires
were distributed in different work settings, such as schools, hospitals, and private
companies, or these individuals were contacted through email and social media (e.g.,
Facebook). Participants again gave their consent to participate. Whereas in samples 4
and 9, approximately 65 percent were working in the social sector, 29 percent of
individuals of sample 3 were working in the social sector.
Measures
Identity Processes. All participants completed the dimensions of identity development
scale (DIDS), which was originally developed in Dutch and provides highly reliable
© 2013 John Wiley & Sons Ltd Social Development, 2013
Table 1. Demographic Characteristics of the 13 Samples
Sample 1 208 DIDS; CESD-12 79.3 18.18 (1.39) 17–26 College students
Sample 2 369 DIDS; CESD-12 77.5 18.25 (1.27) 16–30 College students
Sample 3 371 DIDS; CESD-12 65.0 23.28 (3.21) 17–30 College students (54.2%);
employed individuals (45.2%)
Sample 4 345 DIDS; CESD-12 70.1 23.89 (2.85) 18–30 College students (41.4%);
employed individuals (58.6%)
Sample 5 353 DIDS; CESD-12 77.9 18.50 (1.02) 17–28 College students
Sample 6 342 DIDS; CESD-12 39.8 18.29 (.60) 17–21 High school students
Sample 7 456 DIDS 83.8 18.36 (1.35) 17–30 College students
Sample 8 600 DIDS; CESD-20 52.0 15.70 (1.30) 14–20 High school students
Sample 9 193 DIDS; CESD-12 81.9 25.73 (2.30) 21–30 Employed individuals
Sample 10 249 DIDS 63.1 16.49 (.68) 15–19 High school students
Sample 11 407 DIDS; CESD-12 83.8 18.35 (1.41) 17–29 College students
Sample 12 567 DIDS 51.0 15.80 (1.02) 14–18 High school students
Sample 13 1388 DIDS; CESD-12 64.1 15.72 (1.19) 14–18 High school students
Context
14 456 0 0 0 456
15 670 0 0 0 670
16 855 1 0 0 856
17 647 159 0 0 806
18 420 1233 1 0 1654
19 80 308 3 0 391
20 15 89 11 0 115
21 3 68 76 0 147
22 0 57 77 0 134
23 0 36 78 2 116
24 0 16 92 5 113
25 0 5 73 4 82
26 0 4 70 0 74
27 0 4 51 1 56
28 0 5 56 2 63
29 0 4 57 0 61
30 0 3 37 0 40
Total N 3146 1992 682 14 5834
scores with a clear factor structure in Belgian high school and college student samples
(Luyckx et al., 2008a). The DIDS assesses identity processes with respect to future
plans and possible life paths. For more information on the DIDS and how it is related
to other identity measures, readers are referred to Luyckx et al. (2011). The identity
processes were each measured by five items. Each item was responded to on a 5-point
Likert-type rating scale, ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree).
Sample items include ‘I have decided on the direction I want to follow in my life’
(commitment making), ‘I sense that the direction I want to take in my life will really
suit me’ (identification with commitment), ‘I regularly think over a number of different
plans for the future’ (exploration in breadth), ‘I regularly talk with other people about
the plans for the future I have made for myself’ (exploration in depth), and ‘It is hard
for me to stop thinking about the direction I want to follow in my life’ (ruminative
exploration). Across the different samples, Cronbach’s alphas ranged between .83 and
.93 for commitment making, .79 and .89 for identification with commitment, .76 and
.87 for exploration in breadth, .75 and .83 for exploration in depth, and between .80
and .89 for ruminative exploration.
A Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) was used to check the factor structure across
all samples. In all estimated models, we used standard model fit indices (Kline, 2006).
The chi-square index, which tests the null hypothesis of perfect fit to the data, should
be as small as possible; the root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) should
be less than .08; the comparative fit index (CFI) should exceed .90; and the standard-
ized root mean square residual (SRMR) should be less than .10. A CFA indicated that
© 2013 John Wiley & Sons Ltd Social Development, 2013
Identity Processes 9
a five-factor model (including two error covariances between similarly worded items
patterning on the same latent factor) fitted the data adequately (c2 (263) = 5082.68,
RMSEA = .06, CFI = .94; SRMR = .07). Additionally, we checked whether pattern
coefficients could be set equal for men and women and in adolescence (14–17 year
olds), emerging adulthood (18–25 year olds), and the late 20s (26–30 year olds). The
null hypothesis of invariant pattern coefficients would be rejected if at least two of the
following criteria were satisfied (Vandenberg & Lance, 2000): Dc2 significant at p <
.05; DCFI ⱖ.01; and the change in non-normed fit index (DNNFI) ⱖ.02. Although the
NNFI was not used to evaluate the fit of a single model, it is extremely sensitive to
small deviations or differences in model fit and is a useful tool in invariance testing
(Little, 1997). Invariance tests indicated that all pattern coefficients could be set as
equal for men and women (Dc2 (20) = 46.11, p < .001; but DCFI <.01; DNNFI <.01)
and in the different developmental periods (Dc2 (40) = 250.02, p < .001; but DCFI <.01;
DNNFI <.01).
Results
Preliminary Mean-level Analyses on Identity Processes
Before we describe the different analyses conducted, readers should note that, due to
the large sample size, our analyses attained high power and, therefore, the significance
level was set at p < .01 for all analyses. A multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA)
was conducted to examine sex differences in identity. Based on Wilks’ Lambda,
statistically significant multivariate sex differences were found (F(5, 5767) = 27.59,
p < .001, partial h2 = .02). Follow-up univariate analyses, as detailed in Table 3,
indicated that women scored higher on all identity processes, except for identification
with commitment. However, all partial h2-values accompanying these mean differ-
ences were very small. Next, a MANOVA was conducted to examine context differ-
ences in identity processes. Due to the small group size of the unemployed (N = 12),
these individuals were combined with employed individuals, yielding three groups
(i.e., high school, college or university, and employment or unemployment). Based on
Wilks’ Lambda, statistically significant multivariate context differences were found
(F(10, 11 563) = 18.43, p < .001, partial h2 = .02). Follow-up univariate analyses, as
detailed in Table 3, indicated that high school students scored lowest on all identity
processes, except for ruminative exploration. Again, all the effect sizes accompanying
these mean differences were small.
Finally, in an ancillary MANOVA, we explored whether high school students fol-
lowing the academic track vs. those following the technical/vocational track differed
on identity. Significant multivariate effects were found (F(5, 3089) = 13.49, p < .001,
© 2013 John Wiley & Sons Ltd Social Development, 2013
10
High College/
Males Females Partial school University (Un)employment Partial
Variable M (SD) M (SD) M (SD) F ratio h2 M (SD) M (SD) M (SD) F Ratio h2
Commitment 3.50 (.86) 3.44 (.90) 3.53 (.84) 14.11** <.01 3.41 (.91)a 3.63 (.80)b 3.58 (.74)b 44.18** .02
making
Identification 3.46 (.76) 3.47 (.79) 3.46 (.74) .64 .00 3.40 (.81)a 3.51 (.70)b 3.60 (.65)c 27.58** .01
commitment
Exploration 3.54 (.75) 3.48 (.80) 3.57 (.72) 21.80** <.01 3.50 (.76)a 3.59 (.71)b 3.57 (.77)b 8.97** <.01
in breadth
Koen Luyckx, Theo A. Klimstra, Bart Duriez et al.
Exploration 3.28 (.75) 3.16 (.78) 3.34 (.73) 74.85** .01 3.19 (.78)a 3.39 (.71)b 3.37 (.73)b 48.75** .02
in depth
Ruminative 2.75 (.85) 2.68 (.88) 2.78 (.83) 17.60** <.01 2.75 (.86)a 2.77 (.81)a 2.66 (.92)b 4.69* <.01
exploration
Note: For context differences, means that differ significantly from one another have a different superscript.
* p < .01. ** p < .001.
Figure 1. Observed Age Trends for the Total Sample for the Two Commitment Proc-
esses (A) and the Three Exploration Processes (B). Due to the Fact That Less Than 100
Individuals Belonged to Each of the Last Six Age Cohorts (i.e., from Age 25 to Age 30),
These Age Cohorts were Combined Two by Two (Ages 25–26, Ages 27–28, and Ages
29–30). CM = Commitment Making; IC = Identification with Commitment; EB =
Exploration in Breadth; ED = Exploration in Depth; RE = Ruminative Exploration.
year olds), and the late 20s (26–30 year olds). Of specific relevance to our hypotheses,
using the z-test for independent correlation coefficients (which, again, had to be
significant at p < .01), the positive association between exploration in breadth and both
commitment processes was higher in adolescence as compared to especially the late
20s. Rather similarly, exploration in depth was the most strongly related to the com-
mitment processes in adolescence and the least strongly so in the late 20s. Further, the
negative correlations between ruminative exploration and the two commitment proc-
esses were significantly higher in emerging adulthood as compared to adolescence.
Similarly, the positive association between exploration in depth and ruminative explo-
ration was highest in the late 20s.
Commitment making
With identification commitment .69** .69** .71** .60** 1.46 2.20 2.60*
With exploration in breadth .32** .34** .29** .14 2.07 3.02* 2.24
With exploration in depth .39** .42** .36** .09 2.64* 5.07** 4.07**
With ruminative exploration -.43** -.38** -.49** -.55** 5.07** 3.10* 1.17
Identification commitment
With exploration in breadth .36** .39** .32** .19* 2.99* 3.11* 1.98
With exploration in depth .47** .52** .42** .20* 4.79** 5.30** 3.48**
With ruminative exploration -.38** -.32** -.45** -.47** 5.70** 2.53 .36
Exploration in breadth
With exploration in depth .57** .58** .54** .69** 2.17 2.63* 3.46**
With ruminative exploration .19** .20** .16** .29** 1.54 1.36 1.96
Exploration in depth
With ruminative exploration .11** .12** .09** .33** 1.13 3.15* 3.58**
a
Sample sizes are based on listwise deletion in the correlational analyses within each developmental period.
* p < .01. ** p < .001.
Discussion
The present study examined age trends from adolescence through the late 20s and the
adaptation or functionality of different identity exploration and commitment processes
in a large sample comprising 5834 Belgian 14-to-30-year-olds. We relied on a recently
developed model of identity formation in which two commitment processes (i.e.,
commitment making and identification with commitment), two proactive exploration
processes (i.e., exploration in breadth and exploration in depth), and a maladaptive or
ruminative exploration process are distinguished (Luyckx et al., 2008a). In so doing, a
detailed developmental perspective on core processes of personal identity formation
was provided. The present study not only investigated how the quantity or strength of
these identity processes changed over time, but also explored if the quality or func-
tionality of these processes changed over time. As such, the present findings can
substantially advance our theorizing about identity development from adolescence
through the late 20s.
References
Arnett, J. J. (2000). Emerging adulthood: A theory of development from the late teens through
the twenties. American Psychologist, 55, 469–480.
Arnett, J. J. (2005). The developmental context of substance use in emerging adulthood. Journal
of Drug Issues, 22, 235–254.
Berzonsky, M. D., & Adams, G. R. (1999). Reevaluating the identity status paradigm: Still
useful after 35 years. Developmental Review, 19, 557–590.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analyses for the behavioral sciences, 2nd ed. Hillsdale, NY:
Erlbaum.
Côté, J. E. (2002). The role of identity capital in the transition to adulthood: The individuali-
zation thesis examined. Journal of Youth Studies, 5, 117–134.
Côté, J. E., & Bynner, J. M. (2008). Changes in the transition to adulthood in the UK and Canada:
The role of structure and agency in emerging adulthood. Journal ofYouth Studies, 11, 251–268.
Côté, J. E., & Levine, C. (1988). A critical examination of the ego identity status paradigm.
Developmental Review, 8, 147–184.
Côté, J. E., & Levine, C. G. (2002). Identity formation, agency, and culture: A social psycho-
logical synthesis. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Erikson, E. H. (1968). Identity: Youth and crisis. New York: Norton.
Galambos, N. L., & Martínez, M. L. (2007). Poised for emerging adulthood in Latin America:
A pleasure for the privileged. Child Development Perspectives, 1, 109–114.
Grotevant, H. D. (1987). Toward a process model of identity formation. Journal of Adolescent
Research, 2, 203–222.
Harter, S. (1999). The construction of the self: A developmental perspective. New York: Guilford
Press.
Helson, R., Kwan, V. S. Y., John, O. P., & Jones, C. (2002). The growing evidence for personality
change in adulthood: Findings from research with personality inventories. Journal of
Research in Personality, 36, 287–306.
Hendry, L. B., & Kloep, M. (2010). How universal is emerging adulthood? An empirical
example. Journal of Youth Studies, 13, 169–179.
Klimstra, T. A., Hale, W. W., Raaijmakers, Q. A. W., Branje, S. J. T., & Meeus, W. H. J. (2009).
Maturation of personality in adolescence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96,
898–912.
Klimstra, T. A., Hale, W. W., Raaijmakers, Q. A. W., Branje, S. J. T., & Meeus, W. H. J. (2010).
Identity formation in adolescence: Change or stability? Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 39,
150–162.
Kline, R. B. (2006). Principles and practices of structural equation modeling, 2nd ed. New
York: Guilford Press.
Koepke, S., & Denissen, J. J. A. (2012). Dynamics of identity development and separation-
individuation in parent-child relationships during adolescence and emerging adulthood: A
conceptual integration. Developmental Review, 32, 67–88.
Kroger, J. (2000). Identity development: Adolescence through adulthood. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.
Kroger, J., & Marcia, J. E. (2011). The identity statuses: Origins, meanings, and interpretations.
In S. J. Schwartz, K. Luyckx, & V. L. Vignoles (Eds.), Handbook of identity theory and
research (pp. 31–54). New York: Springer.
Kroger, J., Martinussen, M., & Marcia, J. E. (2010). Identity status change during adolescence
and young adulthood: A meta-analysis. Journal of Adolescence, 33, 683–698.
Lerner, R. M., & Kauffman, M. B. (1985). The concept of development in contextualism.
Developmental Review, 5, 309–333.
Little, T. D. (1997). Mean and covariance structures (MACS) analyses of cross-cultural data:
Practical and theoretical issues. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 32, 53–76.
Luyckx, K., Duriez, B., Klimstra, T. A., & De Witte, H. (2010). Identity statuses in young adult
employees: Prospective relations with work engagement and burnout. Journal of Vocational
Behavior, 77, 339–349.
Luyckx, K., Goossens, L., & Soenens, B. (2006). A developmental-contextual perspective on
identity construction in emerging adulthood: Change dynamics in commitment formation and
commitment evaluation. Developmental Psychology, 42, 366–380.