Adolescent Identity Formation, Psychological Well-being, and Parental Attitudes

Received 19 Oct, 2010

Accepted 30 Nov, 2011

Published 30 Jun, 2012

The present study aimed to investigate adolescent identity formation in relation to psychological well-being and parental attitudes (viz., acceptance, concentration, and avoidance). For this purpose, a sample of 210 late adolescents (99 boys and 111 girls) with ages ranging from 17 years to 20 years. They were administered Extended Objective Measure of Ego Identity Status-2 (Bennion & Adams, 1986), Friedman Well-being Scale (Friedman, 1994), and Family Relations Inventory (Sherry & Sinha, 1987). Pearson Product Moment correlation analyses revealed that for the boys’ sample, psychological well-being was positively correlated with identity achievement while opposite pattern emerged for diffusion. Avoidant and concentrated parental attitudes have significant positive correlates with lower identity statuses (moratorium, foreclosure, and diffusion in either gender). Factor analyses revealed that identity achievement status clustered both with parental acceptance and parental concentration on different factors among boys; girls in lower identity statuses experienced more avoidant and concentrated parenting.

Adolescence has been considered as a period marked with identity crisis. The adolescent crisis of ego identity versus role confusion, when resolved, enables individuals to integrate all the images about oneself into a personal identity and consolidate various roles one has to play (Erikson, 1968). The content of identity tends to fall within two major domains, the ideological domain consisting of choices regarding career or occupation, religion, and politics (Grotevant, Thorbecke, & Meyer, 1982), and the interpersonal domain comprising family, dating, or romantic relationships, friendships, and sex roles (Balistreri, Busch-Rossnagel, & Geisinger, 1995). The relative importance of identity options within these domains for an adolescent depends on what is accepted and valued in their respective culture (Phinney & Baldelomar, 2011).

A useful approach towards understanding the concomitants, precursors, and correlates of identity has been suggested by Marcia (1966). He elaborated upon the Erikson’s (1968) bipolar framework of identity and laid down a four-status approach to study this phenomenon in detail. The four identity statuses viz. identity achievement, moratorium, foreclosure, and diffusion are built upon the dimensions of exploration and commitment. Identity achieved adolescents are those who have gone through a period of exploration, and have made identity-defining commitments (Marcia, 1980). Individuals in moratorium status are currently in the process of exploration, and the commitments are either vague or absent; Foreclosed persons have adopted goals, values, and beliefs from parents or other authority figures without much critical thought; and lack of commitment and exploration is the characteristic of diffused individuals. Identity diffused individuals seem to drift aimlessly and are carefree. Identity diffusion tends to be associated with low self-esteem, delinquency, and drug or alcohol problems (Adams, Munro, Munro, Doherty-Poirer, & Edwards, 2005; Luyckx, Goossens, Soenens, Beyers, & Vansteenkiste, 2005).

Identity strives for consistency, coherence, and harmony between values, beliefs, and commitment, and enables the recognition of potential through a sense of future possibilities and alternative choices. A unique configuration of identity engenders a sense of psychological well-being, a feeling of being ‘at home’ in one’s body, and a sense of knowing where one is going (Erikson, 1968). Empirical research also indicates that identity achievement status reflects the epitome of adolescent mental health, adjustment, and self-esteem, and is a predictor of positive social and psychological outcomes, such as positive psychological well-being (Waterman, 2007), emotional adjustment (Dumas, Lawford, Tieu, & Pratt, 2009), and intimate relationship satisfaction in adulthood (Beyers & Seiffge-Krenke, 2010). Whereas subjects high on identity diffusion have been reportedly high on self-related problems and alienation (Fulton, 1997; Sandhu & Tung, 2004); Identity diffusion is associated with a wide range of psychopathologies rang from depression to suicidal tendency (Butman & Arp, 1990). Identity moratorium individuals are in a state of uncertainty regarding life choices; this status in particular is associated with feelings of anxiety (Meeus, Iedema, Helsen, & Vollebergh, 1999). Kroger, Martinussen, and Marcia (2010), consider that this anxiety to short-lived because moratorium is a transitional period of personal reflection before reaching identity achievement.

Research suggests that parenting and family socialisation experiences may enhance or hinder the individual’s ability to deal effectively with the developmental issues of adolescence (e.g. Ainsworth, 1982; Grotevant & Cooper, 1985; Zimmermann & Becker-Stoll, 2002). Parenting is a complex activity that includes many specific behaviours that work individually or collectively to influence child development. It encompasses number of different aspects, including beliefs, attitudes, values, expectations, goals, practices, and behaviour. Parental attitudes toward the child create not only an emotional climate in which parent’s behaviours are expressed, but also reflect parental control of parent-child relationships (Carlo, McGinley, Hayes, Batenhorst, & Wilkinson, 2007).

The various dimensions of parental attitudes assume significant importance during adolescence and in fact, research has revealed differences among identity statuses of adolescents’ whose parents had diverse parental attitudes (Cakir & Aydin, 2005). Puberty marks the intensification of conflicts between parents and children, and thereby distances the adolescent from the rest of the family. The major quarrels between the adolescents and their parents are over the issues of autonomy (Collins & Laursen, 2004). Parenting attitudes marked by rigidly enforced rules and regulations; make adjustments to adolescence difficult. In families where excessive parental control is accompanied by extreme coldness and punishment, the adolescent may rebel against parents’ standards explicitly, in an attempt to assert his or her independence in a visible and demonstrable fashion (Hill & Holmbeck, 1986). Researchers have suggested that identity is better developed during adolescents when parents themselves encourage youngsters to be autonomous and independent within the context of secure parent-child relationship; families in which adolescents are encouraged both to be connected to their parents and to express their own individuality (Perosa, Perosa, & Tam, 2002).

Adolescent identity formation is a complex process and can be associated with different psychosocial outcomes depending upon the socio-cultural milieu. Erikson (1980) contended that identity was a fit between the culture and the individual. Research indicates that socialization patterns in Asian and Asian-American culture emphasize the interdependent aspects of social competence (Berndt, Cheung, Lau, Hau, & Lew, 1993; Chun & MacDermid, 1997; Fuligni, 1998; Lam, 1997). Society and culture create different experiences for men and women. Culture shapes women’s identity as Matteson (1993) found that it is more difficult for women to achieve identity. Lack of support and encouragement from society stops females to explore their identities. In such socio-cultural conditions, identity formation in adolescent females may be complicated because of the traditional roles expected from them, and the support they get when they conform to the expectations of family and society. Adolescence is a time when the world expands for boys and contracts for girls, and gender disparities in opportunity and expectations become particularly pronounced (Brady, 2005). Boys enjoy privileges reserved for men; girls endure new restrictions reserved for women. Boys gain autonomy, mobility, opportunity, and power; girls are systematically deprived of these assets (Mensch, Bruce, & Greene, 1998). In such cases, as an earlier evidence suggests foreclosure may be considered a secure status and may be associated with high self-esteem (Marcia & Friedman, 1970). On the other hand, it has been suggested that such stability is at superficial levels and foreclosed women have lower psychological health (Josselson, 1973).

Thus, an interesting picture emerges regarding the relationship of identity with parental attitudes and psychological well-being. Most significant here for the researchers, is studying the relationship in the backdrop of a traditionally collectivistic culture like that of India, where female individuation is not very acceptable and thus not encouraged practice in child rearing. The present study was designed with the objective of studying the relationship of identity formation of adolescent boys and girls with parental attitudes and psychological well-being in the Indian culture. Major hypotheses so framed were that (i) identity achievement would be positively related with psychological well-being for both genders, (ii) identity diffusion would be inversely related with psychological well-being for both genders, (iii) Moratorium would be inversely related with psychological well-being for both genders, (iv) Foreclosure in boys would have inverse correlations with psychological well-being, while it would be positively related with psychological well-being in girls, (v) Parental acceptance would be positively related with identity achievement while inversely related with identity foreclosure, moratorium, and diffusion in both genders, and (vi) Parental avoidance and parental concentration would be inversely related with identity achievement while being positively related with identity moratorium, foreclosure, and diffusion in both genders.

METHOD

Sample
To achieve the objectives of the research a purposive sample comprising 210 late adolescents (99 boys and 111 girls) was taken from various colleges of city Amritsar, Punjab, India. The ages ranged from 17 to 20 years; the mean age for the boys was 18.54 years (SD = .92) and that for the girls was 18.77 years (SD = .95). The participants were enrolled in Bachelors of Science (Part I & II) and Bachelor of Commerce (Part I & II). The socioeconomic status of the students was middle class, they had urban background, and whose parents had acquired an education up to senior-secondary level (eight grade) or more.

Measures
Extended Objective Measure of Ego Identity Status-2. The self-report measure namely Extended Objective Measure of Ego Identity-2 (EOMEIS-2; Bennion & Adams, 1986) has been extensively used for research and clinical or educational assessment of identity formation. The instrument comprises 64 items and assesses the identity formation of an individual across two domains (32 items each). The ideological domain has 8 items each on areas like occupation, religion, politics, and philosophical life style; while the interpersonal domain includes 8 items each on friendship, recreation, dating, and sex roles. Both the domains measure the four identity statuses namely identity achievement, moratorium, foreclosure, and diffusion. For present study only 48 items were used. 16 items from the interpersonal domain i.e. dating and sex roles were eliminated, as pilot study indicated that the educational institutions were not permitting the inclusion of items pertaining to dating and sex roles, i.e. largely marital issues, in the instrument.

The scale has been successfully used on Indian adolescents by Graf (2003). Sandhu (2004) reported reliability coefficient of different statuses of EOMEIS-2 ranging from .72 to .87 on Indian sample. In the present study, test-retest reliability over a 15 days period (N = 210) came out to be .79.

Friedman Well-Being Scale. The Friedman Well-being Scale (Friedman, 1994), is a short scale which measures over all psychological well-being. It has five scales, viz., emotional stability, self-esteem/self-confidence, sociability, joviality, and happiness. A Friedman Well-being Composite can be calculated; It consists of 20 bipolar opposite’s i.e. emotional stability-instability and happiness-unhappiness, which are noted and scored on a 10-point scale with a possible range of scores from zero to 200 and divided by two to obtain a 100-point range for easy interpretation. Friedman (1994) reports the test-retest reliability to be .73. In the present study, test-retest reliabilities over a 15 days period (N = 210) was found to be .72.

Family Relations Inventory. Family Relations Inventory (Sherry & Sinha, 1987) was used for the measurement of children’s perception of parental attitudes towards children. The inventory comprised 150 items classified into three parental attitudes of mother and father separately i.e., father’s acceptance, mother’s acceptance, father’s concentration, mother’s concentration, father’s avoidance, and mother’s avoidance. The scores on each dimension of the scale were determined by the number of ‘True’ responses to the item relevant to each dimension. The range of scores is as (i) fathers’ acceptance: 0 to 25, (ii) mothers’ acceptance: 0 to 27, (iii) fathers’ concentration: 0 to 20, (iv) mothers’ concentration: 0 to 21, (v) fathers’ avoidance: 0 to 26, and (vi) mothers’ avoidance: 0 to 31. High scores indicate the respective parent’s acceptance and indulgence for the particular dimension.

Authors have reported test-retest reliability values for the various scales to be between .42 to .81 (Sherry & Sinha, 1987). Test-retest reliability coefficients on a sample of 210, over a 15 days period came out to be .70.

RESULTS

Pearsons Product Moment Correlation analyses were employed to determine the correlations of four identity statuses with various dimensions of psychological well-being, and parental attitudes for the boys and girls sample separately.

Table 1 revealed that identity achievement in boys is positively correlated with well-being composite, self-esteem, and sociability, whereas identity diffusion is inversely correlated with psychological well-being composite, self-esteem/self-confidence, joviality, sociability, and happiness.

Table 1:	Correlation between Identity Status scores, dimensions of Parental Attitude, and Psychological Well-being and its Dimensions (N = 210)
*p < .05, **p < .01

Moratorium is negatively correlated with happiness, while foreclosure status also accompanies lesser emotional stability in boys; moratorium status in adolescent boys and girls accompanies mothers’ attitudes as lesser accepting, higher on concentration, and fathers’ attitude characterized by higher avoidance. Adolescent girls with high moratorium status experience less acceptance and higher concentration from their fathers. It was also found that foreclosure status in girls has significant positive correlation with parental concentration and paternal avoidance. Thus parental attitude of overprotection is associated with foreclosure in girls. Girls higher on diffusion status also reports parental attitudes of high fathers’ concentration and high mothers’ avoidance. (see Table 1)

Table 2:

Rotated Factor Matrix for Identity Statuses, Parental Attitude and Psychological Well-being and its Dimension for Boys (N = 99)

Note. Factor Loading more than .30 are bold faced. Factor Loadings significant = + 0.30 a Factor I explained 24.55 percent of variance (% of Cumulative Variance = 24.55), factor II explained 15.23 percent of variance (% of Cumulative Variance = 39.78), factor III explained 10.98 percent of variance (% of Cumulative Variance = 50.76), factor IV explained 10.27 percent of variance (% of Cumulative Variance = 61.02), and factor V explained 7.35 percent of variance (% of Cumulative Variance =68.39); Eigen Value for the five factors were 3.95, 2.42, 1.80, 1.62, and 1.18 respectively.

Higher diffusion in boys accompanies lesser maternal acceptance (see Table 2). Factor I for the boys’ sample suggests that various well-being variables have loaded positively along with identity achievement, while paternal avoidance has loaded negatively. On Factor III, the statuses of identity moratorium, and diffusion have loaded negatively while identity achievement status and mother’s acceptance have loaded positively. Factor IV showed that parental concentration and identity achievement have significantly loaded on it.

Table 3:

Rotated Factor Matrix for Identity Statuses, Parental Attitude and Psychological Well-being and its Dimension for Girls (N = 111)

Note. Factor leading more than .30 are bold faced. Factor loadings significant = + 0.30 a Factor I explained 20.46 percent of variance (% of Cumulative Variance = 20.46), factor II explained 16.77 percent of variance (% of Cumulative Variance = 37.23), factor III explained 11.99 percent of variance (% of Cumulative Variance = 49.23), factor IV explained 9.95 percent of variance (% of Cumulative Variance = 59.18), and factor V explained 6.86 percent of variance (% of Cumulative Variance =66.04); The Eigen values for the five factors were 3.26, 2.67, 1.90, 1.58, and 1.13 respectively

Table 3 indicates the factor structure for girl’s sample. The variable of maternal concentrated parental attitude has loaded significantly and positively with moratorium status, foreclosure, and diffusion on Factor III. Parental attitudes of concentration and paternal avoidance, and foreclosure status have significantly loaded at Factor IV in the girls’ sample. Also such adolescents are lesser on the joviality dimension of psychological well-being. The variables of mother’s acceptance and identity achievement have significantly loaded on Factor V for the girls’ sample.

DISCUSSION

As suggested by the results of the present study, psychological well-being and parental attitudes emerge as significant correlates of adolescent identity formation. Identity achievement in boys is positively associated with the various aspects of psychological well-being as revealed by the correlation analyses and further substantiated by factor analysis. Knowing ones direction and purpose in life accompanies positive mental health, while lack of commitment and concern for various ideological and interpersonal life issues characterized by identity diffusion does not accompany psychological well-being in males. The results are convincing as identity formation is a major psychosocial developmental task of adolescence, which has to be mastered. The present results lend partial support to hypotheses that identity achievement would be positively related with psychological well-being for both genders, and that identity diffusion would be inversely related with psychological well-being for both genders, as these results did not significantly emerge in the girls’ sample. Seemingly identity achievement is an importantly tied with psychological well-being for boys. Research also suggests that successful identity achievement is related to better adjustment, adaptive capacities and psychological well-being in adolescents (Meeus, Dekovic, & Iedema, 1997).

Also, it has come up that foreclosure girls display lesser joviality. We had hypothesized that foreclosure girls would be high on psychological well-being; however results did not support the hypothesis. Seemingly foreclosure status is not evident of psychological well-being in girls too. A review of earlier literature (Marcia & Friedman, 1970) that foreclosure girls get security from accepting parental ideologies, but there are suggestions that this security is at a superficial level (Josselson, 1973). Basak and Ghosh (2008) had also reported that identity foreclosure (political ideology) was significantly and positively correlated with self-esteem for urban females. Results indicate that committing to life tasks without self-evaluation does not associate with a positive state of mind. The present day competitive world requires adolescents to be active explorers. Girls, who have not experimented with various important issues of life themselves and have unquestioningly accepted the authority, miss out on the virtues associated with healthy resolution of identity crisis.

Interestingly, it comes to light that joviality and happiness in girls is significantly related to higher parental acceptance and lesser parental avoidance, while only fathers’ attitude has loaded significantly with indices of psychological well-being in boys. Girls experiencing higher parental concentration are lesser on joviality. Research also indicates that a context of affective support and connectedness is important for adolescents as it provides an optimal environment for the development of social skills, identity, and psychological well-being (Silverberg & Gondoli, 1996). Parental authoritativeness is effective in assisting adolescent identity development because it comprises warmth, firmness, and psychological autonomy granting (Steinberg, 2001).

Regarding the relationship of identity statuses with parental attitudes, it emerges that maternal acceptance is positively related to identity achievement in both boys and girls, thus lending support to fifth hypothesis. Lower maternal acceptance is indicative of lower identity statuses i.e. moratorium and diffusion in boys. Review also suggests that identity commitment is associated with adolescents’ feeling of being accepted and trusted (Meeus, Oosterwegel, & Vollebergh, 2002).

Mothers play a crucial role in the development of a child, and maternal attitudes characterized by a lack of acceptance for the child may not instil confidence in the child to believe in himself as an individual, thereby not suggesting the resolution of adolescent identity crises. Research is also evident that mother bonds appear to support the resolution of identity crises and the formation of authentic commitments (Benson, Harris, & Rogers, 1992). Weinman and Newcombe (1994) have also ascribed importance to mother’s role in achieving identity.

Fathers’ attitude characterized by higher acceptance is also an important correlate of identity achievement in boys. On the other hand, high paternal attitude of avoidance is associated with lesser identity achievement in boys and higher foreclosure in girls. The present results suggest an importance of positive paternal attitudes towards the psychosocial development of an adolescent. Thus both mothers’ and fathers’ attitudes are associated with adolescent identity formation. The theoretical literature (Minuchin, 1974) and empirical findings (Anderson & Fleming, 1986; Zimmermann & Becker-Stoll, 2002) suggests that the family context plays a significant role in the adolescents’ ability to develop stable identity. Adolescents need a secure base to explore their selves. In the absence of a warm familial relationship, healthy psychosocial development of adolescents may be a challenging issue.

Regarding the hypothesis of relationship between identity and parental concentration, mixed findings have emerged. Parental concentration is associated with identity foreclosure in females. Seemingly girls commit themselves to various life-choices prematurely without any self-exploration, when parents are overly controlling their lives. Such parental attitudes of control and overprotection do not support identity exploration in girls. Moratorium in girls is particularly associated with perceptions of concentration by mothers. Girls who are currently exploring the various life options available to them thus experience a lot of overprotection from their mothers. This result is convincing in the backdrop of Indian scenario where female identity exploration is not a much accepted norm. Matteson (1993) has also reported that lack of support and encouragement from society stops females to explore. Another lower identity status, diffusion, is associated with maternal concentration. Adams and Jones (1983) have found that diffused adolescents perceive more parental control and regulating behaviour. Excessive demands and expectations in the absence of genuine love, care and attention towards the child are not indicative of unique identity commitments. In a similar vein, Noller (1995) also reports that foreclosed adolescents are likely to perceive their parents as highly overprotective as compared to adolescents in the other statuses.

On the other hand, boys high on identity achievement also perceive high parental concentration. Seeing the positive linkages of parental concentration with all identity statuses, it can be assumed that overprotection is an inherent feature of Indian parenting. It might accordingly associate itself with various identity statuses depending upon other aspects of parental attitudes like care/acceptance, as evident in the present results where adolescent boys high on identity achievement are perceiving high parental acceptance as well as high parental concentration. Literature shows that youth in the Indian context might benefit from parental control and overprotection for the achievement of identity (Sandhu, 2004). Also, parental control may be perceived as a security by children in cultures where it is a prescribed norm (Pettengil & Rohner, 1985).

LIMITATIONS AND SUGGESTIONS

The major limitation of the study is that it does not indicate the causal pattern of association between adolescent identity formation, parental attitudes, and psychological well-being. Future studies may explore this from a causal perspective. Also, the role of parental concentration for adolescent psychosocial development needs to be explored particularly in cultures which have traditionally been collectivistic. Some qualitative studies can perhaps look into the adaptive value of female foreclosure in such cultures too.

IMPLICATIONS AND CONCLUSION

The study has implications for understanding the parental attitudes which accompany various adolescent identity statuses, and the well-being of adolescents in various identity statuses. The research highlights the relationship of adolescent identity formation for the psychological well-being of adolescents, and that parental attitudes significantly accompany this developmental process of adolescence. The research can serve as a framework for development of identity enhancement programs of adolescents. Overall, it can be said adolescent boys who are high on identity achievement experience psychological well-being, while foreclosure girls reflect less joviality. Parental attitude marked by acceptance is associated with adolescent identity achievement, while avoidant parenting is related to lower identity statuses. Concentrated parenting is experienced by girls in lower identity statuses. Interestingly for boys, concentrated parenting relates positively with identity achievement. Identity achievement is seemingly high in adolescent boys in the face of both parental acceptance and parental concentration. The relationship of parental concentration with male adolescents’ identity formation needs to be further explored in the Indian set-up.

REFERENCES

1. Adams, G. R., & Jones, R. M. (1983). Female adolescents’ identity development: Age comparisons and perceived child rearing experiences. Developmental Psychology, 19, 249-256.
2. Adams, G. R., Munro, B., Munro, G., Doherty-Poirer, M., & Edwards, J. (2005). Identity processing styles and Canadian adolescents’ self-reported delinquency. Identity: An International Journal of Theory and Research, 5, 57-65.
3. Ainsworth, M. D. S. (1982). Attachment: Retrospect and prospect. In C. M. Parkes, & J. Stevenson-Hinde (Eds.), The place of attachment in human behaviour (pp. 3-30). Basic Books: New York.
4. Anderson, S. A., & Fleming, W. M. (1986). Late adolescents’ identity formation: Individuation from the family of origin. Adolescence, 21(84), 785-796.
5. Balistreri, E., Busch-Rossnagel, N. A., & Geisinger, K. F. (1995). Development and preliminary validation of the ego identity process questionnaire. Journal of Adolescence, 18, 179-192.
6. Basak, R., & Ghosh, A. ( 2008). Ego-identity status and its relationship with self-esteem in a group of late adolescents. Journal of the Indian Academy of Applied Psychology, 34(2), 337-344.
7. 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.
8. Benson, M. J., Harris, P. B., & Rogers, C. S. (1992). Identity consequences of attachment to mothers and fathers among late adolescents. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 2, 187-204.
9. Berndt, T. J., Cheung, P. C., Lau, S., Hau, K. T., & Lew, W. J. F. (1993). Perceptions of parenting in mainland China, Taiwan, and Hong Kong. Developmental Psychology, 29, 156-164.
10. Beyers, W., & Seiffge-Krenke, I. (2010). Does identity precede intimacy? Testing Erikson’s theory on romantic development in emerging adults of the 21^st century. Journal of Adolescent Research, 25, 387-415.
11. Brady, M. (2005). Creating safe spaces and building social assets for young women in the developing world: A new role for sports. Women’s Study Quarterly, 33(1/2), 35-49.
12. Butman, R. E., & Arp, J. H. (1990). Adolescent depression in its developmental and maturational context. Journal of Psychology and Christianity, 9(4), 34-43.
13. Cakir, S. G., & Aydin, G. (2005). Parental attitudes and ego identity status of Turkish adolescents. Adolescence, 40(160), 847-859.
14. Carlo, G., McGinley, M., Hayes, F., Batenhorst, C., & Wilkinson, J. (2007). Parenting, sympathy, and prosocial behaviours among adolescents. Journal of Genetic Psychology, 168(2), 147-176.
15. Chun, Y. J., & MacDermid, S. M. (1997). Perceptions of family differentiation, individuation, and self-esteem among Korean adolescents. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 59, 451-462.
16. Collins, W. A., & Laursen, B. (2004). Changing relationships, changing youth: Interpersonal contexts of adolescent development. Journal of Early Adolescence, 24, 55-62.
17. Dumas, T. M., Lawford, H., Tieu, T., & Pratt, M. W. (2009). Positive parenting and its relation to identity status in young adulthood: A longitudinal study. Developmental Psychology, 45, 1531-1544.
18. Erikson, E. G. (1968). Identity: Youth and crisis. New York: Norton.
19. Erikson, E. H. (1980). Identity and the life cycle. New York: Norton.
20. Friedman, P. H. (1994). Friedman well-being scale. Redwood City, A: Mind Garden.
21. Fuligni, A. J. (1998). Authority, autonomy, parent-adolescent conflict, and cohesion: A study of adolescents from Mexican, Chinese, Filipino, and European Backgrounds. Developmental Psychology, 34, 782-792.
22. Fulton, A. S. (1997). Identity status, religious orientation, and prejudice. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 26(1), 1-11.
23. Graf, S. C. (2003). Cross-cultural study of adolescent identity formation and autonomy within the context of parent-adolescent relationships (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). The Florida State University, Florida.
24. 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.
25. 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.
26. Hill, J., & Holmbeck, G. (1986). Attachment and Autonomy during Adolescence. In G. Whitehurst (Ed.), Annals of child development (pp. 241-294). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
27. Josselson, R. (1973). Psychodynamic aspects of identity formation in college women. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 2, 329-358.
28. 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.
29. Lam, C. M. (1997). A cultural perspective of the study of Chinese adolescent development. Child and Adolescent Social Work Journal, 14, 85-113.
30. Luyckx, K., Goossens, L., Soenens, B., Beyers, W., & Vansteenkiste, M. (2005). Identity statuses based upon four rather than two identity dimensions: Extending and refining Marcia’s paradigm. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 34, 605-618.
31. Marcia, J. (1966). Development and validation of ego identity status. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 3, 551-558.
32. Marcia, J. E. (1980). Identity in adolescence. In J. Adelson (Ed.), Handbook of adolescent psychology (pp. 159-187). New York: Wiley.
33. Marcia, J. E., & Friedman, M. (1970). Ego identity status in college women. Journal of Personality, 38, 249-262.
34. Matteson, D. R. (1993). Differences within and between genders: A challenge to the theory. In J. Marcia, A. Waterman, D. Matteson, S. Archer, & J. Orlofsky (Eds.), Ego identity (pp. 690-1110). New York: Springer-Verlag.
35. Meeus, W. H. J., Iedema, J., Helsen, M., & Vollebergh, W. (1999). Patterns of adolescent identity development: Review of literature and longitudinal analysis. Developmental Review, 19, 419-461.
36. Meeus, W., Oosterwegel, A., & Vollebergh, W. (2002). Parental and peer attachment and identity development in adolescence. Journal of Adolescence, 25, 93-106.
37. Meeus, W., Dekovic, M., & Iedema, J. (1997). Unemployment and identity in adolescence: a social comparison perspective. The Career Development Quarterly, 45, 369-380.
38. Mensch, B. S., Bruce, J., & Greene, M. E. (1998). The uncharted passage: Girls’ adolescence in the developing world. New York: Population Council.
39. Minuchin, S. (1974). Families and family therapy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
40. Noller, P. (1995). Parent-adolescent relationships. In M. A. Fitzpatrick, & A. L. Vangelisti (Eds.), Explaining family interactions (pp. 77-111). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
41. Perosa, L. M., Perosa, S. L., & Tam, H. P. (2002). Intergenerational systems theory and identity development in young adult women. Journal of Adolescent Research, 17(3), 235-259.
42. Pettengill, S. M., & Rohner, R. P. (1985). Korean-American adolescents' perceptions of control, parental acceptance-rejection, and parent-adolescent conflict. In I. R. Lagunes, & Y. H. Poortinga (Eds.), From a different perspective: Studies of behavior across cultures (pp. 240-249). Lisse: Swets & Zeitlinger.
43. Phinney, J. S., & Baldelomar, O. A. (2011). Identity development in multiple 90 cultural contexts. In L. A. Jensen’s (Ed.), Bridging cultural and developmental approaches to psychology: New syntheses in theory, research, and policy (pp. 161-186). New York: Oxford University Press.
44. Sandhu, D. (2004). Psychosocial correlates of identity formation in adolescence. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar, India.
45. Sandhu, D., & Tung, S. (2004). Contributions of family environment and identity formation towards adolescents’ alienation. Pakistan Journal of Psychological Research, 19(1-2), 1-14.
46. Sherry, J. P., & Sinha, J. C. (1987). Family Relations Inventory. Agra: National Psychological Corporation.
47. Silverberg, S. B., & Gondoli, D. M. (1996). Autonomy in adolescence: A contextualized perspective. In G. R. Adams, R. Montemayor, & T. P. Gullota (Eds.), Psychosocial development during adolescence: Progress in developmental contextualism (pp. 12-61). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
48. Steinberg, L. (2001). We know some things: Parent - adolescent relationships in retrospect and prospect. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 11(1), 1-19.
49. Waterman, A. S. (2007). Doing well: The relationship of identity status to three conceptions of well-being. Identity: An International Journal of Theory and Research, 7, 289-307.
50. Weinmann, L. L., & Newcombe, N. (1994). Relation aspects of identity: Late adolescents’ perceptions of their relationships with parents. Child Development, 65(1), 179-194.
51. Zimmermann, P., & Becker-Stoll, F. (2002). Stability of attachment representations during adolescence: The influence of ego-identity status. Journal of Adolescence, 25, 107-124.