research articles identity

Tools and Resources
Customer Services
Affective Science
Biological Foundations of Psychology
Clinical Psychology: Disorders and Therapies
Cognitive Psychology/Neuroscience
Developmental Psychology
Educational/School Psychology
Forensic Psychology
Health Psychology
History and Systems of Psychology
Individual Differences
Methods and Approaches in Psychology
Neuropsychology
Organizational and Institutional Psychology
Personality
Psychology and Other Disciplines
Social Psychology
Sports Psychology
Share This Facebook LinkedIn Twitter

Article contents

Identity development in adolescence and adulthood.

Jane Kroger Jane Kroger Department of Psychology, University of Tromsoe
https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190236557.013.54
Published online: 27 February 2017

Psychoanalyst Erik Erikson was the first professional to describe and use the concept of ego identity in his writings on what constitutes healthy personality development for every individual over the course of the life span. Basic to Erikson’s view, as well as those of many later identity writers, is the understanding that identity enables one to move with purpose and direction in life, and with a sense of inner sameness and continuity over time and place. Erikson considered identity to be psychosocial in nature, formed by the intersection of individual biological and psychological capacities in combination with the opportunities and supports offered by one’s social context. Identity normally becomes a central issue of concern during adolescence, when decisions about future vocational, ideological, and relational issues need to be addressed; however, these key identity concerns often demand further reflection and revision during different phases of adult life as well. Identity, thus, is not something that one resolves once and for all at the end of adolescence, but rather identity may continue to evolve and change over the course of adult life too.

Following Erikson’s initial writings, subsequent theorists have laid different emphases on the role of the individual and the role of society in the identity formation process. One very popular elaboration of Erikson’s own writings on identity that retains a psychosocial focus is the identity status model of James Marcia. While Erikson had described one’s identity resolution as lying somewhere on a continuum between identity achievement and role confusion (and optimally located nearer the achievement end of the spectrum), Marcia defined four very different means by which one may approach identity-defining decisions: identity achievement (commitment following exploration), moratorium (exploration in process), foreclosure (commitment without exploration), and diffusion (no commitment with little or no exploration). These four approaches (or identity statuses) have, over many decades, been the focus of over 1,000 theoretical and research studies that have examined identity status antecedents, behavioral consequences, associated personality characteristics, patterns of interpersonal relations, and developmental forms of movement over time. A further field of study has focused on the implications for intervention that each identity status holds. Current research seeks both to refine the identity statuses and explore their dimensions further through narrative analysis.

identity status
identity formation
adolescence

Introduction

We know what we are, but not what we may be . Shakespeare, Hamlet

The question of what constitutes identity has been answered differently through different historical epochs and through different theoretical and empirical approaches to understanding identity’s form and functions. However, basic to all identity definitions is an attempt to understand the entity that, ideally, enables one to move with purpose and direction in life and with a sense of internal coherence and continuity over time and place. Despite the changing physique that aging inevitably brings and the changing environmental circumstances that one invariably encounters through life, a well-functioning identity enables one to experience feelings of personal meaning and well-being and to find satisfying and fulfilling engagements in one’s social context. The means by which one experiences a feeling of sameness in the midst of continual change is the focus of identity theory and research.

Historically, concerns with questions of identity are relatively recent. Baumeister and Muraven ( 1996 ) and Burkitt ( 2011 ) have noted how changes in Western society, specifically the degree to which society has dictated one’s adult roles, have varied enormously over time. Additional changes have occurred in the loosening of social guidelines, restrictions, and constraints, such that contemporary late adolescents experience almost unlimited freedom of choice in their assumption of adult roles and values. In Medieval times, adolescents and adults were prescribed an identity by society in a very direct manner. Social rank and the kinship networks into which one was born set one’s adult roles for life. In early modern times, wealth rather than kinship networks became the standard for self-definition. In the first half of the twentieth century , apprenticeship systems that prepared adolescents for one specific line of work were giving way to more liberal forms of education, thus preparing adolescents for a broad range of occupational pathways. A more liberal educational system, however, eventually required occupational choice in line with one’s own interests and capacities. In addition, many regions in the United States became more tolerant of diversity in attitudes and values, and gender roles became more fluid. Thus, by the middle of the twentieth century in the United States and many other Western nations, the burden of creating an adult identity was now falling largely on the shoulders of late adolescents themselves.

Into this twentieth century United States context came Erik Erikson, a German immigrant (escaping Hitler’s rise to power) and psychoanalyst, trained by Anna Freud. Erikson began his clinical work and writings on optimal personality development in the Boston area, focusing, in particular, on the concept of identity and identity crisis . As an immigrant, Erikson was acutely attuned to the role of the social context and its influence on individual personality development, and, as a psychoanalyst, he was also adept at understanding the roles of conscious as well as unconscious motivations, desires, and intentions, as well as biological drives on individual behavior.

Erikson ( 1963 ) first used the term “ego identity” to describe a central disturbance among some of his veteran patients returning from World War II with a diagnosis of “shell shock” (or currently, post-traumatic stress disorder), who seemed to be experiencing a loss of self-sameness and continuity in their lives:

What impressed me most was the loss in these men of a sense of identity. They knew who they were; they had a personal identity. But it was as if subjectively, their lives no longer hung together—and never would again. There was a central disturbance in what I then started to call ego identity. (Erikson, 1963 , p. 42)

Through identity’s absence in the lives of these young men, Erikson came to understand the tripartite nature of identity, that he believed to be comprised of biological, psychological, and social factors. It was often a particular moment in a soldier’s life history where soma, psyche, and society conspired to endanger identity foundations that necessitated clinical care. And, thus, it was through disruptions to individual identity that Erikson more clearly came to understand identity’s form and functions.

Erikson has often been referred to as “identity’s architect” (e.g., Friedman, 1999 ), and his initial writings on identity served as the springboard for many later theorists and researchers to examine further identity’s many dimensions. Erikson’s psychosocial approach will thus serve as the organizing framework for a review of research on identity development during adolescent and adult life.

Erikson’s Psychosocial Orientation

Erikson’s ( 1963 , 1968 ) understanding of identity views the phenomenon as a result of the mutual interaction of individual and context; while individual interests and capacities, wishes and desires draw individuals to particular contexts, those contexts, in turn, provide recognition (or not) of individual identity and are critical to its further development. Erikson stressed the important interactions among the biological, psychological, and social forces for optimal personality development. He suggested a series of eight psychosocial tasks over the course of the life span that follow an epigenetic principle, such that resolution to one task sets the foundation for all that follow. Identity vs. Role Confusion is the fifth psychosocial task that Erikson identified, becoming of primary importance during adolescence. Resolution to preceding tasks of Trust vs. Mistrust, Autonomy vs. Doubt and Shame, Initiative vs. Guilt, Industry vs. Inferiority are the foundations upon which one’s resolution to Identity vs. Role Confusion is based, according to Erikson; resolution to subsequent adult tasks of Intimacy vs. Role Confusion, Generativity vs. Stagnation, and Integrity vs. Despair all similarly depend upon resolution to the Identity vs. Role Confusion task of adolescence.

Erikson ( 1963 , 1968 ) postulated a number of key identity concepts that have served as foundations for much subsequent identity research. For Erikson, identity formation involves finding a meaningful identity direction on a continuum between identity attainment and role confusion . The process of identity formation requires identity exploration and commitment , the synthesis of childhood identifications into a new configuration, related to but different from, the sum of its parts. The identity formation process is extremely arduous for some, and the resolutions of a negative identity or identity foreclosure are two means by which the identity formation process can be bypassed. A negative identity involves identity choices based on roles and values that represent polar opposites of those espoused by one’s family and/or immediate community. Thus, the daughter of a Midwestern minister of religion runs away to become a prostitute in inner city Chicago. A foreclosed identity resolution also avoids the identity formation process by basing identity-defining choices on key identifications, mostly with parental values, without exploring potential alternatives.

Erikson ( 1963 , 1968 ) also proposed several further concepts for optimal identity development. A moratorium process, the active consideration and exploration of future possible identity-defining adult roles and values, was considered vital to optimal identity development. Erikson also became well known for his use of the term identity crisis , an acute period of questioning one’s own identity directions. And finally, Erikson stressed that while an initial resolution to the Identity vs. Role Confusion task often occurs during adolescence, identity is never resolved once and for all, but rather remains open to modifications and alterations throughout adult life. The strength of Erikson’s approach lies in its consideration of both individual and sociocultural factors and their mutual interaction in identity construction and development. Erikson’s model of identity development has wide applicability across cultural contexts and highlights the ongoing nature of identity development throughout adulthood. Weaknesses include his imprecise language, which at times makes operationalization of key concepts difficult, and his historically dated concepts regarding women’s identity development.

While other psychosocial models have evolved from Erikson’s original writings (e.g., Whitbourne’s [ 2002 ] identity processing theory, Berzonsky’s [ 2011 ] social cognitive identity styles, McAdams’s [ 2008 ] narrative approach), it is Erikson’s identity formation concepts, particularly those operationalized by Marcia ( 1966 ) (Marcia, Waterman, Matteson, Archer, & Orlofsky, 1993 ) that have generated an enormous volume of empirical research over past decades and will be the primary focus of subsequent sections of this article.

Erikson’s Psychosocial Approach and Marcia’s Identity Status Model

As a young Ph.D. student in clinical psychology, James Marcia was interested in Erikson’s writings but suspected that the process of identity formation during late adolescence to be somewhat more complicated than what Erikson ( 1963 ) had originally proposed. While Erikson had conceptualized an identity resolution as lying on a continuum between identity and role confusion, an entity that one had “more or less of,” Marcia proposed that there were four qualitatively different pathways by which late adolescents or young adults went about the process of forming an identity. Based on the presence or absence of exploration and commitment around several issues important to identity development during late adolescence, Marcia ( 1966 ; Marcia et al., 1993 ) developed a semi-structured Identity Status Interview to identify four identity pathways, or identity statuses, among late adolescent or young adult interviewees.

An individual in the identity achieved status had explored various identity-defining possibilities and had made commitments on his or her own terms, trying to match personal interests, talents, and values with those available in the environmental context. Equally committed to an identity direction was the foreclosed individual, who had formed an identity, but without undergoing an exploration process. This person’s identity had been acquired primarily through the process of identification—by assuming the identity choices of significant others without serious personal consideration of alternative possibilities. An individual in the moratorium identity status was very much in the process of identity exploration, seeking meaningful life directions but not yet making firm commitments and often experiencing considerable discomfort in the process. Someone in the diffusion identity status had similarly not made identity-defining commitments and was not attempting to do so.

Marcia et al.’s ( 1993 ) Identity Status Interview was designed to tap the areas (or domains) of occupation, political, religious, and sexual values that had been described by Erikson as key to the identity formation process. In Marcia’s view, however, the nature of the identity domain was not as critical to the assessment of identity status as was finding the identity-defining issues most salient to any given individual. Marcia suggested the use of clinical judgment in assigning a global identity status, the mode that seemed to best capture an adolescent’s identity formation process. It must be noted that Marcia and his colleagues (Marcia et al., 1993 ) have never attempted to capture all of the rich dimensions of identity outlined by Erikson through the Identity Status Interview; such a task would be unwieldy, if not impossible. Marcia does, however, build on Erikson’s concepts of identity exploration and comment to elaborate these identity dimensions in relation to those psychosocial roles and values identified by Erikson as key to the identity formation process of many late adolescents.

Subsequent to the original Identity Status Interview, several paper-and-pencil measures were developed to assess Marcia’s four identity statuses. One widely used measure has been the Extended Objective Measure of Ego Identity Status (EOM-EIS II), devised and revised through several versions by Adams and his colleagues (Adams, Bennion, & Huh, 1989 ; Adams & Ethier, 1999 ). This questionnaire measure enables identity status assessments in four ideological (occupation, religion, politics, philosophy of life) and four interpersonal domains (friendships, dating, gender roles, recreation/leisure), as well as providing a global rating.

Different dimensions of identity exploration and commitment processes have also been identified through several recent and expanded identity status models (Luyckx, Goossens, Soenens, & Beyers, 2006 ; Crocetti, Rubini, & Meeus, 2008 ). Luyckx and his colleagues differentiated two types of exploration (exploration in breadth and exploration in depth) and two types of commitment (commitment making and identification with commitment). Exploration in breadth is that moratorium process identified by Marcia, while exploration in depth describes the process of considering a commitment already made and how well it expresses one’s own identity. Commitment making refers to deciding an identity-defining direction, while identification with commitment describes the process of integrating one’s commitments into an internal sense of identity. Later, Luyckx and his colleagues (Luyckx, Schwartz, Berzonsky, Soenens, Vansteenkiste, Smits, et al., 2008 ) also identified a process of ruminative exploration.

Meeus and his colleagues (e.g., Crocetti, Rubini, & Meeus, 2008 ) also identified three identity processes: commitment, exploration in depth, and reconsideration of commitments. Commitment here refers to the dimensions of commitment making and identification with commitment in the Luyckx, Goossens, Soenens, and Beyers ( 2006 ) model; exploration in depth corresponds to that dimension in the Luyckx model. Reconsideration of commitment refers to one’s willingness to replace current commitments with new ones. In this model, commitment and reconsideration reflect identity certainty and uncertainty, respectively, in the identity formation process.

Through cluster analysis, these two groups of researchers have extracted clusters that match all of Marcia’s original identity statuses. In addition, Luyckx and his colleagues (Luyckx, Goossens, Soenens, Beyers, & Vansteenkiste, 2005 ) identified two types of diffusion—troubled and carefree—while Meeus, van de Schoot, Keijsers, Schwartz, and Branje ( 2010 ) found two types of moratoriums—classical (where the individual exhibits anxiety and depression in the identity exploration process) and searching (where new commitments are considered without discarding present commitments). Work has now begun to explore the identity formation process during adolescence and young adulthood with these refined identity statuses, which hold interesting implications for understanding both adaptive and non-adaptive identity development.

Over the time since Marcia’s initial studies, the identity statuses have been examined in relation to personality and behavioral correlates, relationship styles, and developmental patterns of change over time. Most of the studies reviewed in subsequent sections address some aspect of identity development during adolescence or young adulthood; a later section will focus on identity development research during adulthood. It must be further noted that discussion of identity statuses here will be limited to general (or global) identity and its relationship to associated variables.

Personality and Behavioral Correlates of the Identity Statuses

Work utilizing Marcia’s original identity status model, as well as its more recent refinements, have focused on personality and behavioral variables associated with each identity status in order to help validate the model; such studies have produced some reasonably consistent results over time. In terms of personality variables associated with the identity statuses, Kroger and her colleagues (e.g., Martinussen & Kroger, 2013 ) have produced a series of findings utilizing techniques of meta-analysis. Meta-analysis is a “study of studies,” using statistical procedures to examine (sometimes contradictory) results from different individual studies addressing comparable themes over time. Results from such meta-analytic studies allow greater confidence in results than a narrative review of individual studies can provide. The personality variables of self-esteem, anxiety, locus of control, authoritarianism, moral reasoning, and ego development and their relations to identity status have attracted sufficient studies for meta-analyses to be undertaken and are described in the sections that follow. While a number of other personality variables have also been examined in identity status studies over the past decades, their numbers have been insufficient to enable meta-analytic studies.

An initial database for all studies included in the meta-analytic work described in the following sections was comprised of some 565 English-language studies (287 journal publications and 278 doctoral dissertations) identified from PsycInfo, ERIC, Sociological Abstracts, and Dissertation Abstracts International databases, using the following search terms: identity and Marcia, identity and Marcia’s, and ego identity. Cohen’s ( 1988 ) criteria were used to define small, medium, and large effect sizes. In some of the meta-analyses that follow, different methods were used to assess identity status (categorical ratings of identity status and scale measures of identity status). Separate meta-analyses had to be undertaken for studies utilizing each of these two types of identity status assessments for statistical reasons.

Self-Esteem

Ryeng, Kroger, and Martinussen ( 2013a ) undertook meta-analytic studies of the relationship between identity status and global self-esteem. A total of twelve studies with 1,124 participants provided the data for these studies. The achieved identity status was the only status to have a positive correlation with self-esteem ( r = .35), considered to be moderate in effect size. Mean correlations between self-esteem and the moratorium, foreclosure, and diffusion statuses were all negative (−.23, −.23, and −.20, respectively) and considered small to moderate in effect size. All of these correlations were significantly different from zero, based on their confidence intervals. When identity status was assessed categorically, there was no difference in effect size between achievements and foreclosures on self-esteem measures. The effect size for the foreclosure-diffusion comparison ( g̅ = −0.19) was small to medium and also significant. Remaining comparisons evidenced small effect size differences in self-esteem scores. Findings here were mixed, as previous research had also produced mixed results on the question of whether foreclosure self-esteem scores would be lower than or similar to those of the identity achieved. Here, results show that only the achieved status (when the identity statuses were measured by continuous scales) produced a moderately positive correlation with self-esteem, while there was no difference in effect sizes between the achieved and foreclosed identity status when studies assessing identity status categorically were analyzed. Thus, the relationship between identity status and self-esteem may depend upon how identity status is measured.

Lillevoll, Kroger, and Martinussen ( 2013a ) examined the relationship between identity status and generalized anxiety through meta-analysis. Twelve studies involving 2,104 participants provided data for this investigation. Effect size differences in anxiety scores for moratoriums compared with foreclosures ( g̅ = 0.39) and for the foreclosure–diffusion comparison ( g̅ = −0.40) were small to moderate. Additionally the confidence intervals for both of these effect sizes did not contain zero, indicating a significant result. A significant moderate effect size ( g̅ = 0.46) was also found in the achievement–foreclosure comparison, but for men only. As predicted, foreclosures had lower anxiety scores compared with all other identity statuses except the achievement women. While it was predicted that those in the achievement identity status would have lower anxiety scores than those in moratorium and diffusion statuses, a small but significant effect size difference was found for the achievement–moratorium comparison only ( g̅ = −0.22). Thus, the moratoriums showed higher generalized anxiety scores than foreclosures, who, in turn, showed lower anxiety scores than the diffusions and male achievements. It appears that unexamined identity commitments undertaken by the foreclosures provided relief from the anxieties and uncertainties of uncommitted identity directions experienced by the moratoriums and diffusions.

Locus of Control

Lillevoll, Kroger, and Martinussen ( 2013b ) examined the relationship between identity status and locus of control. Some five studies with a total of 711 participants provided data for this study. A positive correlation between identity achievement and internal locus of control ( r = .26) and a negative correlation between identity achievement and external locus of control ( r = −.17) was found; these effect sizes are considered small to medium. The moratorium identity status was negatively correlated with internal locus of control ( r = −.17) and positively with an external locus of control ( r = .17), both considered small to medium effect sizes. The foreclosure status was negatively correlated the internal locus of control ( r = −.12) and positively with external locus of control ( r = .19), both considered small to medium effect sizes. The diffusions’ status was negatively correlated with internal locus of control ( r = −.15) and positively with external locus of control ( r = .23), both considered small to medium effect sizes. Apart from the moratorium findings, which were anticipated to reflect an internal locus of control, all other results were in expected directions. It appears that the ability to undertake identity explorations on one’s own terms by the identity achieved is associated with an internal locus of control. Moratorium, foreclosure, and diffusion statuses are associated with an external locus of control.

Authoritarianism

The relationship between identity status and authoritarianism was investigated by Ryeng, Kroger, and Martinussen ( 2013b ) through meta-analysis. Some nine studies involving 861 participants provided data for this study. The mean difference between authoritarianism scores for the achievement—foreclosure comparison ( g̅ = −0.79) was large in terms of Cohen’s criteria and significant. The mean difference in authoritarianism scores for the moratorium–foreclosure comparison ( g̅ = −0.67) was medium and significant, while the mean difference in authoritarianism scores for the foreclosure and diffusion identity statuses was medium ( g̅ = 0.42) and significant. Other comparisons were relatively small and not significant. That the foreclosures scored higher on authoritarianism than all other identity statuses is consistent with expectations. Foreclosures often base their identity commitments on their identifications with significant others, rather than exploring identity options on their own terms; thus, the rigidity and intolerance of authoritarian attitudes seem to characterize the terms of their identity commitments, in contrast to the more flexible commitments of the identity achieved or moratoriums in the process of finding their own identity directions.

Ego Development

Jespersen, Kroger, and Martinussen ( 2013a ) examined studies utilizing Loevinger’s ( 1976 ) measure of ego development in relation to the identity statuses through meta-analysis. Eleven studies involving 943 participants provided data for this investigation. Odds ratios (OR) were used to examine frequency distributions of the categorical data. Results of correlational studies showed a moderate, positive relationship between ego development and identity status ( r = .35), which was significant. Results from categorical assessments of identity status also showed a strong relationship between identity status and ego development (mean OR = 3.02). This finding means that the odds of being in a postconformist level of ego development were three times greater for those high in identity statuses (achievement and moratorium) compared with those in the low identity statuses (foreclosure and diffusion). The study also found a moderate relationship between identity achievement and ego development (mean OR = 2.15), meaning that the odds of being in a postconformist level of ego development were over two times greater for those in the identity achievement status than remaining identity statuses. However, no relationship was found between the foreclosed/nonforeclosed identity statuses and the conformist/nonconformist levels of ego development, contrary to prediction (mean OR = 1.31). While results indicate a strong likelihood of being in a post-conformist level of ego development for the identity achieved and moratoriums, as one would predict, it is somewhat surprising that the foreclosure status was not associated with conventional levels of ego development. This lack of association requires further investigation.

Moral Reasoning

A meta-analysis of moral reasoning stages (using Kohlberg’s [ 1976 ] stages in relation to the identity statuses) was also undertaken by Jespersen, Kroger, and Martinussen ( 2013b ). Some ten studies involving 884 participants provided data appropriate for this study. Results showed a small positive mean correlation (.15) between identity status and moral reasoning development, which was significant. Results from categorical assessments of both measures indicated a strong relationship between high identity status (achievement and moratorium) and postconventional levels of moral reasoning (mean OR = 4.57). This result means that the odds of being in the postconventional level of moral reasoning are about four and a half times greater for the high identity status group (achievement and moratorium) than the low (foreclosure and diffusion) group. A strong relationship was also found between the achieved identity status and the postconventional level of moral reasoning (mean OR = 8.85), meaning that the odds of being in a postconventional level of moral reasoning were almost nine times greater for the identity achieved than for other identity statuses. However, no significant relationship appeared for the foreclosed/nonforeclosed identity statuses and the conventional/nonconventional levels of moral reasoning, contrary to prediction. While a meaningful relationship was found between postconventional stages of moral reasoning and the moratorium and achievement identity statuses, it is again surprising that no relationship appeared for the foreclosed identity status and conventional levels of moral reasoning. This finding warrants further investigation.

Additional Personality and Behavioral Variables

A number of additional personality and behavioral variables have been explored in relation to the identity statuses, but no further meta-analyses have yet been undertaken. With regard to the newer, more refined measures of identity status, some additional personality and behavioral associations have been noted. Luyckx et al. ( 2008 ) found ruminative exploration related to identity distress and low self-esteem, while exploration in breadth and depth were positively related to self-reflection. Furthermore, commitment-making (particularly identification with commitment) was associated with high self-esteem, high academic and social adjustment, as well as with low depressive symptoms. Crocetti et al. ( 2008 ) similarly found strong, positive associations between commitment and self-concept clarity, in addition to strong negative associations between in-depth exploration and reconsideration of commitment with self-reflection. Emotional stability was strongly associated with commitment and negatively with in-depth exploration.

Recent work has performed cluster analyses on the exploration and commitment variables, finding four clusters replicating Marcia’s four identity statuses (with the diffusion status including carefree and diffuse diffusions) and an undifferentiated status (Schwartz et al., 2011 ). In terms of psychosocial functioning, achievements were significantly higher than carefree diffusions on a measure of self-esteem; diffusions, in turn, were significantly lower than all other identity statuses on this variable. On a measure of internal locus of control, achievements and moratoriums were significantly higher and carefree diffusions significantly lower than all other identity statuses. On psychological well-being, identity achievements scored significantly higher and carefree diffusions significantly lower than all other identity status groups. For general anxiety, moratoriums and the two diffusion groups scored significantly higher than achievement and foreclosure groups, while the moratoriums scored significantly higher than foreclosures and the two diffusions groups on depression. These findings are generally in line with findings of earlier studies using Marcia’s original model.

Further behavioral studies in relation to the identity statuses have consistently found the identity diffusion status to be related to psychosocial problem behaviors. Delinquent behavior (e.g., Jessor, Turbin, Costa, Dong, Zhang, & Wang, 2003 ; Schwartz, Pantin, Prado, Sullivan, & Szapocznik, 2005 ), substance abuse (e.g., Jones & Hartmann, 1988 ; Laghi, Baiocco, Longiro, & Baumgartner, 2013 ), risky behaviors (e.g., unsafe sex, Hernandez & DiClemente, 1992 ), social, physical aggression, and rule-breaking (carefree diffusions, Schwartz et al., 2011 ), and procrastination (Shanahan & Pychyl, 2006 ) have all been linked with the identity diffusion status. By contrast, the identity achieved have demonstrated a low prevalence of all preceding problem behaviors, coupled with high levels of agency or self-direction and commitment making (e.g., Schwartz et al., 2011 ; Shanahan & Pychyl, 2006 ). Moratoriums have also scored relatively high on levels of social and physical aggression, although they have also scored high on a number of psychosocial measures of well-being (e.g., Schwartz et al., 2011 ).

Relationships and the Identity Statuses

While a number of relational issues have been explored in identity status research (e.g., parental attitudes toward childrearing, family styles of communication, and friendship styles), to date, meta-analyses have been undertaken to examine identity status only in relation to attachment patterns and intimacy or romantic relationships.

Bartholomew and Horowitz ( 1991 ) have proposed that one’s very unique attachment history and subsequent working models of attachment lead to one of four different adolescent/adult attachment styles, or patterns of relating to significant others; these attachment styles become activated particularly in times of stress. S ecurely attached individuals are at ease in becoming close to others and do not worry about being abandoned or having someone become too close to them. Furthermore, they are interdependent—comfortable depending on others and having others depend on them. Those using the avoidant attachment style find it difficult to trust and depend on others and are uncomfortable in becoming too emotionally close. The preoccupied (anxious/ambivalent) attachment group wants to be close to others but worries that others will not reciprocate and will abandon them, while the fearful attachment group wants to be emotionally close to others but are too frightened of being hurt to realize this desire.

These varied styles of attachment have been examined in relation to Marcia’s identity statuses among adolescents and young adults in a number of studies over the past decades, and recent meta-analytic work has explored patterns of findings across studies (Årseth, Kroger, Martinussen, & Marcia, 2009 ). From the large database of 565 identity status studies described earlier, some 14 had data suitable for meta-analysis (a full description of the database can be found in Martinussen & Kroger, 2013 ). A total of 2,329 participants were involved in this investigation. Weak to moderate correlations were found between identity status and attachment style when scale measures were used to assess each variable; the highest mean correlations were between the secure attachment style and identity achievement ( r = .21) as well as identity diffusion ( r = −.23). (Cohen, 1988 , regarded a correlation of .30 as moderate and .10 as weak.) The diffusion status was also weakly to moderately positively correlated with the fearful attachment style ( r = .19). Among categorical assessments of identity status and attachment style, results suggest there are real differences between the identity achieved and foreclosed as well as diffusion identity statuses, with the identity achieved far more likely to be securely attached than foreclosed or diffusion statuses. Data from these studies suggests that one’s relational experiences do have some links to one’s identity status.

According to Erikson’s ( 1963 , 1968 ) epigenetic principle, resolution to the task of Identity vs. Intimacy should set the foundation for resolution to the task of Intimacy vs. Isolation during late adolescence and young adulthood. In Erikson’s ( 1968 ) view, true intimacy involves mutuality and commitment, an acceptance of another with all of his or her strengths and weaknesses in an interdependent, sexual relationship. Erikson ( 1968 ) believed that genuine intimacy requires a sense of identity to be firmly in place, or the relationship becomes merely a tool to help resolve identity concerns for each partner. However, Erikson was unclear about the potential for gender differences in his theory, and a number of feminist writers (e.g., Gilligan, 1982 ) have stressed the importance of relationship issues for women to the identity formation process. Literature examining the relationship between identity and intimacy statuses for late adolescent and young adult men and women has often produced conflicting results.

Thus, a meta-analysis of the relationship between identity status and intimacy for men and women was undertaken by Årseth, Kroger, Martinussen, and Marcia ( 2009 ). Some 21 studies with a total of 1,983 participants were included in meta-analyses here. For studies utilizing scale measures of intimacy, results indicated a low to moderate effect size for men ( g̅ = .35) and women ( g̅ = .30) considered separately, as well as for the total group ( g̅ = .40). All results were significant and indicate that high identity status individuals (achievement and moratorium) scored higher on scale measures of intimacy than low identity status individuals (foreclosures and diffusions). For categorical assessments of identity and intimacy, the picture was somewhat more complex. Among men, the mean odds ratio of having both a high identity and high intimacy status was very high at 22.09, while for women the mean odds ratio was 2.61. In terms of percentages, some 69% of high identity status men were also high in intimacy, while only 23% of low identity status men were high in intimacy. Erikson’s epigenetic principle thus finds strong support among men. Among women, while 65% of high identity status women were also high in intimacy status, some 46% of low identity status women were also high in intimacy status. Thus, the low identity status women were almost equally distributed over high and low intimacy status groups. These results indicate Erikson’s epigenetic principle also was present for a large proportion of women sampled; however, the relationship was significantly stronger for men than women (p < .001), and reasons for this gender difference require further investigation.

Identity Status Change from Adolescence Through Adulthood

Erikson ( 1963 , 1968 ) had proposed that while making initial identity resolutions was a key developmental task of adolescence, identity remained malleable, open to further changes throughout adult life. Similarly, the identity status literature that has pointed to different patterns of movement during young, middle, and late adolescence clearly shows that identity will continue to meet challenges and, for some, the need for revision throughout adulthood. What are the most prevalent patterns of identity status change over the course of adolescent and adult life, and what are the key events primarily associated with these changes?

A number of studies addressing identity status changes over time have now been undertaken, and a series of meta-analytic investigations are perhaps the most effective means of summarizing common patterns of movement and stability in the identity status literature. Kroger, Martinussen, and Marcia ( 2010 ) investigated some 72 of 124 identity studies that contained developmental information from the larger database of 565 English-language identity status studies described earlier. Movement patterns were investigated in several ways.

When movements over approximately three years of late adolescence and young adulthood were examined longitudinally from data that assessed identity status in categorical terms, the mean proportion of adolescents making progressive identity status changes (D–F, D–M, D–A, F–M, F–A, and M–A) was .36, compared with .15 who made regressive changes (A–M, A–F, A–D, M–F, M–D, and F–D) and .49 who remained stable (A–A, M–M, F–F, D–D) over this time period. It is interesting that the mean proportion of those remaining stable in identity status was so high, especially during the time of late adolescence that Erikson ( 1968 ) has identified as central to the identity formation process. As anticipated, the highest mean proportions of progressive movements were from M–A (.46), F–A (.22), and F–M (.22). The highest mean proportions of those remaining stable were the committed identity achieved (.66) and the foreclosed (.53) statuses. The highest mean proportions of those making regressive movements were from A–F (.17) and M–F (.17).

For cross-sectional studies assessing identity status in categorical terms, the mean proportion of identity achievements increased steadily through the high school years, dropped upon university entry and increased to .34 by age 22 years. It was not until the 30–36 year age group that about half of the participants were rated identity achieved (.47). The mean proportion of moratoriums rose fairly steadily to age 19 years, which peaked at .42 and declined fairly steadily thereafter through the 30–36 year age span. The mean proportion of foreclosures dropped fairly steadily to a low at age 19 years of .12, but then showed and up and down movement throughout remaining ages to .17 in the 30–36 year age group. The mean proportion of diffusions declined fairly steadily from age 14–20 years of age (from .36 to .21), but by age 21 years, the diffusions rose again to .26 and showed up and down movement until the final 30–36 year age span (.14).

For cross-sectional studies using continuous measures of identity status, it was anticipated that achievement and moratorium scores would increase across age groups and foreclosure and diffusion scores would decrease over time. Studies here were based on data for early and mid-adolescents. The anticipated patterns were found, but all effect sizes were small. It may be that more pronounced identity status changes occur during and beyond late adolescence.

Additional studies of identity status change through middle and later adulthood years not included in meta-analyses have also generally found slow, progressive identity status movements over time. Fadjukoff, Pulkkinen, and Kokko ( 2016 ) analyzed identity status longitudinally in a Finnish sample of men and women drawn from the general population. Identity status was assessed at ages 27, 36, 42, and 50 years. Movement towards identity achievement was predominant on the overall measure of identity status, with women typically reaching identity achievement earlier than men. In a narrative analysis of identity pathways among women assessed from late adolescence through mid-life, Josselson ( 1996 ) found a diversity of identity pathways, with achievement and foreclosure pathways tending to be the most stable over time. Carlsson, Wängqvist, and Frisén ( 2015 ) have also examined identity status change and stability in a longitudinal study of young adults at ages 25 and 29 years in Sweden. Half of participants were coded in the same identity status at Times 1 and 2, while half who changed did so in a progressive direction. Additional identity processes of how people approach life-changing situations, the extent to which they continue to engage in meaning-making, and how they continue to develop their personal life directions were explored through narrative methods among foreclosed and achieved participants. Identity achievement was associated with continued identity development over time, while patterns for ongoing development among foreclosures were more mixed. McLean and Pasupathi ( 2012 ) have made a plea for the use of narrative methods that examine reconstructions of past events to supplement current understandings of the exploration and commitment processes involved on ongoing identity development throughout the life span. Additional identity processes may usefully be identified through such means.

Events Associated with Identity Status Change

An issue that researchers have been exploring over several decades is the question of what kinds of circumstances are associated with identity status change and, conversely, what circumstances are linked with identity status stability. Some hints have appeared in related literatures. For example, Helson and Roberts ( 1994 ) found that some optimal level of “accommodative challenge” or life stimulation is critical for adult ego development (referring to Loevinger’s, 1976 , model of ego development). Accommodative challenge is a circumstance or event that involves either a positive or negative disruption to one’s life. It may be that such life challenges are important to ongoing identity development over time as well.

Anthis and colleagues (Anthis, 2002 , 2011 ; Anthis & La Voie, 2006 ) have conducted several investigations into life events associated with identity exploration and commitment. In her “calamity theory of growth” model, Anthis ( 2002 ) has found stressful life events, such as divorce or job loss, to be associated with increased levels of identity exploration and decreases in identity commitments. She has also found increased levels of identity exploration to be associated with a “readiness for change” measure (Anthis & La Voie, 2006 ). Anthis suggests investigating how optimal levels of perceived conflict interact with other factors for different cohorts of people in exploring the role that life events may play in ongoing identity development during adulthood.

Additionally, Kunnen ( 2006 , 2010 ) asks if conflict may be the driver of identity change. In a study of freshman university students, she found that students who experienced a conflict in their career goals increased identity exploratory activity and also manifested a decrease in the strength of their present commitments. Furthermore, those experiencing conflict perceived more change in their commitments as compared to nonconflicted students. The types and levels of perceived identity conflict and the mechanisms by which conflict may stimulate or impair ongoing identity development are in need of further study. Lilgendahl’s ( 2015 ) narrative work reiterates the value of negative events and their potential for psychological growth during midlife, while events that are understood as positive are key to the formation of identity commitments during young adulthood.

Identity Development in Adulthood

Research into ongoing identity development during adulthood has taken several forms. Some researchers have attempted to understand the relationship between resolution to identity issues during late adolescence or young adulthood and the Eriksonian psychosocial tasks of adulthood: Intimacy vs. Isolation (young adulthood), Generativity vs. Stagnation (middle adulthood), and Integrity vs. Despair (late adulthood). Others have attempted to examine selected issues of identity during these specific adult life phases and whether or not identity cohesion and stability increase with age over the course of adulthood. The following brief overview presents some selected findings from these strands of identity research during various phases of adult life.

According to Erikson’s ( 1963 , 1968 ) epigenetic principle, resolutions to earlier psychosocial tasks will impact resolutions to all subsequent ones. Research to date has generally supported this proposal, with some caveats for the relationship between identity and intimacy, described in meta-analytic studies in a preceding section. The relationships among identity, generativity, and integrity have only recently become a focus of research attention, and they present important opportunities for future investigations. Beaumont and Pratt ( 2011 ) have examined links among Berzonsky’s ( 2011 ) identity styles, Intimacy vs. Isolation, and Generativity vs. Stagnation in samples of young and midlife adults. They found that the informational style (associated with identity achievement) was linked with both the capacity for intimacy and generativity, while the diffuse–avoidant style (associated with identity diffusion) was negatively linked with both intimacy and generativity. The normative identity style (associated with the foreclosure identity status) also positively predicted resolution to intimacy and generativity tasks of adulthood. Pulkkinen, Lyyra, Fadjukoff, and Kokko ( 2012 ) obtained longitudinal data from Finnish adults at ages 27, 36, 42, and 50 years on measures including parental identity, general identity, generativity, and integrity. Generativity scores (as well as scores for psychological and social well-being) were highest if parental identity was achieved by age 42. On a cross-sectional basis, Hearn, Saulnier, Strayer, Glenham, Koopman, and Marcia ( 2012 ) examined the relationship between identity status and a measure of integrity status. A significant relationship was found, with some 86% of integrated persons rated as identity achieved, while no despairing persons were. Those in the non-exploring integrity status (in which questions of personal life meanings were unexplored), the pseudo-integrated integrity status (in which the world was understood in terms of simplistic templates or clichéd meanings), and the despairing integrity status were most frequently in the foreclosed identity status. Hannah, Domino, Figueredo, and Hendrickson ( 1996 ) explored predictors of Integrity vs. Despair in a sample of later life adults, finding the most predictive and parsimonious variables to be trust, autonomy, identity, and intimacy, with no meaningful gender differences. Thus, Erikson’s epigenetic principle has found considerable support over time and illustrates the important role that identity resolution plays to the resolution of subsequent psychosocial tasks during adulthood.

While Erikson ( 1963 , 1968 ) had postulated the ongoing nature of identity development throughout adulthood, and Stephen, Fraser, and Marcia ( 1992 ) had first proposed the likelihood of ongoing moratorium–achievement–moratorium–achievement cycles in adult identity development, there have been relatively few efforts to examine the nature of change and continuity in identity development over the course of adulthood. While some early research has estimated the likelihood of a midlife identity crisis to be about 10% (e.g., Brim, 1992 ), recent work has pointed to ongoing times of identity crisis (or revision) during the later adult years as well (Robinson & Stell, 2015 ). Experiences of well-being have been examined in relation to adult psychosocial stage resolutions in the Rochester Adult Longitudinal Study (Sneed, Whitbourne, Schwartz, & Huang, 2011 ), where scores on both identity and intimacy measures in early and middle adulthood predicted midlife feelings of satisfaction and well-being. A sense of coherence and life satisfaction in later adult years has been fully mediated by resolution to Integrity vs. Despair (Dezutter, Wiesmann, Apers, & Luyckx, 2013 ). Much remains to be learned about ongoing identity development in the adulthood years, and the relation of identity to subsequent psychosocial tasks and additional personality variables.

What the Identity Statuses Mean

Through the decades since Marcia ( 1966 ) developed his identity status model, there has been considerable discussion in the literature about what the identity statuses actually mean and how best to assess them. Marcia ( 1980 ) considers identity to be a structure for organizing individual conscious and unconscious wishes, interests, skills, and talents within the framework of one’s biology and cultural context. His identity status model was intended to reflect the movement through Erikson’s ( 1963 , 1968 ) identity formation process, from an identity based on identifications (foreclosure status), through an exploration (moratorium) process, to a new configuration, based on but different from the sum of its identificatory elements (achievement).

In considering the question of what it is that actually changes in an identity status transition, Kroger ( 2003 ) has suggested that qualitatively different forms of ego organization underlie each of Marcia’s identity statuses. However, after an initial identity has formed, further use of the identity status model during adult life begs the question of what the identity statuses actually mean when applied to adults. While new identity-defining decisions may occur in adult life, is there an actual underlying structural change of identity? There may or may not be. There may actually be new or additional structures of ego organization that underlie the identity achievement status of adulthood, and future research could fruitfully explore this issue. Lile ( 2013 , 2015 ) considers structural identity boundaries for each of the identity statuses and offers some empirical support for a structural model of identity that underlies the identity statuses. Identity status research in adulthood should carefully consider the meaning that the identity statuses may hold when applied to a life phase beyond that for which they were originally developed.

Conclusions

Historically, the task of identity formation is a relatively recent phenomenon. Erikson ( 1963 , 1968 ) first used the identity concept in his clinical writings to describe that entity that seemed to be lacking in the lives of young men returning from combat in World War II. From Erikson’s early writings, several broad approaches to identity theory and research have emerged, laying differential emphasis on the psychosocial, phenomenological, and the contextual nature of identity. This article has reviewed some of the writings and research that have sprung from the identity status model of James Marcia ( 1966 , 1980 ). This review has documented meta-analytic work covering the associations of Marcia’s four identity statuses with various personality, relational, and behavioral variables, as well as documenting the most common patterns of identity status change and stability during adolescence and adulthood. The review has also documented the role that resolution to questions of identity plays in resolutions to ongoing psychosocial tasks of adulthood.

Further identity research could fruitfully explore both the meaning of the identity statuses in ongoing adult identity development as well as the processes and contents of identity changes during adult life. The role of regression in adolescent and adult identity development is poorly understand, occurring more frequently than can be predicted by chance alone (see Kroger et al., 2010 ). Understanding what kinds of regression there may be and whether or not specific types of regression are vital to ongoing adult identity development are important avenues for further identity research. And though identity concerns of adolescence have many parallels to identity issues of later adulthood, very little identity-related theory and research has been undertaken with older adults. (For example, individuals in both phases of the life span must adjust to important biological changes, deal with philosophical questions of life’s meanings, and readjustment to changing demands from social contexts.) It is hoped that this article will present a foundation upon which future psychosocial research into the process and contents of identity development from adolescence through adulthood can take place.

What perspectives underlie ‘researcher identity’? A review of two decades of empirical studies

Open access
Published: 23 June 2020
Volume 81 , pages 567–590, ( 2021 )

Cite this article

You have full access to this open access article

Montserrat Castelló ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-1757-9795 1 , 2 ,
Lynn McAlpine 3 , 4 ,
Anna Sala-Bubaré 1 ,
Kelsey Inouye 3 &
Isabelle Skakni 5

17k Accesses

33 Citations

6 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

Over the past two decades, identity has emerged as a concept framing studies of early career researcher experience. Yet, identity is an amorphous concept, understood and used in a range of ways. This systematic review aimed to unpack the underpinnings of the notion of researcher identity. The final sample consisted of 38 empirical articles published in peer-reviewed journals in the last 20 years. Analyses focused on (a) identifying the dimensions used to define researcher identity, and (b) characterising the meta-theories—the underlying assumptions of the research—in relation to these dimensions. We identified four different stances towards researcher identity (clusters), based on variation on the identity dimensions in relation to the meta-theories. We characterised these as (1) transitioning among identities, (2) balancing identity continuity and change, (3) personal identity development through time and (4) personal and stable identity. These stances incorporate thought-provoking nuances and complex conceptualisations of the notion of researcher identity, for instance, that meta-theory was insufficient to characterise researcher identity stance. The contribution of the study is first to be able to differentiate four characterizations of researcher identity—important given that many studies had not clearly expressed a stance. The second is the potential of the four dimensions to help characterise identity, in past as well as future research—thus a useful tool for those working in this area. Many questions remain, but perhaps the biggest is to what extent and under what conditions is identity a productive notion for understanding early career researcher experience?

“Dilemmas” of Early Career Researchers from “Dilemmas” to Problems

Managing the Dual Identity: Practitioner and Researcher

Career Theory for Change: The Influences of Social Constructionism and Constructivism, and Convergence

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

Introduction

Today, in many parts of our lives, ‘identity’ is a recurrent concept, that although frequently contested, is often used to frame human activity in various domains, such as digital, social or genre identity. Increasingly, the concept of ‘identity’ has been invoked over the past two decades in the higher education literature, including that of early career researchers (PhD and post-PhD researchers). Studies frequently claim identity as a central aspect of early career researcher development and the extent to which they manage to develop a sound identity as researchers is crucial to their professional success (Alvesson, Ashcraft and Thomas 2008; Castelló et al. 2015 ). However, we Footnote 1 argue the representations of identity in such empirical studies are rarely challenged, instead being largely presented as a start- or end-point for examining early researcher career experiences. For instance, studies on doctoral students often include reference to Green’s ( 2005 ) notion of the PhD as identity work in their introductions, but do not usually define what it means in the context of the study (Baker and Lattuca 2010 ).

In other words, identity is not a straightforward notion and has multiple embedded meanings. Still, it can be a useful device since it is ‘a tool to think about sameness and difference both in terms of individual continuity and change over time and social categorization or group affiliation’ (Hammack 2015 , p. 11). So, if ‘identity’ is to be useful and meaningful as a concept that can advance research into early career researcher experience, we need to fully understand the assumptions behind the view of identity taken in any particular study, since such assumptions will drive the research and colour the resulting interpretations (Mac Naughton, Rolfe and Siraj-Blatchford 2001). As several authors have argued, it is not possible—nor appropriate—to provide a single, overarching definition of identity. Rather, we need to start with the theoretical underpinnings underlying each particular definition or study (Hall 1992; Strauss 2017 ; Hammack 2015 ). In this systematic review (Kennedy 2007 ), we critically analysed the empirical literature on researcher identity in order to ‘unpack’ the varied theoretical underpinnings of identity—and concurrently, our own respective definitions and assumptions (Grant and Booth 2009 ).

Analysing the underlying dimensions of researcher identity is especially necessary today. In the last decade, institutions, stakeholders and policies around the world have called for a new researcher profile able to develop responsible research and innovation to make possible science with and for society (SWAFS, Horizon 2020 ). To understand what might be implied in the development of this researcher profile, we should reflect on how researcher identity has been defined and empirically addressed and discuss the theoretical assumptions guiding researcher profile definition. Further, in undertaking this analysis, we recognized that identity has over time been under empirical and theoretical debate, particularly in organizational studies (Alvesson et al. 2008 ; Atewologun et al. 2017 ). We were attentive to these conversations in our study, acknowledging debates in specific domains, such as researcher identity, are influenced by and can modify discourses on identity in other domains.

Framing the study

In establishing a useful framework for the study, we started by looking at previous reviews on identity, both in general and specific domains other than the researcher identity domain and higher education field—largely teacher, professional, mentoring or management identity (Epitropaki et al. 2017 ; Holck et al. 2016 ; Palmer et al. 2015 ;Trede et al. 2012 ; Van Lankveld et al. 2017 ). This first reading of the existing reviews revealed ‘identity’ in studies has often been ill-defined—not explicitly stated but implicit—and varied in its apparent focus. This fuzziness was largely evident only through a careful interpretive reading as noted by others (Alvesson et al. 2008 ; Atewologun et al. 2017 ; Brown 2017 ; Pifer and Baker 2013 ). This initial evidence was integrated with (a) our own experience as researchers in the field of early career researcher identity development (Castelló et al. 2015 ; McAlpine et al. 2013 ) and (b) a series of iterative readings of the articles included in this review. Two principles emerged as a result of combining these different sources of evidence which were central to how we approached the review: (a) research on identity can be framed across a range of meta-theories and (b) we can examine the manifestations of different meta-theories through different dimensions of identity. Both meta-theories and dimensions are defined as follows and elaborated in the ‘Method’ section.

Meta-theories

As individuals, we each draw on different epistemological and ontological perspectives or ways of viewing the world, with our views providing a framework through which to understand human experience (Kuhn 1962 ). A meta-theory, an analytic lens Footnote 2 , provides ‘a loose collection of logically related assumptions, concepts, or propositions that orient thinking and research’ (Bogdan and Biklen 1998 p.22): more specifically, (a) a belief about the nature of knowledge, (b) a methodology and (c) criteria for validity (MacNaughton et al. 2001 ). Each meta-theory represents the philosophical intent or motivation for undertaking a study (Cohen et al. 2002 ).

Understood in this way, meta-theories act as knowledge-claims guiding decisions regarding research questions, conceptual frameworks and methodological decisions in empirical studies. Further, they are defined differently depending on disciplinary traditions. Thus, since research on identity has developed transversally from a varied range of disciplines, we did not expect or seek a shared, standard way to understand and classify the influence of different meta-theories on studies of identity (Atewologun et al. 2017 ). To capture this variation and organise the studies reviewed, the analytical structure that we developed integrated authors and traditions from sociology, psychology and education, the three main traditions that account for the variability of the studies included in this review (Bogdan and Biklen 1998 ; Kuhn 1962 ; Neuman 2000 ; Sousa 2010 ).

Our view is that meta-theories can be represented on a continuum. The continuum allows for a range of positions between two extremes as to what is considered valid knowledge. In other words, the continuum avoids suggesting discrete perspectives, but rather proposes overlaps and grey zones as to epistemological assumptions. In this continuum, we distinguished two distinctive end-points, and along the continuum variants that we refer to as meta-theories, which depending on the disciplinary traditions might have different names. At one end of the continuum, we situated positivism—reality is directly observable and scientific knowledge is exclusively valid, with objectivity not only possible but also desirable in developing scientific work. Related meta-theories considered in different disciplinary traditions include cognitivism and behaviourism or associationism.

The other end of the continuum is represented by post-positivism. Here, there is a great diversity of meta-theories but the major claim is that reality cannot be understood without taking into account the social context; thus, reality is subjective, and, to some extent, knowledge and scientific interpretations are situated within the experiences of the participants and researchers. Meta-theories move from more realistic and individual to more sociocultural and contextual premises and explanations of people, activity and concepts. Common meta-theories include constructivism/interpretivism, transformative and critical realism.

Constructivism assumes reality is different depending on who interprets a specific situation or individual, which in turn, results in a spectrum of individually to more socially based explanations, theories and related notions. Agency and the notion of mental representation are usually related to the former while references to socio-historical and cultural mediation as well as to communities as tools for development are used by the later. Transformative aims to use research and derived interpretations to promote social change, given core notions of power relationships, justice or emancipation. A final emerging meta-theory is critical realism, which assumes many of the constructivist statements but claims ontological realism restricts the range of plausible interpretations.

These different meta-theories represent the underlying assumptions researchers use in planning, conducting and interpreting research, though they often remain implicit (Atewologun et al. 2017 ) and may or may not be used coherently. Moreover, meta-theories are constantly reframed and reinterpreted due to the implications of empirical findings, disciplinary cultures and constraints. However, meta-theories are not particular to the concept of identity; rather, they characterise a general way to understand research and related concepts. So, they were unlikely on their own to be productive in achieving our goal of differentiating stances towards identity. We needed a more fine-grained analytic tool.

Dimensions of identity

We needed a concept-specific approach to evoke the underlying dimensions relevant to capturing the variability in how identity was used empirically. We chose to derive the specifics of these dimensions abductively since they needed to be distinctive enough to explain variability, an approach consistent with previous reviews from different disciplinary areas (Alvesson et al. 2008 ; Atewologun et al. 2017 ). Collectively, the application of these dimensions would provide a unique portrait of the characterization of identity for any one study—and potentially be related to the meta-theories—though we could not assume in what way. Our assumption was that the integrated assessment of the dimensions for each study would enable us to differentiate the studies’ views as to the mechanisms claimed to explain the use of the concept of identity, relate these mechanisms with the meta-theories and, in turn, better understand the underlying assumptions of each study.

Based on results and considerations of previously mentioned reviews, theoretical frames of identity and the emergent characteristics of the articles included in our sample, we distinguished four emergent dimensions, with each understood as representing a continuum.

The first dimension addresses the degree to which the view of identity varies in terms of its emphasis on the individual (Hermans 2001 ) through the social (Ivanič 1998 ; Zucchermaglio and Talamo 2000 ; Wenger 1999 ; Butler 1999 ).

Dimension two highlights variation in the view of identity as stable through dynamic (Elliott 2005 ; Hermans 2001 ).

Dimension three, in contrast, focuses on variation from a view of identity as singular (Ricoeur 1991 ) through to multiple identities held by one individual (Knez 2016 ).

The last dimension emphasizes the variation in focus from thinking (Archer 2000 ) through action in characterising identity (Vandenberghe 2007 ).

The four dimensions echo theoretical discussions around the notion of identity in varied disciplinary traditions in the last twenty years. In other words, the cultural, situational or psychological nature of identity has consistently encompassed monolithic through dualistic understandings of the self and boundaries of reality as physical through mental constructions (Hermans and Dimaggio 2007 ; Hammack 2015 ; Ibarra and Barbulescu 2010 ; Strauss 2017 ).

Aim of review

As noted earlier, we wanted to unpack the underpinnings of the notion of researcher identity, given its increasing, but unexamined, use in research (and policy). Such studies, if published, legitimate the conclusions and the uses of the research-based knowledge and thus, implicitly inform readers’ understanding of researcher identity. This, in turn, has implications for future research, and for others using the research for policy or pedagogical purposes.

Our underlying assumption was that meta-theoretical assumptions (often implicit) guide both empirical research design and interpretation of findings (Bogdan and Biklan 1998)—further, that we needed to incorporate dimensions of identity to generate a more fine-grained characterization of the varied stances to researcher identity. By making clear the underlying dimensions of identity in these studies, and assessing them as regards the relative weight given to the different meta-theories, we could identify variation and any gaps.

To unpack the theoretical underpinnings of researcher identity, we asked:

What is the range of ways in which ‘researcher’ identity is understood and used in empirical studies? Specifically,

What dimensions are used to define researcher identity?

How can we characterise the underlying meta-theories in relation to these dimensions?

What are the implications of this for our understanding of identity and future research?

Scope of the review

The review included peer-reviewed journal articles in English, French and Spanish Footnote 3 that were published from 1997 to 2017 and explored the identity of researchers at any stage of their career (e.g. doctoral students, senior researchers, etc.). The twenty-year window allowed for a comprehensive overview of the literature, while including papers in multiple languages extended the review to encompass multiple research cultures.

Inclusion criteria focused on articles addressing ‘researcher identity,’ but also other keywords such as ‘disciplinary identity’ or ‘academic identity’ as long as the main focus met our interest in researchers.

Search terms and article filtering

Web of Knowledge and SCOPUS were chosen as the two online databases underpinning our literature search. We began with the primary keyword, ‘identity,’ and its two synonyms, ‘self-concept’ and ‘self-perception,’ and then identified additional 13 secondary keywords meant to capture our interest in researcher identity development: scholarly, academic, trajectory, development, journey, researcher, junior researcher, early career researcher*, PhD, doctorate, doctoral, postdoc*, and masters. Results of the searches were input into Mendeley, and once duplicates were removed, yielded 554 articles (details of the search string can be found at the online resource 1_ ESM_ 4 .pdf)

Given our aim, to explore how researcher identity specifically is conceptualized in empirical studies, we excluded the following:

Those without a clear focus on researcher identity;

Those with a focus only on specific socio-demographic characteristics in particular pre-defined groups, such as race and gender, since, after reading them, since they did not address researcher identity;

Non-empirical articles such as reviews and position papers as the aim was to analyse how evidence was linked to the approaches adopted by empirical research;

Those that studied other identities, e.g. teacher; and

Those that were interventions, since the focus was on evaluating programs rather than understanding identity.

After reviewing the abstracts, a significant number of articles were excluded: 342 were unrelated to researcher identity (e.g. papers from history or medical fields, studies on teacher education, etc.) and 98 focused on identities of specific groups, not on researcher identity (e.g. Chinese socialisation in US universities, scientific visibility of Mexican researchers, gender and academic socialisation). The remaining 114 papers were downloaded, and the complete text for each was read to assess its alignment with the inclusion and exclusion criteria and the objectives of this review. After careful examination, 41 articles were rejected because, although they mentioned researcher identity in the abstract, and upon reading the papers, it became clear that this was not the focus of the study (e.g. research paradigms, researcher health, otherness, researcher interactions, etc.), and 10 more were excluded because they were theoretical or position papers.

As well, 14 studies exploring writer, teacher or student identity, but not researcher identity were excluded. Finally, those articles assessing interventions aimed at promoting researcher identity were also excluded ( n = 11). After applying these criteria, 38 articles were in the final selection and analysed in more depth (see Fig. 1 ).

Flow chart of the article filtering process

An interesting part of co-authoring this literature review was that, although we shared a keen interest in researcher identity, our stance as to its various dimensions varied. As suggested by Gough et al. ( 2017 ), keeping this in mind eventually helped us to develop and fine-tune comprehensive definitions of researcher identity dimensions. We adopted an iterative procedure in which each of us read, coded and classified the selected set of articles individually. We then compared our results and reconciled them. The same process was subsequently conducted in pairs. To ensure that we shared the same definitions, and maintained consistency, we followed every round of analysis with thorough discussions about how the dimensions of researcher identity were represented in each article. Specifically, we reviewed any disagreements or different opinions and modified our definitions accordingly.

The analysis took place in four steps, conducted by all the researchers as described in Teamwork.

First, the final selected sample of articles was read iteratively, and the following characteristics were documented in an excel spreadsheet: Author(s), year, definition of identity, keywords, aims of the study, design and results. For each study, relevant concepts related to conceptual approach, methodological approach, and significance were identified and entered in the spreadsheet. This first phase was non-inferential since the words and concepts identified were the same used in the articles.

Second, to assign an article to a particular meta-theory, we relied on the initial analysis of concepts and keywords involved in the analysed articles, thus keeping a low inferential level. Discussions focused on how these concepts and keywords were related to the four broad meta-theories defined previously: each sustaining different purposes and notions involved (see Table 1 for a description of this analytical tool). In other words, once we agreed regarding the relationships between key notions and meta-theories, we applied the first analytical tool situating the articles along the continuum of meta-theories. Each researcher individually coded each of the 38 articles. To guarantee reliability among coders, a series of paired analysis using Kappa’s Cohen index were calculated. Results indicated agreement among researchers ranged from high to acceptable (0.79–0.88). The meta-theories provided an overview regarding how the study of identity as a whole was addressed.

Third, we developed a second analytical tool to provide a more nuanced picture of the results. Since the previous tool focused on the underlying assumptions of the study, not the specifics of how ‘identity’ was conceived, this tool differentiated variability as to how identity was either elaborated in the studies or represented in the description of the findings. It identified (a) those distinctive dimensions in defining identity, and (b) the continuum of characteristics or values differentiated in each dimension.

Dimensions and their values were defined and redefined until they covered all the variation regarding the range of interpretations of identity we found in the empirical studies reviewed (Table 2 ). Five successive rounds of analysis were performed in which all the researchers independently analysed a small group of articles (6, 6, 9, 9, 12) and individual results were discussed until consensus was reached, either to introduce some modifications into the tool or to classify the article. Once consensus was reached regarding the meaning of each of the dimensions and their values, all the papers were analysed again independently by the researchers—with reliability assessed. To do this analysis, we first looked for key notions mainly in the introduction section. When not explicit, other related aspects, explanatory statements in the rest of the article, including results and discussion, were also reviewed. Finally, the whole article was checked to guarantee the validity of categories. The level of agreement ranged between 0.81 and 0.92 depending on the dimension and the coders, which is considered high for this type of analysis (Cohen et al. 2002 ).

Finally, we looked for relationships and correlations (a) among the dimensions and (b) the dimensions and the meta-theories. This final analysis enabled us to assess (a) differences in how these articles characterised identity along the dimensions, and (b) to what extent there was a relationship between the understanding of identity, and (c) the meta-theory framing the study The final step in this analysis was to characterise qualitative clusters based on the identified regularities and consistent patterns. Clusters were primarily based on the correlations among the dimensions whereas secondary analysis looked for their relationship with meta-theories.

Descriptive characteristics of the studies

Although our literature search covered the last 20 years, those articles fulfilling the inclusion criteria ranged from 2004 to 2017 and numbers tended to increase with time, especially from 2012 (see Annex 1). Regarding the journals, the scattering of the results is revealing 23% ( n = 6) of the studies were published in Studies of Higher Education; 15% ( n = 4) in Studies in Continuing Education; 11.5% ( n = 3) in Innovations in Education and Teaching International and 7.7% ( n = 2) in the International Journal of Doctoral Studies and Teaching in Higher Education. The rest of the journals ( n = 9, 35.1%) have one single article published on the topic of researcher identity in the analysed period. Slightly more than half of the studies (58%) were exclusively devoted to the development of researcher identity in doctoral students, with the remainder focusing on early career researchers (28%) and experienced researchers (14%).

Meta-theoretical frameworks of studies

Studies were distributed among three of the four considered meta-theories. Three quarters (76%, n = 29) of the articles were classified as interpretative/constructivist. Of the remaining studies, 18.5% ( n = 7) were classified as critical realism and only 5.5% ( n = 2) as transformative. There were no examples of positivism (e.g. cognitivism).

Constructivist studies tended to situate themselves within a variety of theories noted earlier, which range from what can be broadly termed the sociocultural perspective of learning and development to other more sociological-related approaches. In all cases, historical and context-related issues are crucial to defining identity, typically understood as dynamic and a developmental process.

Studies representative of the critical realism framework were less diverse and relied on the idea of identity as a dynamic biographical process grounded in a history, with pre-existing personal understandings, which in turn influences the present interpretations and future learning (McAlpine et al. 2013 ). The notions of agency and trajectory are central to understand identity within this framework, which provide a means to balance unity and change.

The transformative framework is characterised by studies in which, in these cases, a feminist approach is used to characterise identity as dynamic, multidimensional, complex and socially developed (Rockinson-Szapkiw et al. 2017 ).

Dimensions to define identity

Within the four dimensions and their emergent values, we found a diverse distribution explaining the variation of all the articles included in this review (see Table 3 ).

Individual versus social

Most of the studies assumed that identity is socially constructed (71%, n = 27) (located to the right end of the continuum, positions 4 and 5) and though individual’s experiences are acknowledged, the role that authors attribute to them is diverse. In some cases, identity is considered relational and individuals are claimed to position—and be positioned by others—differently in particular changing scenarios (Castelló et al. 2013 ; Cotterall 2015 ; Murakami-Ramalho et al. 2013 ). In other cases, the emphasis is placed entirely on the role of sociocultural, historical and political contexts in which situational identities are negotiated and lived in and through activity (Gunasekara 2007 ; Remich et al. 2016 ).

Studies that assumed identity is mainly individually based, thus located close to the left end of the grid continuum, were less frequent (19%, n = 7, position 2). They emphasised the role of individuals, and especially their agency in the development of identity, without denying the importance of context and the situated nature of this development (Gardner and Willey 2018 ; Inouye and McAlpine 2017 ; McAlpine et al. 2014 ). These studies (position 2) mostly represented critical realism, except two (Buss et al. 2014 ; Pifer and Baker 2016 ), which, despite adopting a constructivist perspective, considered the construction of the self, through notions as ‘salience’ or ‘learned mind’ and ‘perceptions of the self’ respectively, as a matter of individuals rather than a social issue.

Finally, only 4 studies were situated in the middle of the continuum (3), meaning that identity resulted from balancing individual agency and social influence. These studies defined identity by using expressions such ‘a set representation built by individuals in sociocultural contexts’ (González et al. 2014 ) or ‘the core sense of the self’ (Rockinson-Szapkiw et al. 2017 ).

Stability versus dynamism

Most of the studies (73%, n = 28) considered dynamism a crucial dimension of researcher identity, rather than understanding identity as a stable characteristic of individuals (positions 4 and 5 of the continuum). Most of them ( n = 21) focused on identity development, and thus, looked for changes through time. In some cases, development is understood explicitly as constant negotiation-re-negotiation of past, present and future identity experiences, within the notion of identity-trajectory (McAlpine et al. 2014 ; Inouye and McAlpine 2017 ); development is a relevant heuristic to characterise dynamism in the continuous negotiation between stability and change through time. The other seven studies, which consider researcher identity as a dynamic construct, were situated at the end of the continuum and thus made more explicit claims about identity being constantly changing, or even fluid (Gunasekara 2007 ; Rayner et al. 2015 ). This stance requires authors to focus on processes instead on outputs.

Almost a third (27%, n = 10) of the studies took a balanced position on this dimension namely they focused on transitioning from one identity to another (Dison 2004 ; González et al. 2014 ; Holley 2015 ) or modifying a particular identity. In these cases, the process of change is expected to end, whereas this is not the case for the rest.

Unity versus multiplicity

Around a quarter of the studies (24%, n = 9) explicitly stated individuals have one single identity, though it might integrate several roles (positions 1 and 2). When combined with the notion of identity-trajectory, unity is the result of the continuous negotiation between stability and change that characterised the former dimension (Gardner and Willey 2018 ; Inouye and McAlpine 2017 ; McAlpine et al. 2014 ; McAlpine and Amundsen 2009 ).

More than one third of the studies (34%, n = 13) referred to two identities and focused on moving from one to another. Transitioning from a student to a researcher identity is one common topic within this set of studies, as well as from teacher to researcher identity (Baker and Pifer 2011 ). Consequently, although time is important, what is expected and looked for is the end of the process of identity change (González et al. 2014 ; Holley 2015 ). However, several studies included in this group did not provide an explicit definition of identity except for describing the transition situation in which students (or professionals) have to develop their identity as researchers (Araújo 2009 ; Baker and Pifer 2011 ; Heinrich 2005 ; Murakami-Ramalho et al. 2013 ; Rayner et al. 2015 ).

Finally, the largest set of studies (42%, n = 16) accepted, more or less explicitly, a landscape of different identities not necessarily restricted to two (positions 4 and 5). Within this set, almost half of the studies ( n = 7) focused on contradictions and conflicts that arise when individuals negotiate particular identities related to their participation in different contexts. In such cases, their stances and activities are not compatible with the research identity they are developing (Castelló et al. 2013 ; Cotterall 2015 ; Mewburn 2011 ). The focus is on relationships between these identities, or identity dimensions (Rockinson-Szapkiw et al. 2017 ), roles (Merolla and Serpe 2013 ; Pifer and Baker 2016 ) or identity positions (Castelló et al. 2013 ). The aim is to elucidate why, when and how conflicts are solved; norms and practices are adopted, ignored or resisted (Hökkä, Eteläpelto and Rasku-Puttonen 2012); and how multiple trajectories are linked to varying membership positions in multiple communities (Smith and Boyd 2012 ; Zambo et al. 2015 ). The rest of the studies ( n = 8) were more situated at position 5 of the continuum and assume identities are not only multiple because they are situational (Guerin 2013 ; Gunasekara 2007 ) but they are also disjointed (Costa, 2015 ).

Thinking versus action

Studies located in positions 1 and 2 of this continuum assumed that thinking, thus ideas, representations, conceptions or perceptions, prevails in defining identity. This means that, although practices and experiences are acknowledged as highly relevant, the way in which individuals perceive and interpret these experiences is also crucial to explain how identity is developed and shaped. These few studies ( n = 4, 6%) emphasised the role of self-reflection and critical thinking (Alexander et al. 2014 ; Leibowitz et al. 2014 ) as well as the thoughts, ideas or representations of oneself, which are constructed in social contexts (Buss et al. 2014 ; González et al. 2014 ).

A slightly higher number of studies ( n = 6, 15%) took an intermediate stance regarding the role of thinking and action in constituting identity. They assumed some inner processes filter or mediate the activity and contextual factors that, in turn, influence the self-perceptions of identities and the relationships between each. These instances ranged from meaning-making mechanisms (Rockinson-Szapkiw et al. 2017 ), self-definition and personal history (McGregor et al. 2010; Schulze 2014 ), writing and self-narratives (Cotterall 2015 ) to individuals’ internal expectations useful to make sense of themselves (Hökkä et al. 2012 ).

Finally, the majority of studies were situated in the action end of the continuum (positions 4 and 5), thus assuming that thinking and action are relevant but placed more emphasis on action (50%, n = 19), or that action prevails in defining and shaping identity (13%, n = 5). In these studies, identity is shaped or enacted by participation in different contexts (Castelló et al. 2013 ; Gardner and Willey 2016; Inouye and McAlpine 2017 ; McAlpine et al. 2013 , 2014 ; McAlpine and Lucas 2011 ; Merolla and Serpe 2013 ; Wegener et al. 2016 ). Another view is that activity or behaviour comes first, and researcher identity is developed by—and visible in—how one speaks, reads, writes or behaves (Baker and Pifer 2011 ; Guerin 2013 ; Thompson et al. 2016 ). Some of these studies adopted the notion of participatory social practices (Lave and Wenger 1991 ; Wenger 1999 ) in which identity is shaped by Communities of Practice (Boyd and Smith 2016 ; Dison 2004 ; Lassig et al. 2013 ). There were four articles (10%) (Araújo 2009 ; Costa 2015 ; Gunasekara 2007 ; Pifer and Baker 2016 ) that could not be classified in regards to this dimension since they did not offer any explanation regarding this dimension.

Relationship among dimensions and meta-theoretical frameworks in the researcher identity studies

In looking at relationships among the dimensions and between the dimensions and the meta-theoretical approaches, one finding predominated. Two dimensions moved consistently together: the second, stability vs dynamism, and the third, unity vs multiplicity. After collapsing the data from the rubric into three values, (1) low (levels 1 and 2 of the former classification), (2) medium (former level 3) and (3) high (former levels 4 and 5), this consistency was remarkable (see Table 4 ). Four different clusters were identified based on the primary commonalities in the dimensions of stability vs dynamism and unity vs multiplicity and related variation on the rest of the dimensions defining identity. We provide both qualitative and quantitative characterizations for each cluster.

The dimensions are key to understand the distinctiveness of each cluster, but they alone do not provide information about the prevalence of the different clusters or the prevailing stance within each cluster—essential if one is to understand how the construct is being empirically used in the field, which was obtained by looking at the meta-theoretical approaches distribution across clusters.

Cluster 1. Transitioning among identities

The fourteen papers included in this cluster are characterised by understanding identity as socially constructed and dynamic and accept, though not always explicitly, the existence of more than one identity, even multiple identities, which in some cases, can be disjointed. The notion of transitioning among different, often competing, identities is discussed as both a theoretical assumption and a focus for the empirical data collection and analysis. Moreover, identity is mainly socially constructed and developed, except for Pifer and Baker ( 2016 ) who emphasised individual characteristics as the focus to define identity, and Rockinson-Szapkiw et al. ( 2017 ) who were located in the middle, thus valuing both the individual (self) and contextual influences in identity development. More than half of the papers included in this cluster considered both thinking and action as relevant but placed more emphasis on action in defining and shaping identity. Of the remaining, only four took an intermediate stance, thus claiming that both thinking and action are relevant to define identity. The remaining three did not reveal a clear stance on this dimension.

Interestingly, all papers in this cluster were constructivist in approach. The articles in this cluster were also quite recent, all published in the last seven years (the first one is from 2011).

Cluster 2. Balancing identity continuity and change

Six papers that, as in the first cluster, considered identity as socially constructed and highly dynamic shape the second cluster. The main difference from the previous group relates to their stance towards unity in identity definition. Most of the papers in this cluster only referred to one single identity (Araújo 2009 ) or to moving from one identity to another (Lassig et al. 2013 ). In this latter case, the process is sequential, and no multiple identities are considered simultaneously except for some specific transition moments (Alexander et al. 2014 ). However, transitions were rarely the explicit focus of the studies included in this group. Despite the consistency of identity as socially constructed and dynamic, there is great variability regarding whether thought or action prevails in defining identity. Half the papers felt action and participatory practices prevail in shaping and defining identity, whereas, within the other half, two mentioned representations and individual thoughts in identity definition and the last provided no information regarding this dimension (see Table 4 ).

All the papers included in this cluster were in the post-positivist meta-theoretical approaches. However, they were theoretically highly variable with all three meta-theoretical approaches represented. Publication year ranged from 2005 to 2015.

Cluster 3. Personal identity development through time

The eight papers gathered in this cluster were highly consistent in defining identity as dynamic and mainly individually driven, thus a developmental and agentive process—while acknowledging the interaction with not only social contexts but also physical contexts (McAlpine and Lucas 2011 ). Only in two cases (Boyd and Smith 2016 ; Wegener et al. 2016 ) did social characteristics prevail. All of them also defined identity as unique and driven by action and participation on social events.

As regards their meta-theoretical stance, the majority shared critical realism, with only the two favouring social characteristics located in the constructivist. Years of publication range from 2009 to 2017.

Cluster 4. Personal and stable identity

The last cluster gathers seven papers defining identity as mainly unique and stable, though some changes can be inferred in transitions. They viewed social characteristics as crucial or important in defining identity. Still, there was greater variability observed regarding the role of action. Four considered identity as mainly shaped through action and participatory practices; two claimed that thinking and action are both equally relevant to define identity (Klenowski et al. 2011 ; Murakami-Ramalho et al. 2013 ) and the last (González et al. 2014 ) situated thinking and the notion of conceptions, strategies and feelings as predominant.

All the studies in this cluster shared the constructivist framework and were published between 2010 and 2015.

Finally, we were unable to locate three studies in any cluster since they did not display any regularities related to the dimensions we applied in this review. Two of them display a balanced position regarding the dimension of stability and change but claim for multiple identities: Barnacle and Mewburn ( 2010 ) argue the social nature of identity and the relevance of action; Buss et al. ( 2014 ) that identity is individually based and guided by personal thoughts and mental representations. The last defines identity as unique and stable but shaped through social and action (Thompson et al. 2016 ).

Emerging patterns across clusters

Perspectives on dynamism.

Using the dimensions to define identity revealed that most papers looked at dynamism and movement of identities, consistent with the constant changes researchers face nowadays. This dynamism related to three different characteristics: transitions, development and fluidity.

In the papers interested in transitions, dynamism is restricted to changes among identities or roles. Thus, it is expected to end, usually when the new identity replaces a former one. Contradictions may be considered, especially when the focus is transitions, with a single changed identity conceived as ensuring self-coherence and stability. In contrast, in those papers focusing on identity development, no ending or replacement of one identity by another is expected. In these cases, time plays a crucial role to explain how and why specific identity characteristics are characterised. Here, dynamism constitutes constant change, with identity understood as fluid, and may include the notion of multiple identities, even disjointed. Regardless, in both cases, longitudinal designs and trajectories are valued.

Perspectives on action

Papers also displayed alternative understandings of the role of action in shaping identity: whether related to activity or the community. Those papers that related action to activity considered the development of identity linked to the individual’s appropriation of the specific characteristics of a particular type of activity (writing, talking, behaving). In contrast, other papers assumed that the characteristics of a particular community and its practices shape identity. This difference is not minor since results show a relationship between the notion of action and the nature of identity as social or individual. Papers exploring particular contexts of researcher identity development (e.g. engineering researchers) were those that more frequently attributed the individual a substantial role in defining its identity (or at least equated the role of the individual with the social). In contrast, those studies assuming that communities of practice shape identity defined identity mainly as socially constructed.

Interaction of dimensions and meta-theories

The four clusters identified illustrate interesting relationships among and between the dimensions and the meta-theoretical approaches displayed by the reviewed studies. Looking at the results, the consideration of identity as unique or multiple is the main difference between the two first clusters (transitioning among identities and balancing continuity and change); thus, papers included in both agree that researcher identity is socially constructed and dynamic. However, papers in the first cluster, claiming multiple identities, were the most frequent and recent ones, and were mainly situated in socio-cultural constructivist approaches.

Differences in the remaining clusters related to both dynamism and the social or individual nature of identity. Papers in the third cluster (personal identity development through time) claim that changes and dynamism are linked to the notion of identity development; at the same time, they situate the self and agency as key terms to explain changes through time. Theoretical consistency is high in this group, which leads us to conclude that when it comes to researcher identity, the critical realism meta-theory assumes identity as a personal developmental process, mainly individual.

In contrast, those in the fourth cluster (personal and stable identity) considered identity as mainly stable and personal and, though the influence of social characteristics in its development is not denied, the role attributed to the social and its theoretical understanding may vary significantly in this group. Theoretically, this group represents the more individually based explanations within the constructivist meta-theory, assuming agency and situated mental representations as crucial in researcher identity.

We conducted this review to unpack the underpinnings of ‘researcher identity,’ a notion used and debated in different disciplinary fields (e.g. educational and social psychology, organizational studies), particularly in higher education and faculty or academic identity development (Alvesson et al. 2008 ; Atewologun et al. 2017 ; Brown 2017 ). While we had presumed that studies focusing on a specific notion—such as researcher identity—would clarify their epistemological and theoretical assumptions, this proved not to be the case.

Thus, we used an analysis that integrated meta-theories of scientific knowledge with dimensions of identity to interpret the studies. We identified four stances towards researcher identity. These stances incorporate intriguing nuances and complex characterizations; particularly highlighting difference perspectives on (a) dynamism, (b) action and (c) the interaction of dimensions and meta-theories—with implications for both our understanding of researcher identity and future research.

Important nuances emerged when analysing how each paper explained those characteristics and dimensions defining researcher identity. The results as a whole revealed the prevalence of meta-theories towards the post-positivist end of the continuum with the premises linked to constructivist meta-theoretical approaches prevailing across the papers. Further, all four stances incorporated papers with a constructivist approach. Thus, while the meta-theory was necessary to understand the approach to the study, it was insufficient to characterise the researcher identity stance. Notably, none of the analysed papers adopted a positivist stance—presumably because a positivist stance does not engage with the subjectivity of the researcher, and thus, the notion of identity has no value or interest per se.

As regards the four characterizations of researcher identity, their value lies in two directions. The first is to enable fine-grained comparisons of already-published empirical studies: to judge and contest the ways in which different stances may provide different perspectives (and blind-spots) on researcher identity. The second is the valuable tool that the four dimensions represent for future research. Researchers can use them to characterise and report their own stance. Further, if this were done consistently, over time, we would generate a collective empirical understanding of researcher identity that would be much more nuanced, complex and comprehensive.

Three further considerations emerge that have implications for our current understanding and future research on researcher identity. First, given the limited number of authors that appear more than once in the final articles, we wonder if some authors delve into identity as an explanation of other areas of interest rather than as an intrinsic interest, i.e. identity as peripheral rather than central. In other words, what exactly is being looked at when the notion of researcher identity is used? Related subjects, such as PhD programs, attrition, professional development or career changes, were at the core of some of the reviewed studies. In these cases, identity was used as a way to interpret the results or even as a heuristic to conceptually frame those research subjects. The theoretical approaches assumed by those papers appeared to come from disciplinary research fields not always consistent with the researcher identity definition they claimed. This might explain why authors used some theoretically grounded notions that were in opposition (e.g. ‘identities’ in plural alongside ‘transition’), or researchers might avoid the term identity totally given the difficulty of clarifying it in an empirical paper. A final explanation for this lack of clarity might be theoretical shifts in researcher identity that cannot be detailed in an empirical paper.

Second, we suggest current and future researchers of identity can use the dimensions to clarify their underlying assumptions and the implications for their empirical designs and methods. For instance, reflecting on our understanding of stability and change helps decide how to address development in defining identity. Further, clarifying to what extent identity is individual or socially constructed forces us to consider notions of structure and agency. Focusing on the thought-action dimension implies taking a stance on how and when change occurs as well as how the concept of action is related to individual and communities. Finally, reflection on whether identity is unique or multiple forces us to relate researcher identity to roles and spheres of activity. We argue that using such an approach would legitimate the conclusions and uses of the research-based knowledge and better inform readers’ understanding of researcher identity. This particularly has implications for others using the research such as developers, curriculum designers and policy makers.

Third, others, regardless of social science discipline, could use the same systematic analytic procedure—dimensions and meta-theoretical approaches—to characterise the representation of more abstract concepts in empirical studies.

Limitations

Some decisions we made entailed limitations. Restricting the review to the notion of researcher identity could have biased some results, especially as regards the notion of the multiple identities since this decision may have excluded some pertinent papers. However, we did not consider using the broader search term ‘identity’ without any secondary keyword, because this would have broadened the scope and focus of the review too much.

We also excluded articles focused on the identity of specific groups but not on researcher identity. While this could have resulted in missing articles, based on the initial reading, this was not the case for any of the discarded articles. Still, the final sample included four papers addressing early career researcher identity as intersecting with other factors like gender. Though we acknowledge discussing intersectionality might have resulted in more nuanced researcher identity explanations in those four cases, examining this issue in sufficient depth would reframe the focus of the paper.

Readers might also wonder whether some form of selection bias contributed to the prominence of social constructivism with less than a quarter representing other meta-theories. We believe this finding stems from the predominant use of social constructivism in the general literature on early career researchers.

Another aspect of selection bias that the final articles reviewed were all English may reflect the databases used. Van Leeuwen ( 2013 ) argues that WoS and Scopus do not consistently incorporate the literature in the social sciences and humanities and have a bias towards English studies. Further, powerful cultural/linguistic differences may lead to different ways of understanding early career researcher experience. These limitations can be explored in future reviews.

Finally, a further limitation stemmed from our decision to not discuss the relationships between methodologies, theoretical stances and framings of identity, as those elements are often intimately interrelated. Such a discussion might have enhanced the contribution of this study, but we felt it was beyond the scope of the review’s focus on the framing of identity.

Future research

Many questions still remain: To what extent is the interpretation of data influenced by the researcher identity stance, whether or not explicit? What are we not seeing when interpreting data through our own stance only? Are we clear on why we are adopting one stance and not another and for what goal? What influence might data collection and analysis be having on our understanding of identity; recall that those incorporating dynamism often used longitudinal designs. Perhaps the biggest: To what extent and under what conditions is identity a productive notion for understanding early career researcher experience? For researchers in this field (like us), these questions provoke considerable thought since if we do not answer them, our use of the notion of research identity may not prove as productive as it might.

We began this paper noting that identity is a frequently used and contested concept. The results from the review make clear why this may be the case, given the range of different perspectives on identity in the studies analysed. Interestingly, we noted few attempts to contrast the stance taken with other studies, yet such comparison is important if we are truly to make sense of empirical findings.

Further, the unique results from this review clarify how particular understandings of researcher identity relate to a set of underlying conceptual dimensions and theoretical stances. Through the analytical tools used, we drew out the nuances and complex conceptualisations when studies address researcher identity empirically. Given that many studies had not clearly expressed a stance towards identity, a major contribution of our analysis was to clarify not only the specific ways in which identity was understood in each study, but also to characterise how identity was generally conceived in the researcher identity literature. In the process, we created a discourse for articulating stances towards identity. We hope the analysis and the discourse lead to fruitful debates among researcher identity scholars.

An international team of five researchers researching PhD and post-PhD identity development with various disciplinary backgrounds (psychology, education and sociology)

Alternative terms with a similar meaning include ‘knowledge claims’ (Creswell and Poth 2017 ); epistemology and ontology (Neuman 2000 ).

We initially chose these languages because we did not want to restrict the search to only English published research, and these were the languages the authors could read. Neither French nor Spanish published papers remained in the final review.

Alexander, P., Harris-Huemmert, S., & McAlpine, L. (2014). Tools for reflection on the academic identities of doctoral students. International Journal for Academic Development, 19 (3), 162–173.

Article Google Scholar

Alvesson, M., Ashcraft, K., & Thomas, R. (2008). Identity matters: reflections on the construction of identity scholarship in organization studies. Organization, 15 (1), 5–28.

*Araújo, E. R. (2009). ‘With a rope around their neck’: grant researchers living in suspended time. New Technology, Work and Employment, 24(3), 230-242.

Archer, M. S. (2000). Being human: the problem of agency. Cambridge University Press.

Atewologun, D., Kutzer, R., Doldor, E., Anderson, D., & Sealy, R. (2017). Individual-level foci of identification at work: a systematic review of the literature. International Journal of Management Reviews, 19 (3), 273–295.

Baker, V. L., & Lattuca, L. R. (2010). Developmental networks and learning: toward an interdisciplinary perspective on identity development during doctoral study. Studies in Higher Education, 35 (7), 807–827.

*Baker, V. L., & Pifer, M. J. (2011). The role of relationships in the transition from doctoral student to independent scholar. Studies in Continuing Education, 33(1), 5-17.

*Barnacle, R., & Mewburn, I. (2010). Learning networks and the journey of ‘becoming doctor’. Studies in Higher education, 35(4), 433-444.

Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (1998). Foundations of qualitative research in education. Qualitative research in education: an introduction to theory and methods, 1-48.

*Boyd, P., & Smith, C. (2016). The contemporary academic: orientation towards research work and researcher identity of higher education lecturers in the health professions. Studies in Higher Education, 41(4), 678-695.

Brown, A. D. (2017). Identity work and organizational identification. International Journal of Management Reviews, 19 (3), 296–317.

*Buss, R., Zambo, R., Zambo, D., & Williams, T. (2014). Developing researching professionals in an EdD program: from learners and leaders to scholarly and influential practitioners. Higher Education, Skills and Work-based Learning, 4(2), 137-160.

Butler, J. (1999). Gender trouble: feminism and the subversion of identity . New York: Routledge.

Google Scholar

Castelló, M., Iñesta, A., & Corcelles, M. (2013). Learning to write a research article: ph. D. Students’ transitions toward disciplinary writing regulation. Research in the Teaching of English, 442-477.

Castelló, M., Kobayashi, S., McGinn, M. K., Pechar, H., Vekkaila, J., & Wisker, G. (2015). Researcher identity in transition: signals to identify and manage spheres of activity in a risk-career. Frontline Learning Research, 3 (3), 39–54.

Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2002). Research methods in education. Routledge.

*Costa, C. (2015). Outcasts on the inside: academics reinventing themselves online. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 34(2), 194-210.

*Cotterall, S. (2015). The rich get richer: international doctoral candidates and scholarly identity. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 52 (4) 360-370.

Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2017). Qualitative inquiry and research design: choosing among five approaches (Fourth edition). Sage publications.

*Dison, A. (2004). “Finding her own academic self”: research capacity development and identity formation. Perspectives in Education, 22(1), 83-98.

Elliott, J. (2005). Using narrative in social research: qualitative and quantitative approaches . London: Sage.

Book Google Scholar

Epitropaki, O., Kark, R., Mainemelis, C., & Lord, R. G. (2017). Leadership and followership identity processes: a multilevel review. The Leadership Quarterly, 28 (1), 104–129.

*Gardner, A., & Willey, K. (2018). Academic identity reconstruction: the transition of engineering academics to engineering education researchers. Studies in Higher Education, 43(2), 234-250.

González, M. A., Castelló, M., & Monereo, C. (2014). The identity of the nursing academic: between education and research. Texto & Contexto-Enfermagem, 23 (2), 241–249.

Gough, D., Oliver, S. & Thomas, J. (2017). An introduction to systematic reviews. Sage Publications.

Grant, M. J., & Booth, A. (2009). A typology of reviews: an analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies. Health Information and Libraries Journal, 26 (2), 91–108.

Green, B. (2005). Unfinished business: subjectivity and supervision. Higher Education Research and Development, 24 (2), 151–163.

*Guerin, C. (2013). Rhizomatic research cultures, writing groups and academic researcher identities. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 8, 137-150.

*Gunasekara, C. (2007). Pivoting the centre: reflections on undertaking qualitative interviewing in academia. Qualitative Research, 7(4), 461-475.

Hammack, P. L. (2015). Theoretical foundations of identity. In K. C. McLean & M. U. Syed (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of identity development (pp. 11–30). USA: Oxford University Press.

*Heinrich, K. T. (2005). Halfway between receiving and giving: a relational analysis of doctorate-prepared nurse–scholars’ first 5 years after graduation. Journal of Professional Nursing, 21(5), 303-313.

Hermans, H. J. (2001). The dialogical self: toward a theory of personal and cultural positioning. Culture & Psychology, 7 (3), 243–281.

Hermans, H. J., & Dimaggio, G. (2007). Self, identity, and globalization in times of uncertainty: a dialogical analysis. Review of General Psychology, 11 (1), 31–61.

*Hökkä, P., Eteläpelto, A., & Rasku-Puttonen, H. (2012). The professional agency of teacher educators amid academic discourses. Journal of Education for Teaching, 38(1), 83-102.

Holck, L., Muhr, S. L., & Villesèche, F. (2016). Identity, diversity and diversity management: on theoretical connections, assumptions and implications for practice. Equality, Diversity and Inclusion: An International Journal, 35 (1), 48–64.

*Holley, K. A. (2015). Doctoral education and the development of an interdisciplinary identity. Innovations in education and teaching international, 52(6), 642-652.

Ibarra, H., & Barbulescu, R. (2010). Identity as narrative: prevalence, effectiveness, and consequences of narrative identity work in macro work role transitions. Academy of Management Review, 35 (1), 135–154.

Inouye, K. S., & McAlpine, L. (2017). Developing scholarly identity: variation in agentive responses to supervisor feedback. Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice, 14 (2), 3.

Ivanič, R. (1998). Writing and identity. John Benjamins.

Kennedy, M. (2007). Defining a literature. Educational Researcher, 36 (3), 139–147.

Klenowski, V., Ehrich, L., Kapitzke, C., & Trigger, K. (2011). Building support for learning within a Doctor of Education programme. Teaching in Higher Education, 16 (6), 681–693.

Knez, I. (2016). Toward a model of work-related self: a narrative review. Frontiers in Psychology, 7(MAR).

Kuhn, T. S. (1962). The structure of scientific revolutions . Chicago: University of Chicago.

Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge university press.

*Lassig, C. J., Dillon, L. H., & Diezmann, C. M. (2013). Student or scholar? Transforming identities through a research writing group. Studies in Continuing Education, 35(3), 299-314.

*Leibowitz, B., Ndebele, C., & Winberg, C. (2014). ‘It’s an amazing learning curve to be part of the project’: exploring academic identity in collaborative research. Studies in Higher Education, 39(7), 1256-1269.

MacNaughton, G., & Rolfe, S. A., & I. Siraj-Blatchford. (2001). The research process. Doing early childhood research: international perspectives on theory and practice, 12-30.

*McAlpine, L. & Amundsen, C. (2009). Identity and agency: pleasures and collegiality among the challenges of the doctoral journey. Studies in Continuing Education, (31) 2, 109-125.

*McAlpine, L., & Lucas, L. (2011). Different places, different specialisms: similar questions of doctoral identities under construction. Teaching in Higher Education, 16(6), 695-706.

*McAlpine, L., Amundsen, C., & Turner, G. (2013). Constructing post-PhD careers: negotiating opportunities and personal goals. International Journal for Researcher Development, 4(1), 39-54.

*McAlpine, L., Amundsen, C., & Turner, G. (2014). Identity-trajectory: reframing early career academic experience. British Educational Research Journal, 40(6), 952-969.

*Merolla, D. M., & Serpe, R. T. (2013). STEM enrichment programs and graduate school matriculation: the role of science identity salience. Social Psychology of Education, 16(4), 575-597.

*Mewburn, I. (2011). Troubling talk: assembling the PhD candidate. Studies in Continuing Education, 33(3), 321-332.

*Murakami-Ramalho, E., Militello, M., & Piert, J. (2013). A view from within: how doctoral students in educational administration develop research knowledge and identity. Studies in Higher Education, 38(2), 256-271.

Neuman, W. L. (2000). The meanings of methodology. Social research methods, 60 , 87.

Palmer, R. J., Hunt, A. N., Neal, M., & Wuetherick, B. (2015). Mentoring, undergraduate research, and identity development: a conceptual review and research agenda. Mentoring & Tutoring: Partnership in Learning, 23 (5), 411–426.

Pifer, M., & Baker, V. (2013). Identity as a theoretical construct in research about academic careers. In Theory and method in higher education research (pp. 115-132). Emerald Group Publishing Limited.

*Pifer, M. J., & Baker, V. L. (2016). Professional, personal, and relational: exploring the salience of identity in academic careers. Identity, 16(3), 190-205.

*Rayner, S., Lord, J., Parr, E., & Sharkey, R. (2015). ‘Why has my world become more confusing than it used to be? ’Professional doctoral students reflect on the development of their identity. Management in Education, 29(4), 158-163.

*Remich, R., Naffziger-Hirsch, M. E., Gazley, J. L., & McGee, R. (2016). Scientific growth and identity development during a post-baccalaureate program: results from a multisite qualitative study. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 15(3), ar25.

Ricoeur, P. (1991). Narrative identity. Philosophy today

*Rockinson-Szapkiw, A. J., Spaulding, L. S., & Lunde, R. (2017). Women in distance doctoral programs: how they negotiate their identities as mothers, professionals, and academics in order to persist. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 12(7), 50-72.

*Schulze, S. (2014). Finding the academic self: identity development of academics as doctoral students. Koers, 79(1), 1-8.

*Smith, C., & Boyd, P. (2012). Becoming an academic: the reconstruction of identity by recently appointed lecturers in nursing, midwifery and the allied health professions. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 49(1), 63-72.

Sousa, F. J. (2010). Meta-theories in research: positivism, postmodernism, and critical realism. In Organizational culture, business-to-business relationships, and interfirm networks (pp. 455-503). Emerald Group Publishing Limited. Available at SSRN: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1594098 Accessed 20 Jun 2020

Strauss, A. L. (2017). Mirrors and masks: the search for identity . Routledge.

SwafS, Horizon 2020; https://ec.europa.eu/programmes/horizon2020/en/h2020-section/science-and-society

*Thompson, C., Morton, J., & Storch, N. (2016). Becoming an applied linguist. Australian review of applied linguistics, 39(2), 139-157.

Trede, F., Macklin, R., & Bridges, D. (2012). Professional identity development: a review of the higher education literature. Studies in Higher Education, 37 (3), 365–384.

Van Lankveld, T., Schoonenboom, J., Volman, M., Croiset, G., & Beishuizen, J. (2017). Developing a teacher identity in the university context: a systematic review of the literature. Higher Education Research and Development, 36 (2), 325–342.

van Leeuwen, T. (2013). Bibliometric research evaluations, Web of Science and the Social Sciences and Humanities: a problematic relationship? Bibliometrie - Prxis und Forschung, Band 2. https://doi.org/10.5283/bpf.173

Vandenberghe, F. (2007). Structure, agency and the internal conversation. Revue du Mauss permanente, 1-8. Retrieved from http://www.journaldumauss.net Accessed 20 Jun 2020

*Wegener, C., Meier, N., & Ingerslev, K. (2016). Borrowing brainpower–sharing insecurities. Lessons learned from a doctoral peer-writing group. Studies in Higher Education, 41(6), 1092-1105.

Wenger, E. (1999). Communities of practice: learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge University press.

*Zambo, D., Buss, R. R., & Zambo, R. (2015). Uncovering the identities of students and graduates in a CPED-influenced EdD program. Studies in Higher Education, 40(2), 233-252.

Zucchermaglio, C., & Talamo, A. (2000). The social construction of work times: negotiated time and expected time. Time & Society, 9 (2-3), 205–222.

Download references

European Commission. Directorate-General for Education and Culture

Erasmus+ (2017-1-ES01-KA203-038303)

European Cooperation in Science and Technology (COST Action IS1401)

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Facultat de Psicologia, Ciències de l’Educació i de l’Esport Blanquerna, Universitat Ramon Llull, C/ Cister 34, 08022, Barcelona, Spain

Montserrat Castelló & Anna Sala-Bubaré

Graduate School of Psychology, Blanquerna, Ramon Llull University, C/ Cister 34, 08022, Barcelona, Spain

Montserrat Castelló

Department of Education, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK

Lynn McAlpine & Kelsey Inouye

Faculty of Education, McGill University, Montreal, Canada

Lynn McAlpine

Department of Educational Research, Lancaster University, Lancashire, UK

Isabelle Skakni

You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Montserrat Castelló .

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

(DOCX 18 kb)

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Castelló, M., McAlpine, L., Sala-Bubaré, A. et al. What perspectives underlie ‘researcher identity’? A review of two decades of empirical studies. High Educ 81 , 567–590 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-020-00557-8

Download citation

Published : 23 June 2020

Issue Date : March 2021

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-020-00557-8

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Researcher identity
Identity dimensions
Find a journal
Publish with us
Track your research

Identity: Personal AND Social

In book: Oxford Handbook of Personality and Social Psychology
Edition: 2nd ed.
Publisher: Oxford University Press
Editors: Kay Deaux, Mark Snyder

University of Sussex

Discover the world's research

25+ million members
160+ million publication pages
2.3+ billion citations
Radosław Baran
Beata Marciniak

Pers Soc Psychol Bull

Maja Becker

Matthew J Easterbrook
J PERS ASSESS

أميرة محمود محمد صميدة
Michael Olayinka Gbadegesin
Rachel Oluwafisayo Aluko

Ingrid Valks
Dara Satrio
Angelica Reitsma

Steven J. Heine
Darrin R. Lehman

Joe Greenholtz
Ellinor Owe

H.M. Proshansky
Stephen Reicher

Cynthia L. Pickett
R.K. Merton

BRIT J SOC PSYCHOL

Recruit researchers
Join for free
Login Email Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google Welcome back! Please log in. Email · Hint Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google No account? Sign up

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

View all journals
Explore content
About the journal
Publish with us
Sign up for alerts
Published: 10 November 2022

Identity effects in social media

Sean J. Taylor ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-7436-1656 1 ,
Lev Muchnik ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-5011-8336 2 , 3 ,
Madhav Kumar 4 &
Sinan Aral ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-2762-058X 4

Nature Human Behaviour volume 7 , pages 27–37 ( 2023 ) Cite this article

5691 Accesses

14 Citations

366 Altmetric

Metrics details

Business and management
Information systems and information technology
Science, technology and society

Identity cues appear ubiquitously alongside content in social media today. Some also suggest universal identification, with names and other cues, as a useful deterrent to harmful behaviours online. Unfortunately, we know little about the effects of identity cues on opinions and online behaviours. Here we used a large-scale longitudinal field experiment to estimate the extent to which identity cues affect how people form opinions about and interact with content online. We randomly assigned content produced on a social news aggregation website to ‘identified’ and ‘anonymous’ conditions to estimate the causal effect of identity cues on how viewers vote and reply to content. The effects of identity cues were significant and heterogeneous, accounting for between 28% and 61% of the variation in voting associated with commenters’ production, reputation and reciprocity. Our results also showed that identity cues cause people to vote on content faster (consistent with heuristic processing) and to vote according to content producers’ reputations, production history and reciprocal votes with content viewers. These results provide evidence that rich-get-richer dynamics and inequality in social content evaluation are mediated by identity cues. They also provide insights into the evolution of status in online communities. From a practical perspective, we show via simulation that social platforms may improve content quality by including votes on anonymized content as a ranking signal.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Access Nature and 54 other Nature Portfolio journals

Get Nature+, our best-value online-access subscription

24,99 € / 30 days

cancel any time

Subscribe to this journal

Receive 12 digital issues and online access to articles

111,21 € per year

only 9,27 € per issue

Buy this article

Purchase on Springer Link
Instant access to full article PDF

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Realtime user ratings as a strategy for combatting misinformation: an experimental study

Users choose to engage with more partisan news than they are exposed to on Google Search

Friendship paradox biases perceptions in directed networks

Data availability.

An anonymized version of the data supporting this study is retained indefinitely for reproducibility. The data can be accessed from the authors by signing a non-disclosure agreement available at the following GitHub repository: https://github.com/seanjtaylor/identify_effects_in_social_media . The NDA requires that researchers provide their affiliation and attest that they will only use the data for reproduction and that no attempt will be made to re-engineer the identities of users or the platform.

Code availability

The code supporting this study is available at the following GitHub repository: https://github.com/seanjtaylor/identify_effects_in_social_media .

Burns, W. Is it time to require identity verification for everyone using social media? Forbes https://www.forbes.com/sites/willburns/2018/02/22/is-it-time-to-require-identity-verification-for-everyone-using-social-media/?sh=74308aec8683 (2018).

Salganik, M. J. & Watts, D. J. Leading the herd astray: an experimental study of self-fulfilling prophecies in an artificial cultural market. Soc. Psychol. Q. 71 , 338–355 (2008).

Article Google Scholar

Lorenz, J., Rauhut, H., Schweitzer, F. & Helbing, D. How social influence can undermine the wisdom of crowd effect. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 108 , 9020–9025 (2011).

Article CAS Google Scholar

Muchnik, L., Aral, S. & Taylor, S. J. Social influence bias: a randomized experiment. Science 341 , 647–651 (2013).

Chaiken, S. Heuristic versus systematic information processing and the use of source versus message cues in persuasion. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 39 , 752–766 (1980).

Chaiken, S. in Social Influence: The Ontario Symposium Vol. 5 (eds Zanna, M. P. et al.) 3–39 (Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1987).

Hass, R. G. in Cognitive Responses in Persuasion Vol. 2 (eds Petty, R. E. et al.) Ch. 7 (Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1981); https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315803012

Walther, J. B. Relational aspects of computer-mediated communication: experimental observations over time. Organ. Sci. 6 , 186–203 (1995).

Walther, J. B. Computer-mediated communication: impersonal, interpersonal, and hyperpersonal interaction. Commun. Res. 23 , 3–43 (1996).

Resnick, P., Kuwabara, K., Zeckhauser, R. & Friedman, E. Reputation systems. Commun. ACM 43 , 45–48 (2000).

Pavlou, P. A. & Gefen, D. Building effective online marketplaces with institution-based trust. Inf. Syst. Res. 15 , 37–59 (2004).

Moon, J. Y. & Sproull, L. S. The role of feedback in managing the Internet-based volunteer work force. Inf. Syst. Res. 19 , 494–515 (2008).

Wetzer, I. M., Zeelenberg, M. & Pieters, R. “Never eat in that restaurant, I did!”: exploring why people engage in negative word-of-mouth communication. Psychol. Mark. 24 , 661–680 (2007).

Wood, W. Attitude change: persuasion and social influence. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 51 , 539–570 (2000).

Cialdini, R. B. & Trost, M. R. Social Influence: Social Norms, Conformity and Compliance. The handbook of social psychology, McGraw-Hill, 151–192 (1998).

Chaiken, S., Wood, W. & Eagly, A. H. Principles of Persuasion. Social psychology: Handbook of basic principles. Guilford, 702–742 (1996).

Chen, S., Shechter, D. & Chaiken, S. Getting at the truth or getting along: accuracy- versus impression-motivated heuristic and systematic processing. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 71 , 262–275 (1996).

Lundgren, S. R. & Prislin, R. Motivated cognitive processing and attitude change. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 24 , 715–726 (1998).

Petty, R. E. & Wegener, D. T. Matching versus mismatching attitude functions: implications for scrutiny of persuasive messages. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 24 , 227–240 (1998).

Tajfel, H. Social psychology of intergroup relations. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 33 , 1–39 (1982).

Turner, J. C. Social Influence (Thomson Brooks/Cole, 1991).

Flache, A. Models of social influence: towards the next frontiers. J. Artif. Soc. Soc. Simul. https://doi.org/10.18564/jasss.3521 (2017).

Aral, S. & Walker, D. Creating social contagion through viral product design: a randomized trial of peer influence in networks. Manag. Sci. 57 , 1623–1639 (2011).

Aral, S. & Walker, D. Identifying influential and susceptible members of social networks. Science 337 , 337–341 (2012).

Bakshy, E., Eckles, D., Yan, R. & Rosenn, I. Social influence in social advertising: evidence from field experiments. In Proc. 13th ACM Conference on Electronic Commerce 146–161 (ACM, 2012); https://doi.org/10.1145/2229012.2229027

Aral, S. & Walker, D. Tie strength, embeddedness, and social influence: a large-scale networked experiment. Manag. Sci. 60 , 1352–1370 (2014).

Tucker, C. Social Advertising: How Advertising that Explicitly Promotes Social Influence Can Backfire. SSRN https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1975897 (2016).

Bakshy, E., Rosenn, I., Marlow, C. & Adamic, L. The role of social networks in information diffusion. In Proc. 21st International Conference on World Wide Web 519–528 (ACM, 2012).

Bapna, R. & Umyarov, A. Do your online friends make you pay? A randomized field experiment on peer influence in online social networks. Manag. Sci. 61 , 1902–1920 (2015).

Luc, J. G. Y. et al. Does tweeting improve citations? One-year results from the TSSMN prospective randomized trial. Ann. Thorac. Surg. 111 , 296–300 (2021).

Forman, C., Ghose, A. & Wiesenfeld, B. Examining the relationship between reviews and sales: the role of reviewer identity disclosure in electronic markets. Inf. Syst. Res. 19 , 291–313 (2008).

Ma, M. & Agarwal, R. Through a glass darkly: information technology design, identity verification, and knowledge contribution in online communities. Inf. Syst. Res. 18 , 42–67 (2007).

Shalizi, C. R. & Thomas, A. C. Homophily and contagion are generically confounded in observational social network studies. Sociol. Methods Res. 40 , 211–239 (2011).

Toubia, O. & Stephen, A. T. Intrinsic vs. image-related utility in social media: why do people contribute content to twitter? Mark. Sci. 32 , 368–392 (2013).

Taylor, S. J., Bakshy, E. & Aral, S. Selection effects in online sharing: consequences for peer adoption. In ACM Conference on Electronic Commerce 821–836 (ACM, 2013); https://doi.org/10.1145/2492002.2482604

Bertrand, M. & Mullainathan, S. Are Emily and Greg more employable than Lakisha and Jamal? A field experiment on labor market discrimination. Am. Econ. Rev. 94 , 991–1013 (2004).

Edelman, B., Luca, M. & Svirsky, D. Racial discrimination in the sharing economy: evidence from a field experiment. Am. Econ. J. Appl. Econ. 9 , 1–22 (2017).

Hu, N., Zhang, J. & Pavlou, P. A. Overcoming the J-shaped distribution of product reviews. Commun. ACM 52 , 144–147 (2009).

Kahneman, D., Sibony, O. & Sunstein, C. R. Noise: A Flaw in Human Judgment (Little, Brown, 2021).

Bourdieu, P. in: Handbook for Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education (ed. Richardson, J.). Greenwood Press , 241–258 (1986).

Throsby, D. Cultural capital. J. Cult. Econ. 23 , 3–12 (1999).

Putnam, R. The prosperous community: social capital and public life. The American Prospect https://prospect.org/infrastructure/prosperous-community-social-capital-public-life (1993).

Lin, C.-S. & Chen, Y.-F. Examining social tagging behaviour and the construction of an online folksonomy from the perspectives of cultural capital and social capital. J. Inf. Sci. 38 , 540–557 (2012).

Simon, H.A. On a class of skew distribution functions. Biometrika 42 , 425–440 (1955).

Merton, R. K. The Matthew effect in science. Science 159 , 56–63 (1968).

Barabási, A.-L. & Albert, R. Emergence of scaling in random networks. Science 286 , 509–512 (1999).

Salganik, M. J., Dodds, P. S. & Watts, D. J. Experimental study of inequality and unpredictability in an artificial cultural market. Science 311 , 854–856 (2006).

Van de Rijt, A. Self-correcting dynamics in social influence processes. Am. J. Sociol. 124 , 1468–1495 (2019).

Berry, G. & Taylor, S. J. Discussion quality diffuses in the digital public square. In Proc. 26th International Conference on World Wide Web 1371–1380 (ACM, 2017); https://doi.org/10.1145/3038912.3052666

Taylor, S. J. & Eckles, D. in Complex Spreading Phenomena in Social Systems (eds Lehmann, S. & Ahn, Y. Y.) 289–322 (Springer, 2018); https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-77332-2_16

Sun, T. & Taylor, S. J. Displaying things in common to encourage friendship formation: a large randomized field experiment. Quant. Mark. Econ. 18 , 237–271 (2020).

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank members of the MIT Initiative on the Digital Economy for valuable feedback. L.M. acknowledges support from the Israel Science Foundation (Grant 2566/21) and the David Goldman Data-Driven Innovation Research Centre for supporting this research. The authors received no specific funding for this work.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Independent Researcher, Oakland, CA, USA

Sean J. Taylor

The Hebrew University Business School, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel

Lev Muchnik

Microsoft Research, Herzliya, Israel

MIT Sloan School of Management, Cambridge, MA, USA

Madhav Kumar & Sinan Aral

You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

S.J.T., L.M. and S.A. performed the research design and data analysis. S.J.T., M.K. and S.A. did the writing.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sinan Aral .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Peer review

Peer review information.

Nature Human Behaviour thanks Johan Ugander, Marijn Keijzer and the other, anonymous, reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Supplementary information.

Supplementary Sections A.1–A.7, Figs. B3–B7 and Tables C3–C5.

Reporting Summary

Rights and permissions.

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Taylor, S.J., Muchnik, L., Kumar, M. et al. Identity effects in social media. Nat Hum Behav 7 , 27–37 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-022-01459-8

Download citation

Received : 23 June 2021

Accepted : 13 September 2022

Published : 10 November 2022

Issue Date : January 2023

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-022-01459-8

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

This article is cited by

Domain-adaptive pre-training on a bert model for the automatic detection of misogynistic tweets in spanish.

Dalia A. Rodríguez
Julia Diaz-Escobar
Leonardo Trujillo

Social Network Analysis and Mining (2023)

Quick links

Explore articles by subject
Guide to authors
Editorial policies

Research Impact

In this guide.

Getting Started

Your Researcher Identity

Author Impact
Article Impact
Journal Impact
Broadening Your Impact
Resources & Classes

Taking charge of and managing your researcher identify is important to distinguish you and your work from other researchers. It allows you to track the impact of your research, increase the visibility of your work, and connect all of your contributions over time. Your researcher identity is formed by combining all of your research outputs (e.g., articles, books, datasets, conference proceedings, blog posts, etc) and its impact that may be aligned with or act as an author profile.

As a researcher, it is critical to have control in managing your researcher identity. Your researcher identifier can:

Uniquely distinguish your name (author disambiguation)
Improve the discoverability of your work
Correctly accredit your work
Collate all your research activities and outputs
Collect and analyze your impact and metrics
Promote your research
Find collaborators
Streamline your research workflow

Researcher Identifiers

Claim your ORCID
Add works to a record

As a researcher, it is important to uniquely attach your identity to your scholarly outputs and unambiguously associate your publications, funding, and other information to you. As an open, non-profit, interdisciplinary, and community-driven effort, ORCID iD helps you distinguish you from other researchers and ensure your work is correctly accredited to you. An ORCID iD is a unique persistent and interoperable 16-digit researcher identifier associated with you (much like an SSN number) throughout your academic and professional career. The term ORCID also refers to the registry in which the unique persistent identifiers are maintained.

Increasingly, ORCID is integrated into the workflows for individuals, institutions, funders, and systems. Beginning in 2020, any individual who is supported by research training, fellowships, research education, and career development awards from NIH, AHRQ, and CDC will be required to have an ORCID. Publishers are also increasingly requiring ORCID as part of the manuscript submission process.

ORCID is not a social media platform, a profile system, an online CV, or a content repository. However, it provides a transparent method of linking ORCID to research activities and outputs in key workflows that fulfill these functions such as manuscript submissions, grant applications, researcher profiles, and patent applications.

While ORCID does not aggregate citation data, it captures a wide range of traditional and non-traditional research outputs such as journal articles, conference publications, books, datasets, patents, websites, methodology or technique, etc. You can authorize CrossRef and DataCite in your ORCID account to automatically receive updates to your profile when you publish with your ORCID. Authorize Stanford University as an alternative sign-in to use your SUNet credentials. Link other identifiers, such as Google Scholar, Scopus Author ID, and Publons to your ORCID profile to increase the visibility of your work. For more information, visit the ORCID guide .

How can you use it?

Link your ORCID iD or generate a QR code for your resume, conference poster, webpage, social media, and email signature to direct people to your works.

You can also use ORCID to connect a variety of profile systems and research related tools, such as SciENcv profile system and Dryad data repository. For more information, visit Use ORCID .

What is ORCID? from ORCID on Vimeo .

Claim your ORCID by registering at https://orcid.org/login with your Stanford credentials. Select "Institutional account" and search for "Stanford University".

There are three ways to sign-in into your ORCID:

Login to ORCID with your existing ORCID credentials
Stanford is an ORCID member and allows you to login to your ORCID account with your Stanford username and password (SUNet). Select “Institutional account” on the login screen to sign in with your SUNet.
You can use your Google or Facebook account as an alternative sign in.

Authorize Stanford University as a trusted organization to read, and/or add and update your ORCID record. Visit https://authorize.stanford.edu/orcid/ and follow the steps.

You can access an ORCID record as a stand-alone public profile in ORCID's database, and embedded in systems and tools for many databases and workflows.

Add information about yourself to your ORCID record

Build your ORCID record by adding information about yourself and connecting your ids. Personal information you can add to your ORCID record include:

Your name and other versions of your name
The country where you perform your research
Keywords related to you and your research
Links to websites related to you and your research (e.g. faculty profile webpage, LinkedIn, Twitter)
Email addresses you use or have previously used
Other researcher identifiers (e.g. ResearcherID, Publons, Scopus Author ID)
A brief biography

Add works to your ORCID record

There are several ways you can add works to your record:

Set-up auto-updates with CrossRef and DataCite . If you include your ORCID iD when you submit a work for publication, Crossref and DataCite publisher members index metadata about the work. You can authorize Crossref and DataCite to automatically update your record when the content is registered and has a DOI.
Add works by direct import from other systems. Select "Search & link" in the drop down menu to import links to your publications and other works from different databases and systems. This is the recommended process because it reduces errors and enables a reliable connection between your ORCID iD and your work.
Add works with a DOI, PMID, or ArXiv id .
Import and export works via BibTeX . If you have existing bibliographies from your Google Scholar profile or reference management software (e.g., Zotero, EndNote), you export the data in a BibTeX (.bib) file and import it into your ORCID record. BibTeX is a platform-independent, plain-text format used for bibliographic citations.
Add works manually .

In addition to profile systems like SciENcv, ORCID also integrates with a variety of other research-related tools giving you essentially a single sign and enabling you to share information about your contributions throughout your research toolchain. Below we've highlighted some tools that connect with ORCID that are widely used at Stanford Medicine.

	, the open data repository, requires ORCID iDs for login. Once you've logged in and published a dataset through Dryad, you can be added to your ORCID profile as a work. Dryad also allows you to add ORCID iDs for co-authors.
	, the collaborative LaTeX editor allows you to login with your ORCID iD and connect your ORCID to your current account. Once your account is linked, your ORCID iD will be included when you submit work to participating publishers.
	is a repository for recording and sharing up-to-date research methods and protocols. Connecting your ORCID iD with your account allows protocols.io to post information about your published protocols onto the "Works" section of your ORCID record.

Other Researcher Identifiers

Google Scholar
Scopus Author Identifier

There are various types of sites and services that are important in fostering your visibility. Use the comparison chart below to find the appropriate identifier for you. The Lane Medical Library recommends you claim an ORCID iD first before considering other identifiers.










		ORCID	ORCID Google Scholar

Google Scholar is a free tool you can set up using an email. It allows your profile to show up in the Google Scholar results when someone searches your name. Google uses a proprietary statistical model to try to tell different authors apart, so ensure you check that articles attached to your profile are really yours. One of the benefits of having a Google Scholar profile is its ability to aggregate multiple sources to generate a citation report on your impact. You can also create a Google Scholar profile for a group or organization.

Where can you find it

Google Scholar profiles can be accessed via https://scholar.google.com/ by searching for an author's name. Suggested user profiles will be displayed at the top of the results.

How can you get one

There are two ways to create and sign into your Google Scholar profile:

Go to https://scholar.google.com/ and click "sign-in" in the upper right corner. Sign-in using your SUNet.
Sign-in with an existing Gmail account or create an account with your Gmail.

Click "My Profile" in the upper left corner to set up your account information.

Adding works to your Google Scholar record

Google Scholar will most likely have indexed your work. It will provide you with groups of articles its algorithm believes belong to you. Select any group that is your work. If you don't see your work in a group, click "Search articles" and add your articles one at a time.

Alternatively, you can add missing articles manually by selecting the "+" button in the grey toolbar above your listed articles.

Scopus Author ID is automatically created when an author has one or more publications indexed by the Scopus database from Elsevier. Scopus will link publications to the same profile based on affiliation and name. However, if the affiliation changes, the form of the name is different, or subject area varies, additional profiles for the same individual may be created. If you have more than one profile in Scopus, it is necessary to merge the profiles by contacting the Scopus team. Scopus Author ID also integrates with ORCID to direct users to both profiles.

Scopus Author ID can be found in the Scopus database. Search by author or key terms to locate author profiles.

It is automatically generated in Scopus when authors have more than two publications. If you have more than one Scopus Author ID, it is important to send a request to Scopus to merge the IDs.

Adding works to your Scopus Author record

Publications indexed in Scopus will be automatically added to your Scopus Author profile. Publications indexed in Scopus can also be added by request, if not linked automatically by its algorithm.

Formerly ResearcherID, Publons is also a free tool as part of the suite of products offered by Clarivate Analytics who provides Web of Science and EndNote. It provides publication listings and citation metrics for publications indexed in Web of Science, as well as tracking of peer review work. Recently, Web of Science introduced a beta author search that algorithmically generates author records for authors who have one or more publications indexed in the database. You can claim a Web of Science author profile by registering with Publons. Based on affiliation, name variation, and subject areas, more than one profile may be generated for an author. Contact Web of Science to merge profiles. Like Scopus Author ID, Publons also integrates with ORCID. All former ResearcherID accounts are migrated to Publons and can be accessed via here .

Click on WoS search results to view abstract and author profile or use “author search”

Register to get an ID https://publons.com/account/register/ Can use a single login for Publons, EndNote, and Web of Science Integrated with ORCID

Adding works to your Publons record

<< Previous: Getting Started
Next: Author Impact >>
Last Updated: Jul 31, 2024 1:54 PM
URL: https://laneguides.stanford.edu/researchimpact

Last updated 2nd August 2024: Online ordering is currently unavailable due to technical issues. As we resolve the issues resulting from this, we are also experiencing some delays to publication. We are working hard to restore services as soon as possible and apologise for the inconvenience. For further updates please visit our website https://www.cambridge.org/news-and-insights/technical-incident

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings .

Login Alert

> Journals
> The British Journal of Psychiatry
> Volume 219 Issue 2
> Dissociative identity disorder: out of the shadows...

Article contents

(mis)diagnosing did, neurobiological evidence for the trauma model of did, considerations, dissociative identity disorder: out of the shadows at last.

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 07 October 2020

Supplementary materials
eLetters (2)

Dissociative identity disorder (DID) is a severely debilitating disorder. Despite recognition in the current and past versions of the DSM, DID remains a controversial psychiatric disorder, which hampers its diagnosis and treatment. Neurobiological evidence regarding the aetiology of DID supports clinical observations that it is a severe form of post-traumatic stress disorder.

Dissociative identity disorder (DID) was first included in the DSM in 1980 (DSM-III) as ‘multiple personality disorder’ and it is a controversial psychiatric diagnosis. The controversy finds its roots in a debate regarding the aetiology of the disorder. Supporters of two diametrically opposed views have engaged in passionate debate for decades: Reference Reinders, Willemsen, Vos, den Boer and Nijenhuis 1 the trauma model states that DID is a severe form of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) originating in severe and chronic (childhood) traumatisation, whereas the fantasy model postulates that DID is predominately due to suggestion and enactment and is facilitated by high levels of fantasy proneness and suggestibility. Although the trauma versus fantasy debate has evolved and aetiological research has broadened in the past few decades, Reference Şar, Dorahy and Krüger 2 there are several reasons why the fantasy model continues to appeal to clinicians. One reason is that information in undergraduate and graduate textbooks about trauma and dissociation is inadequate or simply wrong, because (a) it is often based on experimental research in non-clinical samples, (b) it is not fully based on scientific research, (c) it contains unbalanced discussions about the detrimental impact of childhood traumatisation and (d) it disregards empirical evidence showing a relationship between dissociation and antecedent trauma. Another reason is reluctance to accept the nature and severity of childhood abuse that individuals with DID report. It is troubling and painful to acknowledge how common and devastating trauma is, especially chronic childhood abuse. Subconscious protective mechanisms can take over to deny the reality of such abuse (in a similar way as denying racism, the Holocaust, or global warming Reference Dalenberg, Brand, Loewenstein, Frewen and Spiegel 3 ) and to believe that DID is a factitious disorder, as stated by the fantasy model. Reference Reinders, Willemsen, Vos, den Boer and Nijenhuis 1 However, it becomes increasingly apparent that severe childhood abuse, neglect and maltreatment are part of many psychiatric disorders and of our society. Reference Nemeroff 4

The combination of insufficient training in recognising trauma-related dissociation, limited exposure to accurate scientific information about DID, symptom similarities with other disorders (such as schizophrenia, bipolar disorder and borderline personality disorder) and the aetiology debate has led to a reluctance to consider a diagnosis of DID, leading to under- and misdiagnosis of the disorder, hampering effective treatment. Reference Reinders, Marquand, Schlumpf, Chalavi, Vissia and Nijenhuis 5 From the moment of seeking treatment for symptoms to the time of an accurate diagnosis of DID, individuals receive an average of four prior other diagnoses, inadequate pharmacological treatment, have several hospital admissions and consequently spend many years in mental health services. These years of misdirected treatment result in protracted personal suffering and high direct and indirect societal costs. Other factors contributing to under- and misdiagnosing of DID are unfamiliarity with the spectrum of dissociative disorders, the existence of feigned DID, the reluctance of individuals with DID to present their dissociative symptoms, often owing to feelings of shame, and lack of knowledge and appreciation of its epidemiology. DID has an estimated lifetime prevalence of around 1.5%, Reference Reinders, Marquand, Schlumpf, Chalavi, Vissia and Nijenhuis 5 meaning that at least one million people in the UK will suffer from DID during their life. It is therefore highly clinically relevant to move DID out of the abyss to facilitate earlier accurate diagnosis, prevent unnecessary suffering and promote research into faster and more targeted interventions.

According to DSM-5 criteria, DID is characterised by, among other things, two or more distinct identities or personality states that coincide, with fluctuating consciousness and changing access to autobiographical memory. Personality-state-dependent brain activation was found for the first time in 1985 in a single patient at rest and has been confirmed in independent studies over time. In 2003, the first multi-participant stimulus-driven brain-imaging study revealed personality-state-dependent processing of neutral and trauma-related autobiographical memory scripts. In a follow-up study it was shown that individuals with DID can be distinguished from DID-simulating healthy controls with high and low levels of fantasy proneness. Reference Reinders, Willemsen, Vos, den Boer and Nijenhuis 1 Importantly, these simulation-independent differences in brain activation patterns between different personality states in DID were replicated in an independent sample, altogether discrediting the fantasy model for DID. In DSM-5 a dissociative subtype for PTSD was included and the dissociative disorders were placed immediately after the trauma- and stress-related disorders, to suggest a close relationship between dissociative PTSD and DID. Research confirmed similarities in brain activation patterns during emotion overmodulation and undermodulation in an indirect comparison between the two. These neurobiological similarities between personality states in DID and PTSD subtypes support a trauma-related aetiology of DID.

As regards neurostructural evidence, a smaller hippocampal volume is the most consistently reported neuroanatomical correlate of childhood traumatisation. Negative correlations between childhood maltreatment and hippocampal volume have been reported in both unmedicated individuals from the general community and transdiagnostically in people with psychiatric disorders. Chalavi and colleagues Reference Chalavi, Vissia, Giesen, Nijenhuis, Draijer and Cole 6 built on this evidence to study hippocampal global and subfield volumes in PTSD and DID in relation to childhood traumatisation with the aim of directly testing the trauma model for DID. They found a negative correlation between hippocampal volumes and childhood traumatisation across the two disorders, thereby providing neuroanatomical evidence for the clinical observations that DID is related to (severe) childhood trauma. This finding is particularly important because neuroanatomical data are unlikely to be subject to cognitive manipulation. Hence, these findings support the notion that DID is closely related to PTSD, as indicated by its placement in DSM-5, especially when childhood trauma is involved, and provide evidence for the trauma model of DID. The finding that DID is related to environmental factors was further supported by a multicentre study Reference Reinders, Chalavi, Schlumpf, Vissia, Nijenhuis, Jäncke, Veltman and Ecker 7 that evaluated the neurodevelopmental origins of abnormal cortical morphology in DID. This study examined overall cortical volume and its two constitutes, that is, cortical thickness and surface area, in individuals with DID. It found that individuals with DID differed from controls on all three measures and provided evidence that non-genetic, environmental factors affect multiple aspects of brain development in DID. Negative associations between abnormal brain morphology and early childhood traumatisation were found as well.

Taken together, brain activation studies have validated the DSM-5 identity criterion of DID by showing the existence of two or more distinct personality states, each with their own distinct pattern of brain activation in response to autobiographical trauma-related information. Studies of brain structure in DID have shown that DID is not likely to be a neurodevelopmental disorder but that environmental factors, such as early childhood traumatisation, have an impact on brain morphology in DID.

The aetiology of DID has been debated for decades, questioning the validity of DID as a diagnostic entity in the DSM. Given that neurobiological and other evidence Reference Şar, Dorahy and Krüger 2 supports the trauma model for DID, it remains unclear why the aetiology of DID is still controversial, because for most other major psychiatric disorders, such as psychosis, the aetiology is also insufficiently known without such detrimental impact on diagnostic detection, treatment and patient's quality of life. We therefore propose that, given the available neurobiological evidence, it is time to move DID out of the shadows and to consider it as a mainstream psychiatric disorder.

National and international training information and training opportunities are available to support clinicians in becoming more familiar with dissociation, dissociative symptoms, DID and dissociative disorders in general. The Trauma and Dissociation Service at South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust, the Clinic for Dissociative Studies in London and the Pottergate Centre for Dissociation & Trauma in Norwich are some of the national expertise centres in the UK. The European Society for Trauma and Dissociation (ESTD) and the International Society for the Study of Trauma and Dissociation (ISSTD) provide resources, information, training and advice to develop and promote comprehensive, clinically effective and empirically based responses to trauma and dissociation.

A final consideration is to employ whole-brain structural brain imaging to aid the diagnosis of DID. Structural brain imaging holds the promise of using objective biomarkers at the individual level to facilitate a fast and correct diagnosis of individuals with DID. A first study using pattern recognition methodologies has shown that individuals with DID can be distinguished from healthy controls at an individual level with a degree of accuracy that is comparable to what has been demonstrated for most psychiatric disorders. Reference Reinders, Marquand, Schlumpf, Chalavi, Vissia and Nijenhuis 5 Future studies are needed to enhance clinical relevance by replicating previous findings and by distinguishing between DID and other psychopathologies using these pattern recognition methods.

Moving DID out of the shadows of psychiatry will facilitate earlier accurate diagnosis, faster and more targeted interventions, prevent unnecessary direct and indirect societal costs, but most important of all prevent years of suffering for individuals with the disorder.

Acknowledgement

We thank Professor Bethany Brand and Professor Allan Young for suggestions on parts of the content.

Author contributions

A.A.T.S.R. conceptualized and wrote the first draft of the manuscript and D.J.V. provided feedback and review towards the final version. Both authors approve of the final version of the manuscript.

This editorial represents independent research part funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Biomedical Research Centre at South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust and King's College London. The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the National Health Service (NHS), the NIHR or the Department of Health.

Declaration of interest

ICMJE forms are in the supplementary material, available online at https://doi.org/10.1192/bjp.2020.168 .

Reinders and Veltman supplementary material

This article has been cited by the following publications. This list is generated based on data provided by Crossref .

Google Scholar

View all Google Scholar citations for this article.

Save article to Kindle

To save this article to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle .

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Volume 219, Issue 2
Antje A. T. S. Reinders (a1) and Dick J. Veltman (a2)
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1192/bjp.2020.168

Save article to Dropbox

To save this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox .

Save article to Google Drive

To save this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive .

Reply to: Submit a response

- No HTML tags allowed - Web page URLs will display as text only - Lines and paragraphs break automatically - Attachments, images or tables are not permitted

Your details

Your email address will be used in order to notify you when your comment has been reviewed by the moderator and in case the author(s) of the article or the moderator need to contact you directly.

You have entered the maximum number of contributors

Conflicting interests.

Please list any fees and grants from, employment by, consultancy for, shared ownership in or any close relationship with, at any time over the preceding 36 months, any organisation whose interests may be affected by the publication of the response. Please also list any non-financial associations or interests (personal, professional, political, institutional, religious or other) that a reasonable reader would want to know about in relation to the submitted work. This pertains to all the authors of the piece, their spouses or partners.

Search Menu

Sign in through your institution

Advance articles
Author Interviews
Research Curations
Author Guidelines
Open Access
Submission Site
Why Submit?
About Journal of Consumer Research
Editorial Board
Advertising and Corporate Services
Self-Archiving Policy
Dispatch Dates
Journals on Oxford Academic
Books on Oxford Academic

< Previous

It Looks Like “Theirs”: When and Why Human Presence in the Photo Lowers Viewers’ Liking and Preference for an Experience Venue

Article contents
Figures & tables
Supplementary Data

Zoe Y Lu, Suyeon Jung, Joann Peck, It Looks Like “Theirs”: When and Why Human Presence in the Photo Lowers Viewers’ Liking and Preference for an Experience Venue, Journal of Consumer Research , Volume 51, Issue 2, August 2024, Pages 321–341, https://doi.org/10.1093/jcr/ucad059

Permissions Icon Permissions

Consumers and marketers often post photos of experiential consumption online. While prior research has studied how human presence in social media images impacts viewers’ responses, the findings are mixed. The present research advances the current understanding by incorporating viewers’ need for self-identity into their response model. Six studies, including an analysis of field data (14,725 Instagram photos by a top travel influencer) and five controlled experiments, find that the presence (vs. absence) of another human in the photo of an identity-relevant experience (e.g., a vacation, a wedding) can lower viewers' liking and preference for the venue (i.e., the vacation destination, the wedding venue) in the photo. This effect is mediated by viewers' feelings of others' ownership of the venue and moderated by the relevance of the experience to the viewer’s self-identity as well as the distinctiveness of the human in the photo. This research is the first to investigate the impact of human presence in shared photos through the lens of psychological ownership and the identity-signaling function of ownership. The findings offer practical insights into when marketers should avoid human presence in advertisements and how to mitigate the negative impact of human presence in online photos.

Personal account

Sign in with email/username & password
Get email alerts
Save searches
Purchase content
Activate your purchase/trial code
Add your ORCID iD

Institutional access

Sign in with username/password
Recommend to your librarian
Institutional account management
Get help with access

Access to content on Oxford Academic is often provided through institutional subscriptions and purchases. If you are a member of an institution with an active account, you may be able to access content in one of the following ways:

IP based access

Typically, access is provided across an institutional network to a range of IP addresses. This authentication occurs automatically, and it is not possible to sign out of an IP authenticated account.

Choose this option to get remote access when outside your institution. Shibboleth/Open Athens technology is used to provide single sign-on between your institutionâ€™s website and Oxford Academic.

Click Sign in through your institution.
Select your institution from the list provided, which will take you to your institution's website to sign in.
When on the institution site, please use the credentials provided by your institution. Do not use an Oxford Academic personal account.
Following successful sign in, you will be returned to Oxford Academic.

If your institution is not listed or you cannot sign in to your institutionâ€™s website, please contact your librarian or administrator.

Enter your library card number to sign in. If you cannot sign in, please contact your librarian.

Society Members

Society member access to a journal is achieved in one of the following ways:

Sign in through society site

Many societies offer single sign-on between the society website and Oxford Academic. If you see â€˜Sign in through society siteâ€™ in the sign in pane within a journal:

Click Sign in through society site.
When on the society site, please use the credentials provided by that society. Do not use an Oxford Academic personal account.

If you do not have a society account or have forgotten your username or password, please contact your society.

Sign in using a personal account

Some societies use Oxford Academic personal accounts to provide access to their members. See below.

A personal account can be used to get email alerts, save searches, purchase content, and activate subscriptions.

Some societies use Oxford Academic personal accounts to provide access to their members.

Viewing your signed in accounts

Click the account icon in the top right to:

View your signed in personal account and access account management features.
View the institutional accounts that are providing access.

Signed in but can't access content

Oxford Academic is home to a wide variety of products. The institutional subscription may not cover the content that you are trying to access. If you believe you should have access to that content, please contact your librarian.

For librarians and administrators, your personal account also provides access to institutional account management. Here you will find options to view and activate subscriptions, manage institutional settings and access options, access usage statistics, and more.

Short-term Access

To purchase short-term access, please sign in to your personal account above.

Don't already have a personal account? Register

Month:	Total Views:
September 2023	116
October 2023	223
November 2023	500
December 2023	268
January 2024	199
February 2024	171
March 2024	293
April 2024	187
May 2024	156
June 2024	126
July 2024	218

Email alerts

Citing articles via.

Recommend to your Library

Affiliations

Online ISSN 1537-5277
Print ISSN 0093-5301
About Oxford Academic
Publish journals with us
University press partners
What we publish
New features
Open access
Rights and permissions
Accessibility
Advertising
Media enquiries
Oxford University Press
Oxford Languages
University of Oxford

Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide

Cookie settings
Cookie policy
Privacy policy
Legal notice

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.

The five Olympic rights, coloured blue, black, red, yellow and green, are seen through green foliage

Transgender athletes face an uncertain future at the Olympics as reactionary policies gain ground

Professor of Sociology, Simon Fraser University

Disclosure statement

Travers has received funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada for research related to transgender youth and from Sport Canada to fund research related to gender equity in youth baseball.

Simon Fraser University provides funding as a member of The Conversation CA.

Simon Fraser University provides funding as a member of The Conversation CA-FR.

View all partners

At the last Summer Olympics held in Tokyo, New Zealand weightlifter Laurel Hubbard made history as the first openly transgender athlete in Olympic history . American transgender and non-binary runner Nikki Hiltz recently qualified for the 2024 Paris Games , marking their Olympic debut.

But these two may be among the last transgender athletes to compete at the Olympics for some time due to a reactionary shift in sport policy stemming from conflicts over the participation of transgender women and girls in “female” sports.

While transgender people have gained some recognition and human rights in the past decade, a well-financed reactionary movement is rolling them back. A constellation of white supremacist, conservative and Christian fundamentalist groups and so-called “gender critical feminists” are resisting feminist and gender-inclusive challenges to traditional gender and sexual hierarchies.

These groups are targeting transgender women and girls specifically — more so than transmen and boys, and non-binary people — for surveillance and exclusion. Bills blocking transgender women and girls from participating in “female” sports have been passed in many U.S. states and proposed in the Canadian province of Alberta .

A weightlifter holds a barbell above their head in front of a red wall that says 'Tokyo 2020' on it

Sport is a human right

The human right of transgender people to participate in all aspects of society — although far from universally affirmed and experienced — is often limited by assumptions about innate biological differences between males and females that suppose men and boys have an athletic advantage.

The debate over the inclusion of transwomen in sports involves questioning whether hormone therapy effectively changes biological characteristics associated with male athletic advantage . These concerns presume transgender athletes have an unfair advantage in women’s competitions because of the apparent lasting effects of testosterone exposure.

Current female eligibility policies for both transwomen and women with higher levels of testosterone than the so-called norm are based on unscientific claims about testosterone . These claims purport that higher average levels of testosterone among people assigned male at birth give them an unfair advantage.

Read more: Elite sport is becoming a platform to target the trans community

From 2011 to 2021, elite and amateur sporting organizations like the International Olympic Committee (IOC) and the International Amateur Athletic Federation (IAAF) — now World Athletics (WA) — used testosterone levels to determine female eligibility , despite its flawed science.

The assumptions about binary sex difference and female inferiority that motivate and animate female eligibility policies have been put under the microscope by human rights and science-based challenges, with the overwhelming consensus that sex is not binary and sex testing is flawed .

Mandatory sex testing for women athletes was abandoned by the IAAF in 1992 and the IOC in 2000 , but selective testing of “suspicious” athletes continued . Selective sex testing and medical interventions disproportionately affect racialized women from the Global South .

A muscular Black woman in a green and yellow tank top runs a track

Olympic policies

In November 2021, the IOC announced a new policy for transgender participation that relies on sport-by-sport, evidence-based decision-making to determine if transwomen have an apparent unfair advantage.

The new IOC policy refreshingly rules out medically unnecessary treatment and acknowledges the harms past regulations have had on women athletes. However, it abandons its responsibility to support the human rights of transgender and cisgender women athletes. Instead, it leaves individual sport organizations to do the dirty work of drawing boundaries between “real” and “unreal” women and girls.

The harm such assessments will produce was foreshadowed by World Rugby’s 2020 ban on transwomen participating in international women’s rugby competitions. This ban was based on the scientifically unsupported claim that transwomen retain vestigial strength that makes their participation unsafe for their cisgender counterparts.

The NCAA followed suit in January 2022 by replacing their leading-edge transgender inclusive policy from 2011 with one that leaves the inclusion of transgender athletes in the hands of individual sport governing bodies.

The recent success of swimmer Lia Thomas, the first transgender woman to win an NCAA swimming championship , prompted the change. This led FINA, the international swimming body, to effectively ban transwomen from competing in the women’s category . Only swimmers who transitioned before age 12 are permitted to compete in women’s events.

Broader anti-trans campaigns

A group of people hold blue, pink and white striped flags and protest signs outside a white, Grecian-style building

Efforts to ban transwomen who have gone through male puberty from women’s sports are part of broader anti-trans campaigns that seek to deny transgender youth access to the gender-affirming health care — specifically hormone blockers — required to avoid an unwanted puberty.

Many U.S. states and Alberta have banned, or are planning to ban, access to affirming health care for youth under 16. Transgender women and girls impacted by these bans will never be able to compete in women’s sport. These laws and policies signal to transgender women and girls they are not welcome in sport, and their privacy will be violated if they attempt to participate.

Read more: What is gender-affirming care? A social worker and therapist working with trans people explains

This will particularly impact transgender women and girls who do not or cannot pass as cisgender — either because they choose not to access gender-affirming health care, because they cannot afford it or because they live in areas where it is banned for minors.

As a result, many transgender girls and young women wishing to compete in high school or youth sport may avoid participating in sport altogether. This gender panic has also had consequences for cisgender girls who don’t conform to gender norms , subjecting them to anti-trans surveillance and harassment.

Conservative, anti-trans groups claim to be protecting sport for women and girls by banning the participation of transgender women and girls. However, their actions reveal them as enemies of gender equity and reproductive freedom . What girls and women athletes need to thrive are well-funded and gender-equitable sporting spaces that include transgender women and girls.

Transgender
Olympic games
Elite sport
Transgender athletes
Transgender rights
2024 Paris Olympics

Communications and Change Manager – Research Strategy

Head of School: Engineering, Computer and Mathematical Sciences

Educational Designer

Organizational Behaviour – Assistant / Associate Professor (Tenure-Track)

Apply for State Library of Queensland's next round of research opportunities

Harvard Library
Research Guides
Faculty of Arts & Sciences Libraries

Finding and Reading Journal Articles

Journal Articles: Why You Use Them

Why are articles so important to research?

Subject Databases: Organizing Research Conversations
Databases We Recommend For You
Sources in the Disciplines
Reading in the Disciplines

Journal articles are the academic's stock in trade, t he basic means of communicating research findings to an audience of one’s peers. That holds true across the disciplinary spectrum, so no matter where you land as a concentrator, you can expect to rely on them heavily.

Regardless of the discipline, moreover, journal articles perform an important knowledge-updating function .

image of 4 journals repesenting the life and physical science, the social sciences (examples from education and sociology) and the humanities (example from literary studies)

Textbooks and handbooks and manuals will have a secondary function for chemists and physicists and biologists, of course. But in the sciences, articles are the standard and preferred publication form.

In the social sciences and humanities , where knowledge develops a little less rapidly or is driven less by issues of time-sensitivity , journal articles and books are more often used together.

Not all important and influential ideas warrant book-length studies, and some inquiry is just better suited to the size and scope and concentrated discussion that the article format offers.

Journal articles sometimes just present the most appropriate solution for communicating findings or making a convincing argument. A 20-page article may perfectly fit a researcher's needs. Sustaining that argument for 200 pages might be unnecessary -- or impossible.

The quality of a research article and the legitimacy of its findings are verified by other scholars, prior to publication, through a rigorous evaluation method called peer-review . This seal of approval by other scholars doesn't mean that an article is the best, or truest, or last word on a topic. If that were the case, research on lots of things would cease. Peer review simply means other experts believe the methods, the evidence, the conclusions of an article have met important standards of legitimacy, reliability, and intellectual honesty.

Searching the journal literature is part of being a responsible researcher at any level: professor, grad student, concentrator, first-year. Knowing why academic articles matter will help you make good decisions about what you find -- and what you choose to rely on in your work.

Think of journal articles as the way you tap into the ongoing scholarly conversation , as a way of testing the currency of a finding, analysis, or argumentative position, and a way of bolstering the authority (or plausibility) of explanations you'll offer in the papers and projects you'll complete at Harvard.

Next: Subject Databases: Organizing Research Conversations >>

Except where otherwise noted, this work is subject to a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License , which allows anyone to share and adapt our material as long as proper attribution is given. For details and exceptions, see the Harvard Library Copyright Policy ©2021 Presidents and Fellows of Harvard College.

Election 2024
Entertainment
Newsletters
Photography
AP Buyline Personal Finance
AP Buyline Shopping
Press Releases
Israel-Hamas War
Russia-Ukraine War
Global elections
Asia Pacific
Latin America
Middle East
Delegate Tracker
AP & Elections
2024 Paris Olympic Games
Auto Racing
Movie reviews
Book reviews
Financial Markets
Business Highlights
Financial wellness
Artificial Intelligence
Social Media

At the 2024 Olympics, AIN hides the identity of the few Russian and Belarusian athletes

Ivan Litvinovich of the Individual Neutral Athletes competes during the men’s trampoline finals in Bercy Arena at the 2024 Summer Olympics, Friday, Aug. 2, 2024, in Paris, France. (AP Photo/Charlie Riedel)

Viyaleta Bardzilouskaya of Individual Neutral Athletes celebrates after winning the silver medal during the women’s trampoline finals in Bercy Arena at the 2024 Summer Olympics, Friday, Aug. 2, 2024, in Paris, France. (AP Photo/Charlie Riedel)

Daniil Medvedev of Russia returns the ball against Felix Auger-Aliassime of Canada during the men’s single tennis competition at the Roland Garros stadium, at the 2024 Summer Olympics, Wednesday, July 31, 2024, in Paris, France. (AP Photo/Manu Fernandez)

Viyaleta Bardzilouskaya of Individual Neutral Athletes performs during the women’s trampoline qualification round in Bercy Arena at the 2024 Summer Olympics, Friday, Aug. 2, 2024, in Paris, France. (AP Photo/Morry Gash)

From left to right silver medalist Viyaleta Bardzilouskaya of Individual Neutral Athletes, gold medalist Bryony Page of Britain and bronze medalist Sophiane Methot of Canada hold up their medals after the women’s trampoline finals in Bercy Arena at the 2024 Summer Olympics, Friday, Aug. 2, 2024, in Paris, France. (AP Photo/Charlie Riedel)

Mirra Andreeva and Daniil Medvedev of Russia compete against Sara Errani and Andrea Vavassori of Italy during the mix doubles tennis competition at the Roland Garros stadium, at the 2024 Summer Olympics, Monday, July 29, 2024, in Paris, France. (AP Photo/Manu Fernandez)

Copy Link copied

PARIS (AP) — Exactly one week after thousands of athletes sailed through the opening ceremony at the Paris Olympics , a gold medal was finally won Friday by a member of the neutral collective of athletes.

Ivan Litvinovich was barred from boarding a boat on the River Seine — just like all 32 athletes from Russia and Belarus whose Olympic team identity has been made almost invisible because of their nations’ military invasion of Ukraine.

When standing on the top step of the podium, Litvinovich was prohibited from hearing the Belarus anthem. Playing instead was a nondescript, wordless tune commissioned by the International Olympic Committee.

These are the Olympic rules of engagement for the 32 athletes who were vetted and approved — and accepted their invitations — to come to France and compete for the team-that’s-not-a-team.

Earlier Friday, when the first of them won a medal, it was not the international sports signifier BLR for Belarus next to Viyaleta Bardzilouskaya’s name.

Bardzilouskaya took silver in women’s trampoline for AIN, the French acronym for Individual Neutral Athlete, whose collective medals are barred from being tallied on the official team standings .

Almost 2 1/2 years after Russia invaded Ukraine with backing from neighboring Belarus, the two countries mostly feel like pariahs in world sports.

What are Russia and Belarus banned from and by who?

Russia and Belarus are not “banned” from the Olympics, as such, though they won’t be in any team sports at the Paris Games. And they could not have a boat at the opening ceremony.

It was Feb. 24, 2022, that Russia invaded, four days after the Beijing Winter Games closed and still in the Olympic Truce period Russian diplomats had signed up to at the United Nations.

Within hours in Europe, national teams in soccer and other sports, plus countries hosting winter sports events, refused to engage with Russian teams and athletes.

Paris Olympics

Sha’Carri Richardson won her first-ever race at the Olympics in 10.94 seconds to easily qualify for the semifinals.
Here’s what to watch as the track and field competition kicks off.
Take a look at everything else to watch on Friday .
See AP’s top photos from the 2024 Paris Olympics.
Olympic schedule of events and follow all of AP’s coverage of the Summer Games .
Which countries are in the lead? Take a look at the Olympic medal tracker .
Want more? Sign up for our daily Postcards from Paris newsletter.

The IOC moved within days to urge Olympic sports bodies to pull upcoming events from Russia and Belarus and remove their teams and athletes, for reasons of security and integrity of competitions.

Russians did keep on competing abroad in individual sports, like tennis and cycling. As qualifying events for the Paris Olympics approached, the IOC eased its advice — against Ukrainian pleas — to encourage governing bodies toward reintegrating some athletes.

During 2023, the IOC settled on its Paris Olympics policy : No Russian or Belarusian teams, which by definition represent a nation, but invite selected athletes. They must have passed vetting first by their sport’s governing body, then the IOC, to have not supported the war nor had funding or links to military or state security agencies.

The long and picky vetting processes both infuriated officials in Russia — claiming it was humiliating and politicized — and let the IOC avoid imposing a blanket ban. That severe option could have been legally challenged. It also risked setting a tricky precedent to follow in future wars involving other countries.

Some sports do still have a total ban on Russia internationally: soccer’s FIFA and track and field’s World Athletics.

How many AIN athletes came to the Paris Olympics?

From Russia 15, and 17 from Belarus. The Russians included 2021 U.S. Open champion Daniil Medvedev, who was eliminated in all three of his tennis events without winning a medal.

How does that compare with Russia at previous Summer Games? At the 2012 London Olympics, before the state doping and cover-ups scandal affected its entries, Russia had 436.

What restrictions did the IOC put on AINs in Paris?

No flag, no anthem, no team uniforms in national flag colors. Basically, stripped of national identity.

The AIN flag is jade or turquoise green with a circular logo in white. Those were the colors of the trampolinists’ warmup tops Friday.

The anthem commissioned by the IOC is a generic tune with no words that went publicly unheard until Friday.

AP Summer Olympics: https://apnews.com/hub/2024-paris-olympic-games

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Publications
Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

Advanced Search
Journal List
VA Author Manuscripts

Implications of Identity Resolution in Emerging Adulthood for Intimacy, Generativity, and Integrity Across the Adult Lifespan

Lauren l. mitchell.

Center for Care Delivery & Outcomes Research, Minneapolis VA Healthcare System

Jennifer Lodi-Smith

Department of Psychology, Canisius College

Erica N. Baranski

Department of Psychology, University of Houston

Susan Krauss Whitbourne

Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, University of Massachusetts

Associated Data

Erikson’s psychosocial stage model posits that identity formation is a key developmental task for adolescents, and that successfully resolving the identity vs. role confusion crisis at this time of life has important impacts on psychosocial development through adulthood. However, little empirical work has tested the consequences of early-life identity development for progression through the subsequent psychosocial stages in Erikson’s model. The purpose of the present study was to test whether identity resolution measured during emerging adulthood predicted later developmental trajectories of intimacy, generativity, and integrity across adulthood. We used data from four cohorts of participants in the Rochester Adult Longitudinal Study (N = 1224), with up to five assessments spanning the twenties through the sixties. Latent growth curve modeling was used to estimate developmental trajectories for intimacy, generativity, and integrity, and to test the association between emerging adulthood identity resolution and growth parameters for each psychosocial outcome. Findings suggested that individuals with higher emerging adulthood identity resolution also experienced high levels of intimacy, generativity, and integrity in emerging adulthood, and these levels remained consistently high across adulthood. In contrast, those with lower identity resolution in emerging adulthood experienced lower initial levels of intimacy, generativity, and integrity, but faster growth over time. As a result, these trajectories appeared to nearly converge by the time participants were in their sixties, suggesting that one’s emerging adulthood identity has less importance over time, and that individuals who struggled more with identity formation in adolescence and emerging adulthood are able to make up for it later in life.

Typically, adolescence and emerging adulthood are seen as an especially crucial time for identity development ( Erikson, 1968 ; Arnett, 2015 ; Schwartz et al., 2013 ; Meeus, 2011 ; McLean & Syed, 2015 ). This is a time of life when youth have relatively ample opportunities and motivation to explore what kind of person they want to be, and what direction they would like their life to take ( Arnett, 2000 ). In theory, a stable, coherent identity formed in adolescence is seen as laying the groundwork for healthy psychosocial functioning and growth across the lifespan ( Erikson, 1950 ; 1968 ; Vaillant & Milofsky, 1980 ; McLean & Syed, 2015 ). Individuals who struggle to form an integrated, stable, positive sense of self by early adulthood are expected to have trouble progressing forward through the subsequent developmental tasks of adulthood. However, the consequences of early-life identity development for later-life psychosocial growth have rarely been examined empirically. In the present study, we address this gap in the literature by examining how individuals’ degree of identity resolution in emerging adulthood influences their trajectories of development through the subsequent stages of Erikson’s model. Specifically, we used five waves of longitudinal data to estimate the effects of emerging adulthood identity resolution on trajectories of intimacy, generativity, and integrity from the twenties through the sixties.

Psychosocial Development Across the Lifespan

Erikson’s (1950 ; 1968 ) classic psychosocial stage model of human development lays out a set of eight developmental tasks that unfold over the lifespan: trust vs. mistrust, autonomy vs. shame and self-doubt, initiative vs. guilt, industry vs. inferiority, identity vs. role confusion, intimacy vs. isolation, generativity vs. stagnation, and integrity vs. despair. Conventional interpretations of Erikson’s model suggest that each of the eight stages builds sequentially on the last, and that successful resolution of the developmental task associated with the current life stage is beneficial or even necessary for moving on to later stages. Indeed, Erikson (1950) notes that each psychosocial construct within the stage model “is systematically related to all others, and that they all depend on the proper development in the proper sequence of each item” (p. 272). An early influential study aimed at validating Erikson’s theory suggested that psychosocial development indeed proceeds in a clearly defined sequence, and that problems in mastering earlier stages would prevent successful progression through later stages ( Vaillant & Milofsky, 1980 ; though see Peterson & Stewart, 1990, for a more nuanced view of the continued relevance of earlier psychosocial stages through the adult lifespan).

At the same time, Erikson (1950 ; 1968 ) also suggested that each of the eight psychosocial constructs are present at all stages of life, and these constructs remain malleable across the lifespan. Furthermore, recent empirical work calls into question the assumption that the eight stages of Erikson’s model follow the neat, sequential order suggested by many conventional interpretations (e.g., Whitbourne et al., 2009 ). Thus, the extent to which progression through the stages in Erikson’s model depends on the resolution of previous developmental tasks remains unclear.

The Role of Identity Development in Erikson’s Model

Erikson’s (1950 ; 1968 ) model situates the identity vs. role confusion crisis as a central developmental task for adolescents, and one that sets the stage for healthy maturation across adulthood. Among the eight psychosocial stages, identity in particular is seen as performing a crucial integrative function for an individual’s traits, needs, goals, abilities, and commitments, pulling together these aspects of the self into a coherent whole (Erikson, 1982). A coherent identity then provides the basis of healthy psychosocial functioning across adulthood. Indeed, youth who have managed to establish a stable, coherent, positive sense of self tend to experience greater well-being ( Van Hoof & Raaijmakers, 2002 ; Klimstra & Denissen, 2017 ). On the other hand, youth who struggle to make identity commitments and develop a clear sense of self tend to experience worse mental health, including depressive symptoms ( Luyckx, Klimstra, Duriez, Petegem, & Beyers, 2013 ), internalizing and externalizing symptoms ( Seiffge-Krenke & Weitkamp, 2020 ), and in severe cases, suicidality ( Chandler et al., 2003 ; Sokol & Eisenheim, 2016 ). Thus, the relevance of identity for mental health is well established.

Identity is also perhaps the most central and well-developed of the eight psychosocial constructs within Erikson’s theory, and one that Erikson explicitly discussed as laying a crucial foundation for development through the later psychosocial stages (see, e.g., Erikson, 1968 , p. 94; p. 135–141; p. 187–188). For example, Erikson noted that developing a clear, coherent identity is necessary for forming close intimate relationships with others, without losing one’s sense of self in the relationship. Furthermore, during the identity vs. role confusion stage, youth establish initial perspectives on leader and follower roles that inform their development of generativity, and on ideology and values that inform their development of integrity, thus “setting the stage” for development of generativity and integrity through subsequent decades of life. However, despite identity being the most extensively studied construct within Erikson’s model (e.g., McLean & Syed, 2015 ; Meeus, 2011 ; Schwartz, Luyckx, & Vignoles, 2011), these hypotheses relating early-life identity to subsequent psychosocial stages have not been empirically tested. The lack of research on the consequences of identity development in youth for lifespan psychosocial development is a notable gap within the identity literature, one that is addressed by the current study. Specifically, we examined whether identity development in emerging adulthood indeed influences subsequent development of intimacy, generativity, and integrity (see Supplemental Figure S1 ). Here, we define each of these psychosocial constructs in turn, and review existing research on their associations with identity.

Intimacy, Generativity, and Integrity

The development of intimacy is associated with early adulthood, roughly the mid-twenties through the thirties. In Erikson’s model, intimacy refers to the capacity to be open, vulnerable, and empathetic, and to welcome authentic, close connection with others ( Erikson, 1950 ). This capacity is critical for establishing stable, positive romantic relationships, as well as close friendships and other relationships that involve a deep sense of trust and attachment. Fear of making oneself open and vulnerable in a close, intimate relationship with another leads to a sense of isolation and distance.

Perhaps the most evidence exists for connections between identity and the subsequent stage, intimacy. Most of this work has been cross-sectional, and demonstrates positive correlations between identity and intimacy ( Orlofsky, Marcia, & Lesser, 1973 ; Rotenberg, Schaut, & O’Connor, 1993 ; Montgomery, 2005 ; Whitbourne & Tesch, 1985 ). Two studies that used multiple measurements of identity and intimacy across several years found conflicting results. Beyers and Seiffge-Krenke (2010) found that age 15 identity predicted age 25 intimacy, but not vice-versa. In contrast, using the same dataset as the current study, Sneed, Whitbourne, Schwartz and Huang (2012) found that, across adulthood, changes in identity did not predict change in intimacy, after controlling for stability in identity and intimacy over time.

The next stage, generativity, is conventionally associated with midlife, and reflects an individual’s efforts to nurture future generations and make contributions that will leave a lasting, positive influence on the world ( Erikson, 1950 ). The expression of generativity may include becoming a parent and raising one’s own family, but also extends to participating in the education and upbringing of other young people, as well as making concrete contributions to future generations in the form of products or ideas.

A handful of studies have also examined the connections between identity and generativity among adults, but used only a single measurement occasion for both identity and generativity ( Vandewater & Stewart, 2006 ; Vandewater et al., 1997 ; de Haan & MacDermid, 1994 ). The results of these studies have been mixed. For example, Vandewater and colleagues (1997) found that identity at age 43 was moderately positively correlated with generativity at age 48. In contrast, de Haan and MacDermid (1994) found that global identity development was unrelated to global generativity among midlife women, though they did find evidence that domain-specific identity development was associated with generativity in the corresponding domain (e.g., political identity achievement was related to civic generativity). Furthermore, because these studies did not assess changes in generativity over multiple measurements, the relationship between early-life identity and trajectories of generativity across the lifespan remains unclear.

Finally, the stage of integrity is most closely associated with the late decades of life, and centers around self-acceptance and satisfaction with the way one has lived one’s life. Integrity is characterized by the ability to look back on one’s life with pride, having achieved one’s main goals and lived according to one’s principles. There are no major regrets, but rather “acceptance of one’s one and only life cycle as something that had to be” ( Erikson, 1950 , p. 268). Individuals who are able to attain a strong sense of integrity overcome the fear of aging and death as the natural conclusion to a life well-led.

To our knowledge, no studies have examined the relationship between identity and subsequent development of ego integrity. However, Erikson’s (1950 ; 1968 ) conceptualization of integrity suggests that identity is a crucial precursor to the positive development of integrity in later adulthood. The kind of self-acceptance that forms the basis of integrity relies on a profound understanding of one’s identity: one’s deepest values and principles, an awareness of one’s own flaws balanced against one’s strengths and contributions, and an overall sense of comfort with oneself. Settling on one’s values early in adulthood makes it more likely that one will live an adult life according to those values, and avoid major regrets. Developing a positive, coherent view of the self in youth similarly lays the groundwork for accepting one’s actions and decisions across adulthood as the behaviors of an imperfect, but fundamentally good and worthy person. On the other hand, youth who struggle to develop an integrated identity may be less likely to set and reach important life goals that would form the basis of a satisfying legacy.

The Present Study

The Rochester Adult Longitudinal Study (RALS) provides a unique opportunity to examine the implications of identity development in emerging adulthood for later-life psychosocial outcomes. The RALS is perhaps the only longitudinal study currently available that includes assessments of the eight Eriksonian psychosocial constructs at multiple time points across early, middle, and later adulthood. At present, data are available starting when participants were emerging adults, and extending through their sixties. Other notable strengths of the RALS dataset are the inclusion of four different cohorts, each spaced approximately ten years apart, and the inclusion of both men and women. In comparison, much of the classic research on Eriksonian psychosocial stages has focused on only one gender (e.g., Helson, 1967 ; Stewart, 1978 ; Vaillant & Milofsky, 1980 ). These strengths of the dataset allow us to examine whether developmental trajectories vary by gender or birth cohort. Indeed, prior research with the RALS has investigated the moderating effects of gender and birth cohort on trajectories of psychosocial development, revealing, for instance, that women tend to score higher on intimacy than men ( Whitbourne et al., 2009 ). Furthermore, sociohistorical contexts associated with different birth cohorts may influence identity development ( Erikson, 1968 ; Fadjukoff, Kokko, & Pulkkinen, 2010 ). In keeping with this prior research, we included gender and birth cohort as covariates in all analyses, to investigate the potential role of these demographic factors and sociohistorical influences in shaping psychosocial development.

Previous investigations utilizing the RALS dataset have assessed the relationship between identity, intimacy, and wellbeing ( Sneed et al., 2012 ) and normative trajectories of psychosocial development across the life course ( Lodi-Smith et al., 2018 ; Whitbourne & Van Manen, 1996 ). Generally speaking, results from the RALS demonstrate age-related maturation in psychosocial and identity development ( Whitbourne & Van Manen, 1996 ; Whitbourne et al., 2009 ) and the consistent predictive relationship between maturation in Eriksonian concerns and well-being ( Sneed et al., 2012 ). These previous investigations have primarily focused on the causes and consequences of psychosocial maturation of individuals in midlife and have collectively worked to illuminate the importance of Eriksonian psychosocial development in predicting physical and psychological health and wellbeing through adulthood.

The purpose of the present study was thus to test whether identity resolution during emerging adulthood predicts trajectories of development in the subsequent Eriksonian psychosocial constructs: intimacy, generativity, and integrity. Our hypotheses were based on Erikson’s (1950 ; 1968 ) theory, while taking into account prior empirical work with the RALS estimating normative trajectories of development in intimacy, generativity, and integrity through the early fifties ( Whitbourne et al., 2009 ). This prior research revealed several patterns of growth that diverged from theoretically expected trajectories. Specifically, this work suggested that intimacy follows a slightly curved trajectory, with steeper growth across early adulthood, and leveling off slightly across mid-life. Generativity was characterized by a slowly increasing linear trajectory. Integrity decreased from the twenties through the forties, then increased from there on. Our Open Science Preregistration includes the following hypotheses, which were informed by previous analyses of RALS data in addition to Erikson’s theory.

For intimacy, we expected that higher emerging adulthood identity resolution would be associated with a curvilinear trajectory that increases sharply in the thirties (corresponding to the time of life associated with intimacy vs. isolation in the psychosocial stage model), leveling off afterward (see Figure 1a ). In contrast, we expected that lower identity resolution would be associated with a trajectory that increases slowly over time but remains relatively low across adulthood.

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.
Object name is nihms-1729544-f0001.jpg

Note . Y-axis labels are not included because we did not hypothesize specific values for intimacy, generativity, or integrity, but rather a general shape for the developmental trajectory.

For generativity, we predicted that higher emerging adulthood identity resolution would be associated with linear increases in generativity, whereas lower identity resolution would be associated with a relatively stable and consistently lower trajectory (see Figure 1b ).

For integrity, we expected a U-shaped trajectory that decreases initially, but increases in later waves for those individuals higher in identity resolution. Individuals with lower identity resolution were expected to experience a relatively stable and consistently lower level of integrity relative to their peers with higher emerging adulthood identity resolution (see Figure 1c ).

Participants

The RALS includes four cohorts of University of Rochester alumni, each separated by approximately a decade. Table 1 summarizes the number of participants in each cohort, the timing of assessments for each cohort, and the mean age of participants at each time point. The most recent wave of assessments was completed in 2012–2014. In this wave, Cohort 1 were in their sixties, and Cohort 4, the youngest cohort, were in their thirties. The present study uses data from all four cohorts. On average, participants were 20.01 ( sd = .63) years old in their first assessment, and for those cohorts that have completed additional assessments, they were 30.96 ( sd = .63) years old in their second, 42.77 ( sd = 1.62) in their third, 55.69 ( sd = 1.61) in their fourth, and 67.68 ( sd = 1.32) in their fifth assessment. The sample includes 585 women (48%), and is primarily White (96%). Given the racial/ethnic homogeneity of the sample, this demographic factor is not considered in the following analyses. Approximately 25% (N = 308) participants reported completing a graduate or professional degree after their initial assessment.

Sample size by cohort and wave.

Cohort	Wave 1 (20’s)	Wave 2 (30’s)	Wave 3 (40’s)	Wave 4 (50’s)	Wave 5 (60’s)
	= 20.01, = .63, range = 17–24 years	= 30.96, = .63, range = 28–38 years	= 42.77, = 1.62, range = 40–58 years	= 55.69, = 1.61, range = 52–60 years	= 67.68, = 1.32, range = 64–71 years
1	1965–1968 N = 348	1976–1977 N = 153	1988–1989 N = 99	2000–2002 N = 182	2012–2014 N = 163
2	1976–1977 N = 299	1988–1989 N = 83	2000–2002 N = 137	2012–2014 N = 114	-
3	1988–1989 N = 292	2000–2002 N = 114	2012–2014 N = 102	-	-
4	2000–2002 N = 285	2012–2014 N = 101	-	-	-

Note . M age = mean age, SD = standard deviation. The discrepancy in sample sizes between the 1988–1989 and the 2000–2002 assessments is a result of major efforts to re-engage participants from Cohorts 1 and 2 in the early 2000’s, facilitated by the emergence of the internet. Further detail on these efforts is reported in Whitbourne et al. (2009) . Although the age range for Wave 3 includes participants with ages 40–58, only two participants had an age reported outside of the intended 40–49 age range. One participants’ age is reported as 55, another’s is 58. All other remaining participants’ ages fell within the range of 40–48. Sensitivity analyses excluding these two participants are reported in Supplemental Table S8 , and had no substantive differences from the main results.

We checked the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) for each outcome within each cohort, at each wave. The ICC was generally very close to zero for these comparisons, suggesting little within-cohort homogeneity on the outcomes of intimacy, generativity, and integrity; thus we combined all four cohorts to increase sample size and power. The total sample size was N = 1224.

Missing data.

The RALS includes planned missingness due to the cohort sequential design, as well as missingness due to attrition. Among the original sample of 348 recruited in 1965–1968, 47% completed the most recent 2012–2014 assessment. Attrition within the other cohorts ranges from 65% to 62%. However, analyses comparing participants who remained in the sample to those who dropped out revealed no significant association between completion status in 2012–2014 and the main predictor of interest, i.e. emerging adulthood identity resolution (r = .02, p > .05), nor for the focal outcomes of intimacy ( r s range from −.04 to .08 across waves, all p s > .05), generativity ( r s range from −.08 to .11, all p s > .05), or integrity ( r s range from −.02 to .04, all p s > .05), consistent with prior attrition analyses of RALS data ( Whitbourne et al., 2009 ) 1 . We use Full Information Maximum Likelihood (FIML) estimation to account for missingness in all longitudinal analyses.

Eriksonian Psychosocial Constructs.

The Inventory of Psychosocial Development (IPD; Constantinople, 1969 ) was originally used to assess the first six psychosocial constructs in Erikson’s model. Starting in 1977, items to assess the remaining two constructs (generativity and integrity) were developed and added ( Whitbourne & Waterman, 1979 ). Each construct is assessed with ten items, including five positive and five negative items, each measured on a 7-point Likert scale. Participants are asked to indicate how characteristic or uncharacteristic each item is of them. Sample items for the subscales included in the present study include: “I know who I am and what I want out of life” (identity), “I have sympathetic concern for others” (intimacy), “I feel productive in my work” (generativity), and “I wouldn’t change my life if I lived it over” (integrity). Scale scores were calculated for each of these constructs by reverse scoring the negatively associated items and adding them to the positively associated items, yielding a sum score for each subscale that reflects a participant’s degree of resolution for each stage of Erikson’s model. Item-level data were available for IPD assessments that occurred from Wave 3 (1988–1989) and beyond, but were unavailable for the two assessments in 1965–1968 and 1976–1977. The full IPD instrument is available in the Supplemental Material . Correlations among the baseline measures of each psychosocial construct are reported in Table 2 . Cronbach’s alpha and test-retest reliability are reported for each subscale where item-level data were available in Supplemental Tables S2 through S5 . Alpha was .64 for identity, and ranged from .66–.76 for intimacy, .36–.61 for generativity, and .69-.78 for integrity. Given the low internal consistency estimates for generativity, we ran sensitivity analyses using a version of this subscale that removed two items that were weakly correlated with the rest of the items (detailed in the Analysis Plan and Results sections). Test-retest reliability for the IPD subscales ranged from r = .24 to r = .81, with stronger correlations among measurements that occurred closer in time. This is consistent with our expectations for data collected at approximately ten-year intervals.

Descriptive Statistics and Correlations among Variables

Variable	1	2	3	4	5	Mean (SD)	Observed Range
1. Cohort	-
2. Sex	−.01	-
3. BL Identity	−.04	.07	-			7.30 (6.83)	−24, 30
4. BL Intimacy	<.01	.13	.56	-		11.49 (7.50)	−20, 29
5. BL Generativity	−.03	.15	.45	.55	-	7.24 (5.66)	−10, 23
6. BL Integrity	−.17	.11	.56	.41	.35	3.59 (8.31)	−22, 24

BL = Baseline. SD = standard deviation. Correlations among Wave 2–5 psychosocial stage variables are available in supplemental material . Scale scores for Identity, Intimacy, Generativity, and Integrity could theoretically range from −30 to 30.

Participants were recruited for their first assessment during college. Subsequently, alumni (i.e., individuals who attended the University of Rochester, regardless of whether they graduated) were contacted for follow-up assessments using information in the University of Rochester alumni directory. In 2000, fee-based services (Find a Friend; Online Detective) were used and by 2002, and particularly by 2012, Internet searches became available for more thorough identification of past participants. These procedures for identifying and contacting alumni are described in more detail elsewhere (e.g., Sneed et al., 2012 ; Whitbourne et al., 2009 ). Alumni received a letter describing the study, a questionnaire, and a stamped envelope for returning the completed questionnaire. In the most recent assessments (2002, 2012–14), all questionnaires were completed using online survey tools. The present study was declared exempt from review by the Minneapolis VA IRB (VAM-19–00430).

Analysis Plan

Latent growth curve modeling (LGM) was used to test our main hypotheses. LGM is a longitudinal form of structural equation modeling ( Singer & Willett, 2003 ; Tomarken & Waller, 2005 ), in which parameters such as an intercept (I), linear slope (S), and quadratic slope (Q) are estimated to define an average trajectory of growth over time. Predictors such as emerging adulthood identity resolution can be entered as time-invariant covariates to examine their association with the growth parameters, thus indicating whether such predictors have a significant influence on trajectories of growth for outcomes.

For each of our focal outcomes – intimacy, generativity, and integrity – we developed a separate model to describe an average trajectory of change, and to determine whether trajectories varied by level of emerging adulthood identity resolution. First, we compared several unconditional growth models (i.e., models with no covariates included) to identify the best fitting functional form for each outcome. For each outcome, we considered the following functional forms: intercept-only, linear, quadratic, and basis (i.e., freely estimating the pattern of change; Preacher, 2010 ; Grimm et al., 2011 ) models. For basis models, the loading of Wave 1 scores on the shape factor was set at 0, the loading of the Wave 5 scores on the shape factor was set at 1, and intermediate loadings were allowed to vary freely, allowing estimation of non-linear growth. Thus, the fitted values for outcomes within a basis model are obtained by multiplying the basis shape factor by the basis factor loading for each wave, and adding the model intercept. The model with the best fit, according to visual inspection and fit statistics, was retained for each outcome. Lower values on comparative fit statistics (Akaike Information Criterion and Bayesian Information Criterion), Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA) values less than .06, Comparative Fit Index (CFI) values greater than .95, and Standardized Root Mean Residual (SRMR) values less than .08 were taken as indicators of good fit ( Hooper, Coughlan, & Mullen, 2008 ; Hu & Bentler, 1999 ; Schreiber, Nora, Stage, Barlow, & King, 2006 ). After identifying the best fitting unconditional model, we added emerging adulthood identity resolution as a time-invariant covariate to examine its association with the growth parameters. We controlled for sex and cohort in these analyses. Identity resolution was mean-centered to facilitate interpretation of results.

In addition to testing our preregistered hypotheses, we conducted additional exploratory analyses to further probe our findings. We conducted exploratory analyses using mediation models to test whether relationships between identity and the later psychosocial stages were mediated by intervening stages. Specifically, we tested whether the relationship between identity and generativity was mediated by intimacy, and similarly whether the relationship between identity and integrity was mediated by generativity. We also conducted sensitivity analyses fitting a latent growth curve model for generativity using the alterative, shortened version of the generativity scale, and including a covariate reflecting whether participants obtained a graduate degree. Finally, we conducted analyses incorporating age as a covariate. All analyses were performed in R ( R Core Team, 2018 ). The package lavaan was used for latent growth curve modeling ( Rosseel, 2012 ).

Unconditional Growth Models

Fit statistics for all unconditional models are reported in Table 3 . For intimacy, a linear growth curve model fit best. This model indicated that on average, participants started with a positive level of intimacy at baseline, and increased steadily over time (I=11.62, p <.001; S= 1.30, p <.001; see Figure 2a ). For generativity, a linear model also provided the best fit. This model suggested that participants generally began with a positive level of generativity, with linear increases afterward (I=7.45, p <.001; S= .63, p <.001; see Figure 2c ). For integrity, the basis model provided the best fit. The model produced a negative variance estimate for Wave 5 integrity, so we constrained this variance to zero; this constraint did not substantially affect model fit. The unconditional basis model suggested nonlinear growth in integrity, starting at a relatively low level in Wave 1 and increasing somewhat at Wave 2, declining in Wave 3, and then rising continuously through Wave 4 and Wave 5 (I=3.71, p <.001; S=4.75, p <.001; α 2 =.24, p =.001; α 3 =−.05, p =.65; α 4 =.35, p <.001; see Figure 2e ).

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.
Object name is nihms-1729544-f0002.jpg

Note. Panels A, C, and E illustrate unconditional model-implied trajectories. Panels B, D, and F illustrate the model-implied trajectories for a hypothetical individual with mean-level identity resolution, as well as an individual one standard deviation above or below the mean.

Fit Indices for Latent Growth Curve Models.

Model	AIC	BIC	Chi-square	RMSEA	CFI	SRMR
Intimacy
Unconditional intercept-only	16085	16121	χ = 230.09, = 13, <.001	.12	.56	.19
Unconditional linear	15887	15938	χ = 26.44, = 10, =.003	.04	.97	.08
Unconditional basis	15886	15952	χ = 19.22, = 7, =.008	.04	.98	.08
Unconditional quadratic	15878	15949	χ = 9.52, = 6, =.23	.02	.99	.03
Conditional linear	15372	15454	χ = 80.05, = 19, <.001	.05	.94	.07

Generativity

Unconditional intercept-only	12734	12769	χ = 95.48, = 13, <.001	.08	.74	.13
Unconditional linear	12661	12711	χ = 16.54, = 10, =.09	.02	.98	.04
Unconditional basis	12656	12721	χ = 5.93, = 7, =.55	<.001	1.00	.09
Unconditional quadratic	12665	12735	χ = 12.85, = 6, =.05	.03	.98	.04
Conditional linear	12324	12406	χ = 32.60, = 19, =.03	.02	.96	.04

Integrity

Unconditional intercept-only	14008	14043	χ = 132.12, = 13, <.001	.09	.72	.16
Unconditional linear	13970	14020	χ = 88.59, = 10, <.001	.08	.81	.11
Unconditional basis	13915	13975	χ = 29.59, = 8, <.001	.05	.95	.08
Unconditional quadratic	13939	14004	χ = 51.35, = 7, <.001	.08	.89	.07
Conditional basis	13469	13561	χ = 108.23, = 17, <.001	.07	.78	.11

Note. AIC = Akaike information criterion. BIC = Bayesian information criterion. RMSEA = root mean square error of approximation. CFI = comparative fit index. SRMR = root mean square residual.

Conditional Growth Models

Conditional models for each outcome incorporated emerging adulthood identity, cohort, and gender as covariates (see Table 4 ). For intimacy, emerging adulthood identity was significantly associated with intercept and slope (see Table 4 , Figure 2b ). Specifically, each point above the mean level of identity resolution was associated with a .56-point higher level of intimacy at baseline. However, individuals with greater identity resolution in college increased their intimacy more slowly over time than those with lower identity resolution in college. Sex was also associated with baseline intimacy, with women starting out on average 1.61 points higher than men. Cohorts did not differ significantly on baseline intimacy. Neither sex nor cohort was significantly associated with slope.

Latent Growth Curve Models Predicting Psychosocial Outcomes on Emerging Adulthood Identity

	Intimacy		Generativity		Integrity

	Coefficient	SE	Coefficient	SE	Coefficient	SE


For intercept
Intercept	10.49	.44	7.49	.53	-	-
EA Identity	.56	.03	.34	.02	-	-
Cohort	.12	.15	−.24	.17	-	-
Female	1.61	.35	1.25	.32	-	-

For linear slope
Intercept	1.06	.25	.28	.25	-	-
EA Identity	−.10	.02	−.03	.01	-	-
Cohort	.15	.13	.17	.12	-	-
Female	.13	.19	.08	.18	-	-

For basis intercept
Intercept	-	-	-	-	4.54	.92
EA Identity	-	-	-	-	.62	.05
Cohort	-	-	-	-	−.60	.28
Female	-	-	-	-	1.23	.45

For basis shape factor
Intercept	-	-	-	-	5.30	2.38
EA Identity	-	-	-	-	−.38	.12
Cohort	-	-	-	-	−1.15	.64
Female	-	-	-	-	−.44	1.13

Basis factor loadings
Wave 2	-	-	-	-	.49	.08
Wave 3	-	-	-	-	.37	.24
Wave 4	-	-	-	-	.57	.12



Intercept	15.89	2.51	12.23	2.23	-	-
Slope	1.18	.50	1.74	.53	-	-
Basis intercept	-	-	-	-	22.29	13.63
Basis slope	-	-	-	-	62.01	53.87

Note. All coefficients are unstandardized.

EA = Emerging adulthood. Fixed effects represent the average trajectory across all participants, and random effects represent the variance of individual participants’ trajectories around the average trajectory.

For generativity, identity resolution was also associated with intercept and slope, in a similar pattern (see Table 4 , Figure 2d ). Each additional point on the identity resolution scale was associated with .34 additional points on the generativity scale at baseline. Higher identity resolution was also associated with slower growth in generativity over time. In addition, women had a higher initial level of generativity than men by 1.25 points. Cohort was not significantly associated with baseline generativity, and neither sex nor cohort predicted different rates of change in generativity. 2

Emerging adulthood identity resolution was also associated with both the initial level and pattern of growth for integrity (see Table 4 , Figure 2f ). Each point above the average for identity resolution was associated with a .62-point higher level of integrity at baseline. Higher identity resolution in college was also associated with a slower rate of growth from one wave to the next. Sex and cohort were also related to baseline levels of integrity. Women scored higher than men by 1.23 points on average. Later cohorts scored slightly lower than early cohorts, with each cohort starting .60 points below the previous cohort. Sex and cohort were not significantly associated with the growth parameters for integrity.

We conducted sensitivity analyses controlling for attainment of a graduate degree, as well as age. These analyses did not substantively change the results (see Supplemental Tables S7 - S10 ).

Exploratory Mediation Analyses for Intervening Stages

We used path analysis models to test whether the relationships between T1 identity and T3 generativity, as well as between T1 identity and T3 integrity, were mediated by the intervening psychosocial stages. Results of these models are reported in Figure 3 . The indirect path from identity to generativity via intimacy was significant ( b = .07, p <.001), though smaller than the direct path from identity to generativity ( b = .18, p <.001). A similar pattern was found for the indirect path from identity to integrity via generativity ( b = .13, p <.001), relative to the direct path from identity to integrity ( b = .23, p <.001). These findings suggest that part, but not all, of the relationship between identity and the later psychosocial stages can be explained by the intervening stages.

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.
Object name is nihms-1729544-f0003.jpg

Note . Unstandardized coefficients are reported. *** p <.001, ** p <.01, * p <.05

Erikson’s classic psychosocial stage model suggests that identity development in adolescence and emerging adulthood shapes an individual’s progression through later developmental tasks across the lifespan ( Erikson, 1950 ; 1968 ; Vaillant & Milofsky, 1980 ). The purpose of the present study was to test whether identity resolution in emerging adulthood predicted subsequent development of intimacy, generativity, and integrity across early, middle, and later adulthood. We estimated developmental trajectories for each of these three psychosocial constructs starting in the early twenties and continuing through the sixties. Although emerging adulthood identity resolution did predict higher levels of intimacy, generativity, and integrity, as well as significant differences in growth rates for each of these three constructs, the specific trajectories we found were quite different from what we predicted. We expected that individuals with high identity resolution in college would go on to experience substantial growth in intimacy, generativity, and integrity, while their peers with lower identity resolution would experience little growth in these areas. Instead, our findings suggest that strong identity resolution in emerging adulthood predicts consistently high levels of intimacy, generativity, and integrity across adulthood. In contrast, those with low identity resolution in emerging adulthood go on to experience faster rates of growth across their thirties, forties, and fifties, so that they start to “catch up” with their peers later in life, especially in the domains of intimacy and integrity 3 . Only data with multiple assessments across the adult years could reveal these developmental patterns - a notable strength of the RALS dataset.

Identity formation is often viewed as a key developmental task for adolescence and emerging adulthood, and a prerequisite for healthy adult functioning ( Arnett, 2000 ; Erikson, 1968 ; 1950 ; Marcia, 1966 ; Meeus, 2011 ). Individuals who have trouble forming a coherent, stable sense of self at these early times of life are expected to experience poor outcomes later in adulthood as a result. However, we found that having relatively low identity resolution in college did not totally preclude growth through subsequent psychosocial stages. These findings provide some reassurance that individuals who do not manage to form a coherent identity “on time” in emerging adulthood are not destined to fail at the key developmental tasks later across the lifespan – they may just take longer to arrive there. Indeed, some research on adults in their mid-twenties suggests that those who remain in identity diffusion (the least mature, least resolved identity status) can nonetheless progress forward in their identity development later on ( Carlsson, Wangqvist, & Frisen, 2015 ). Prior research with the RALS has also suggested that life experiences such as entering a committed relationship or becoming a parent can contribute to “catching up” on psychosocial growth for individuals who exhibited lower levels of intimacy and generativity early in adulthood ( Whitbourne et al., 2009 ). Course-corrections ( Stewart & Vandewater, 1999 ), or later-life choices made after revisiting one’s earlier-life regrets, may be another mechanism for gaining ground in these psychosocial domains through midlife.

Perhaps what was most surprising, from a developmental perspective, was that individuals with high identity resolution in college also tended to score highly on intimacy, generativity, and integrity in their youth, and maintain those levels over time. Eriksonian theory posits that healthy psychosocial development is dynamic, with each psychosocial construct becoming especially salient at a different point in the adult lifespan ( Erikson, 1950 ; 1968 ; see also Zucker, Ostrove, & Stewart, 2002 ; McAdams & de St. Aubin, 1992 ). However, our findings suggest that individuals who had already attained a high level of identity resolution in their early twenties were also particularly mature on all of these dimensions in a stable, trait-like way. Though it is assumed that identity resolution serves as preparation for future growth in these areas, our findings suggest that instead, people who have highly mature identities in emerging adulthood may already have a strong sense of intimacy, generativity, and integrity, which remains strong across their lifespan.

In contrast to the conventional, strictly age-graded interpretation of Erikson’s psychosocial stage model (e.g., Vaillant & Milofsky, 1980 ), more recent interpretations have emphasized Erikson’s assertion that each psychosocial construct is present across the lifespan ( Whitbourne et al., 2009 ; Pratt, Lawford, Matsuba, & Villar, 2020 ). In support of this “matrix” interpretation, previous research with the RALS ( Whitbourne et al., 2009 ), as well as other longitudinal datasets ( Einolf, 2014 ) has demonstrated a surprising degree of stability in some psychosocial constructs over time, a finding reinforced by the present analyses. Our results also question the sequential, stage-based interpretation by demonstrating that the psychosocial constructs that are typically associated with adulthood can nonetheless be quite strong in the early twenties (see also, e.g., Pratt & Lawford, 2014 ). Our mediation models suggested that the effects of identity on the later psychosocial stages (e.g., generativity) may be partially explained by the intervening stages (e.g., intimacy). However, identity remained significantly associated with late psychosocial stages after accounting for the indirect paths through the middle stages, further calling into question a strictly sequential interpretation of Erikson’s model.

The nonlinear growth pattern we found for integrity is intriguing, as it contradicts theoretically derived expectations for integrity across the lifespan. However, the rise in integrity around age 30 and subsequent dip in the 40’s may reflect changing attitudes across these decades of life. In particular, the integrity subscale includes items such as “I have reached my goals,” “I am proud of what I’ve done,” “I take responsibility for my actions,” and the reverse-coded item, “I am afraid of getting old.” The thirties have been a relatively neglected time of the lifespan, but this time of life, recently coined “established adulthood,” (Mehta et al., 2020), is a time of increased stability and success, as adults settle into career and family roles, and attain a degree of financial stability. This may be a time when adults feel a greater sense of accomplishment and pride compared to their emerging adulthood years. At the same time, the emerging health concerns and awareness of aging that characterize midlife (Lachman et al., 2015) have not yet set in for most established adults. Thus, it is conceivable that integrity, as measured by the IPD, does indeed increase slightly in the 30’s, with a slight decrease afterward. It is important to note that the magnitude of these changes we detected was small, relative to the larger increase in integrity across the 50’s and 60’s. Nonetheless, they point to possible salience of integrity at earlier stages of life than theoretically expected. Further research examining psychosocial development in established adulthood would help elucidate these effects.

Prior research has demonstrated differences by gender and birth cohort in Eriksonian psychosocial development (e.g., Fadjukoff et al., 2010 ; Whitbourne et al., 2009 ; Vandewater & Stewart, 2006 ), and the present study sheds additional light on how these demographic factors may influence psychosocial growth over time. First, we found that women tended to score slightly higher than men on intimacy, generativity, and integrity in emerging adulthood, and there were no gender differences in slope, suggesting that gender differences persisted over time. These differences may reflect underlying associations between gender and relevant personality traits. For example, meta-analytic evidence suggests that women tend to score higher on warmth and nurturance, two traits that are closely related to intimacy and generativity ( Costa, Terracciano, & McCrae, 2001 ). Birth cohort was unrelated to all outcomes except that later cohorts tended to have lower levels of ego integrity in emerging adulthood, consistent with past RALS research ( Whitbourne et al., 2009 ).

An important direction for future research is understanding how some individuals attained a high level of intimacy, generativity, and integrity earlier in life than expected. Given our findings that high levels of intimacy, generativity, and integrity appear to persist beyond emerging adulthood, promoting the acquisition of these psychosocial attributes in emerging adulthood may have a lasting positive effect across the lifespan.

The present findings point to identity development as one potential mechanism contributing to psychosocial maturity in emerging adulthood. Engaging in identity work may involve trying out different educational and career possibilities, developing friendships and romantic relationships, experimenting with different ideological, religious, and political views, and making lasting commitments in these areas ( Marcia, 1966 ). These same activities could also lead youth to grapple with the same issues that are central to the developmental tasks of intimacy, generativity, and integrity, including forming close bonds with significant others, promoting the well-being and growth of younger people, and contemplating one’s lasting impact on the world. For example, volunteering in one’s neighborhood and community may contribute to emerging adults’ identity development ( Pancer, Pratt, Hunsberger, & Alisat, 2007 ), and also to the development of generative concern ( Soucie, Jia, Zhu, & Pratt, 2018 ). Thus, the activities involved in identity development may also promote the development of intimacy, generativity, and integrity all during emerging adulthood.

Another possibility is that these psychosocial constructs may all reflect underlying dispositional traits, or attributes of personality that are relatively stable across the lifespan. For example, multiple studies have found correlations between generativity and the Big Five personality traits of extraversion, openness to experience, and emotional stability (the opposite of neuroticism) among middle-aged adults ( Bradley & Marcia, 1998 ; Cox, Wilt, Olson, & McAdams, 2010 ; De St. Aubin & McAdams, 1995 ; Peterson & Duncan, 2007 ; Van Hiel, Mervielde, & de Fruyt, 2006 ). The pattern we observed, where some participants were persistently high on all of the psychosocial constructs we examined, may simply reflect especially adaptive personality trait profiles among those individuals. Furthermore, there is evidence supporting the existence of a general factor of psychosocial development ( Dunkel et al., 2012 ; Dunkel & Harbke, 2017 ), a latent factor capturing the shared variance among all eight psychosocial constructs. This general psychosocial factor may reflect an overall ability to successfully navigate psychosocial challenges, and could drive simultaneous high scores across multiple psychosocial dimensions.

The present study revealed some limitations of the IPD, the questionnaire measure used to assess Eriksonian constructs in the RALS. Notably, internal consistency for the generativity subscale was quite low for some assessments. Our sensitivity analysis, using a modified version of the generativity subscale with problematic items removed, somewhat mitigates these concerns, as the findings were largely similar to the main analysis. However, future research replicating the present findings using alternative measures of the Eriksonian psychosocial constructs (e.g., the Eriksonian Psychosocial Stage Inventory; Rosenthal, Gurney, & Moore, 1981 ; the Loyola Generativity Scale; McAdams & de St. Aubin, 1992 ) are warranted. Though replicating the full forty-year longitudinal models may not be possible, replication of the cross-sectional effects and shorter-scale longitudinal studies may bolster support for the connections between identity, intimacy, generativity, and integrity.

An important limitation of the present sample is its homogeneity in terms of education, race, and social class. The RALS participants were recruited from among students at a private university, and their scores on the IPD indicate that they are in general relatively well-adjusted on most of Erikson’s psychosocial dimensions. Investigating similar questions among individuals who have especially low levels of identity resolution may reveal whether developmental trajectories unfold differently for individuals with substantially lower identity resolution in emerging adulthood. Thus, extending this work to clinical samples (e.g., individuals with borderline personality disorder and other mental health concerns characterized by low identity resolution; Wilkinson-Ryan & Westen, 2000 ) is an important direction for future study. As much of the foundational work on lifespan psychosocial development has relied on relatively highly educated samples (e.g., the Mills College study, Helson, 1967 ; the Radcliffe College study, Stewart, 1978 ), investigation of more diverse and representative samples is also needed. Evidence suggests, for example, that emerging adults who do not attend college tend to become parents earlier than college students, and have substantially different patterns of employment and financial dependence across their early twenties – all factors that may affect opportunities for identity development at this time of life ( Mitchell & Syed, 2015 ). In general, research on ego identity development among youth from racial/ethnic minority backgrounds and youth who do not attend college has been sparse, and the need for more work with diverse groups is a longstanding gap within the ego identity development literature ( Syed & Mitchell, 2013 ). Nonetheless, the RALS’ strengths – the inclusion of men and women from multiple birth cohorts, and five waves of assessments spanning nearly fifty years – make it a unique and valuable source of information on developmental sequencing of Eriksonian psychosocial stages.

The consequences of adolescent and emerging adulthood identity formation processes for later-life outcomes have been regularly asserted, but insufficiently tested ( Erikson, 1950 ; 1968 ; Vaillant & Milofsky, 1980 ; McLean & Syed, 2015 ). The present study investigated the association between emerging adulthood identity resolution and subsequent development through the Eriksonian psychosocial stages associated with adulthood, namely intimacy, generativity, and integrity. We found that higher identity resolution was associated with persistently high levels on each of these psychosocial constructs, whereas lower identity resolution predicted lower initial levels and gradual increases over time. These trajectories appeared to nearly converge by the time participants were in their sixties, suggesting that one’s emerging adulthood identity has less importance over time, and that individuals who struggled more with identity formation in emerging adulthood are able to make up for it later in life. Our findings support the growing body of literature questioning the strictly sequential, age-graded interpretation of Erikson’s psychosocial stage model (e.g., Whitbourne et al., 2009 ; Pratt et al., 2020 ). Nonetheless, it appears that successfully resolving the identity-related challenges of emerging adulthood may have a lasting, positive impact for intimacy, generativity, and integrity across the lifespan.

Supplementary Material

Supplemental material, acknowledgments.

Project information including preregistration is available at https://osf.io/38sz2/?view_only=57b2e0d1e629483d964af493ab80f6ed . This material is based on work supported by the Office of Academic Affiliations, Department of Veterans Affairs, through the Health Services Research and Development Advanced Fellowship, TPH 67-000, PI: Diana Burgess. The present analyses have not been previously published or presented. Prior publications based on the Rochester Adult Longitudinal Study dataset are included in the literature review of the present study.

1 The complete correlation matrix for attrition at each wave is available in Supplemental Table S1 .

2 Due to the low internal consistency of the generativity subscale, we fit an additional model for generativity, after removing two weakly correlated generativity items from the subscale. The results of this model are reported in Supplemental Table S6 . The results were substantively very similar to those found with the full generativity subscale.

3 The current findings are distinct from those of Sneed et al. (2012) in demonstrating the association between emerging adulthood levels of identity resolution and long-term trajectories of intimacy; further explanation can be found in the Supplemental Materials .

Contributor Information

Lauren L. Mitchell, Center for Care Delivery & Outcomes Research, Minneapolis VA Healthcare System.

Jennifer Lodi-Smith, Department of Psychology, Canisius College.

Erica N. Baranski, Department of Psychology, University of Houston.

Susan Krauss Whitbourne, Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, University of Massachusetts.

Arnett JJ (2000). Emerging adulthood: A theory of development from the late teens through the twenties . American Psychologist , 55 ( 5 ), 469–480. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Arnett JJ (2015). Identity development from adolescence to emerging adulthood: What we know and (especially) don’t know. In McLean KC & Syed M. (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of identity development (pp. 53–64). Oxford University Press. [ Google Scholar ]
Beyers W, & Seiffge-Krenke I. (2010). Does identity precede intimacy? Testing Erikson’s theory on romantic development in emerging adults of the 21st century . Journal of Adolescent Research , 25 ( 3 ), 387–415. [ Google Scholar ]
Bradley CL, & Marcia JE (1998). Generativity-stagnation: A five-category model . Journal of Personality , 66 ( 1 ), 39–64. [ Google Scholar ]
Carlsson J, Wängqvist M, & Frisén A. (2015). Identity development in the late twenties: A neverending story . Developmental Psychology , 51 , 334–345. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Chandler MJ, Lalonde CE, Sokol BW, & Hallett D. (2003). Personal persistence, identity development, and suicide: A study of native and non-native North American adolescents . Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development , 68 , 1–138. www.jstor.org/stable/1166217 [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Constantinople A. (1969). An Eriksonian measure of personality development in college students . Developmental Psychology , 1 , 357–372. [ Google Scholar ]
Costa PT, Terracciano A, & McCrae RR (2001). Gender differences in personality traits across cultures: robust and surprising findings . Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 81 ( 2 ), 322. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Cox KS, Wilt J, Olson B, & McAdams DP (2010). Generativity, the Big Five, and psychosocial adaptation in midlife adults . Journal of Personality , 78 ( 4 ), 1185–1208. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
De Haan LG, & MacDermid SM (1994). Is women’s identity achievement associated with the expression of generativity? Examining identity and generativity in multiple roles . Journal of Adult Development , 1 ( 4 ), 235–247. [ Google Scholar ]
De St. Aubin E, & McAdams DP (1995). The relations of generative concern and generative action to personality traits, satisfaction/happiness with life, and ego development . Journal of Adult Development , 2 ( 2 ), 99–112. [ Google Scholar ]
Dunkel CS, & Harbke C. (2017). A review of measures of Erikson’s stages of psychosocial development: Evidence for a general factor . Journal of Adult Development , 24 ( 1 ), 58–76. [ Google Scholar ]
Dunkel CS, Kim JK, & Papini DR (2012). The general factor of psychosocial development and its relation to the general factor of personality and life history strategy . Personality and Individual Differences , 52 ( 2 ), 202–206. [ Google Scholar ]
Einolf CJ (2014). Stability and change in generative concern: Evidence from a longitudinal survey . Journal of Research in Personality , 51 , 54–61. [ Google Scholar ]
Erikson EH (1950). Childhood and society . New York: Norton. [ Google Scholar ]
Erikson EH (1968). Identity: Youth and crisis . New York: Norton. [ Google Scholar ]
Fadjukoff P, Kokko K, & Pulkkinen L. (2010). Changing economic conditions and identity formation in adulthood . European Psychologist , 15 , 293–303. [ Google Scholar ]
Grimm KJ, Ram N, & Hamagami F. (2011). Nonlinear growth curves in developmental research . Child development , 82 ( 5 ), 1357–1371. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Helson R. (1967). Personality characteristics and developmental history of creative college women . Genetic Psychology Monographs , 76 , 205–256. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Hooper D, Coughlan J, & Mullen M. (2008). Structural equation modelling: Guidelines for determining model fit . Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods , 6 ( 1 ), 53–60. [ Google Scholar ]
Hu L, & Bentler PM (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indices in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives . Structural Equation Modeling , 6 , 1–55. [ Google Scholar ]
Klimstra TA, & Denissen JJ (2017). A theoretical framework for the associations between identity and psychopathology . Developmental Psychology , 53 ( 11 ), 2052. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Lodi-Smith J, Whitbourne SK, Virginia H, Kellogg A, & Kozlowski K. (2018). Psychosocial development and aging in the Rochester Adult Longitudinal Study . Innovation in Aging , 2 ( Suppl 1 ), 375. [ Google Scholar ]
Luyckx K, Klimstra TA, Duriez B, Van Petegem S, & Beyers W. (2013). Personal identity processes from adolescence through the late 20s: Age trends, functionality, and depressive symptoms . Social Development , 22 ( 4 ), 701–721. [ Google Scholar ]
Marcia JE (1966). Development and validation of ego-identity status . Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 3 ( 5 ), 551–558. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
McAdams DP, & de St Aubin ED (1992). A theory of generativity and its assessment through self-report, behavioral acts, and narrative themes in autobiography . Journal of personality and social psychology , 62 ( 6 ), 1003–1015. [ Google Scholar ]
McLean KC, & Syed M. (Eds.). (2015). The Oxford handbook of identity development . Oxford University Press. [ Google Scholar ]
Meeus W. (2011). The study of adolescent identity formation 2000–2010: A review of longitudinal research . Journal of Research on Adolescence , 21 ( 1 ), 75–94. [ Google Scholar ]
Mitchell LL, & Syed M. (2015). Does college matter for emerging adulthood? Comparing developmental trajectories of educational groups . Journal of Youth and Adolescence , 44 ( 11 ), 2012–2027. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Montgomery MJ (2005). Psychosocial intimacy and identity: From early adolescence to emerging adulthood . Journal of Adolescent Research , 20 ( 3 ), 346–374. [ Google Scholar ]
Orlofsky JL, Marcia JE, & Lesser IM (1973). Ego identity status and the intimacy versus isolation crisis of young adulthood . Journal of personality and social psychology , 27 ( 2 ), 211–219. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Pancer SM, Pratt M, Hunsberger B, & Alisat S. (2007). Community and political involvement in adolescence: What distinguishes the activists from the uninvolved? . Journal of Community Psychology , 35 ( 6 ), 741–759. [ Google Scholar ]
Peterson BE, & Duncan LE (2007). Midlife women’s generativity and authoritarianism: Marriage, motherhood, and 10 years of aging . Psychology and Aging , 22 ( 3 ), 411. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Pratt MW, & Lawford HL (2014). Early generativity and types of civic engagement in adolescence and emerging adulthood. In Padilla-Walker LM & Carlo G. (Eds.), Prosocial development: A multidimensional approach (pp. 410–436). Oxford University Press. [ Google Scholar ]
Pratt MW, Matsuba MK, Lawford HL, & Villar F. (2020). The Life Span Development of Generativity. In Jensen LA (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of moral development: An interdisciplinary perspective (pp. 366–386). Oxford University Press. [ Google Scholar ]
Preacher KJ (2010). Latent growth curve models. In Hancock GR, Mueller RO, & Stapleton LM (Eds.), The reviewer’s guide to quantitative methods in the social sciences (pp. 185–198). Routledge. [ Google Scholar ]
R Core Team (2018). R: A language and environment for statistical computing . R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. [ Google Scholar ]
Rosenthal DA, Gurney RM, & Moore SM (1981). From trust on intimacy: A new inventory for examining Erikson’s stages of psychosocial development . Journal of Youth and Adolescence , 10 ( 6 ), 525–537. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Rosseel Y. (2012). lavaan: An R Package for Structural Equation Modeling . Journal of Statistical Software , 48 , 1–36. [ Google Scholar ]
Rotenberg KJ, Schaut GB, & O’Connor BP (1993). The roles of identity development and psychosocial intimacy in marital success . Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology , 12 ( 2 ), 198–217. [ Google Scholar ]
Schwartz SJ, Zamboanga BL, Luyckx K, Meca A, & Ritchie RA (2013). Identity in emerging adulthood: Reviewing the field and looking forward . Emerging Adulthood , 1 ( 2 ), 96–113. [ Google Scholar ]
Schreiber JB, Nora A, Stage FK, Barlow EA, & King J. (2006). Reporting structural equation modeling and confirmatory factor analysis results: A review . The Journal of Educational Research , 99 ( 6 ), 323–337. [ Google Scholar ]
Seiffge-Krenke I, & Weitkamp K. (2020). How individual coping, mental health, and parental behavior are related to identity development in emerging adults in seven countries . Emerging Adulthood , 8 ( 5 ), 344–360. [ Google Scholar ]
Singer JD, & Willett JB (2003). Applied longitudinal data analysis . New York: Oxford University Press. [ Google Scholar ]
Sneed JR, Whitbourne SK, Schwartz SJ, & Huang S. (2012). The relationship between identity, intimacy, and midlife well-being: Findings from the Rochester Adult Longitudinal Study . Psychology and Aging , 27 ( 2 ), 318–323. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Sokol Y, & Eisenheim E. (2016). The relationship between continuous identity disturbances, negative mood, and suicidal ideation . The Primary Care Companion for CNS Disorders , 18 ( 1 ). Online publication. doi: 10.4088/PCC.15m01824 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Soucie KM, Jia F, Zhu N, & Pratt MW (2018). The codevelopment of community involvement and generative concern pathways in emerging and young adulthood . Developmental Psychology , 54 ( 10 ), 1971–1976. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Stewart AJ (1978). A longitudinal study of coping styles in self-defining and socially defined women . Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology , 46 ( 5 ), 1079–1084. [ Google Scholar ]
Stewart AJ, & Vandewater EA (1999). “ If I had it to do over again...”: Midlife review, midcourse corrections, and women’s well-being in midlife . Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 76 ( 2 ), 270. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Syed M, & Mitchell LL (2013). Race, ethnicity, and emerging adulthood: Retrospect and prospects . Emerging Adulthood 1 ( 2 ), 83–95. [ Google Scholar ]
Tomarken AJ, & Waller NG (2005). Structural equation modeling: Strengths, limitations, and misconceptions . Annual Review of Clinical Psychology , 1 , 31–65. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Vaillant GE, & Milofsky E. (1980). Natural history of male psychological health: IX. Empirical evidence for Erikson’s model of the life cycle . The American Journal of Psychiatry , 137 ( 11 ), 1348–1359. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Van Hiel A, Mervielde I, & De Fruyt F. (2006). Stagnation and generativity: Structure, validity, and differential relationships with adaptive and maladaptive personality . Journal of Personality , 74 ( 2 ), 543–574. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Van Hoof A, & Raaijmakers QA (2002). The spatial integration of adolescent identity: Its relation to age, education, and subjective well–being . Scandinavian Journal of Psychology , 43 ( 3 ), 201–212. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Vandewater EA, & Stewart AJ (2006). Paths to late midlife well-being for women and men: The importance of identity development and social role quality . Journal of Adult Development , 13 ( 2 ), 76–83. [ Google Scholar ]
Vandewater EA, Ostrove JM, & Stewart AJ (1997). Predicting women’s well-being in midlife: The importance of personality development and social role involvements . Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 72 ( 5 ), 1147. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Westen D, Betan E, & DeFife JA (2011). Identity disturbance in adolescence: Associations with borderline personality disorder . Development and Psychopathology , 23 ( 1 ), 305–313. DOI: 10.1017/S0954579410000817 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Whitbourne SK, Sneed JR, & Sayer A. (2009). Psychosocial development from college through midlife: A 34-year sequential study . Developmental Psychology , 45 , 1328–1340. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Whitbourne SK, & Tesch SA (1985). A comparison of identity and intimacy statuses in college students and alumni . Developmental Psychology , 21 ( 6 ), 1039–1044. 10.1037/0012-1649.21.6.1039 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Whitbourne SK, & Van Manen K-J (1996). Age differences and correlates of identity status from college through middle adulthood . Journal of Adult Development , 3 , 59–70. [ Google Scholar ]
Whitbourne SK, & Waterman AS (1979). Psychosocial development in young adulthood: Age and cohort comparisons . Developmental Psychology , 15 , 373–378. [ Google Scholar ]
Wilkinson-Ryan T, & Westen D. (2000). Identity disturbance in borderline personality disorder: An empirical investigation . American Journal of Psychiatry , 157 ( 4 ), 528–541. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Zucker AN, Ostrove JM, & Stewart AJ (2002). College-educated women’s personality development in adulthood: Perceptions and age differences . Psychology and Aging , 17 ( 2 ), 236–244. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]

IMAGES

Example of Embedded Identity in Journal Articles
(PDF) Chapter 1 Identity and Culture
(PDF) Dissociative Identity Disorder : A Pathophysiological Phenomenon
Implications of identity for scientists Research papers, journal
(PDF) How to Write an Original Research Article: A Guide for
How to Write a Research Article

VIDEO

DBM Chat Hour
Identity Analytics Market Report 2024
IRS Fraudster Audio Video
Still Untitled—The search for our true identity
Forming Your Personal Identity: A Guide to Self-Discovery and Growth
Discovering—and rediscovering—my identity

COMMENTS

Full article: The Role of Identity in Human Behavior Research: A
Many theories of motivation recognize a person's identity adds value to the prediction of behavior; albeit indirectly, through constructs such as social norms, self-efficacy, perceived behavioral control, and values. Recently, behavioral research has more directly assessed the influence of identity on behavior; however, it is unclear whether ...
Full article: Identities: A developmental social-psychological perspective
From Erikson's psychosocial theory to identity process-oriented models. Erikson's (Citation 1950, Citation 1968) psychosocial theory has inspired research on personal identity up to the present time (Schachter & Galliher, Citation 2018).A fundamental tenet of Erikson's view is that identity formation is a core task that individuals strive to address throughout their entire life span ...
The Development of Self and Identity in Adolescence
In summary, in research using functional neuroimaging, explicit self-evaluation as well as more indirect forms of social self-evaluation implicated in relational identity robustly engage the vmPFC and the rostral/perigenual ACC (as part of a broader network including the VS, TPJ, and dmPFC) in children and adolescents, often more so than in adults.
Identity Development in Adolescence and Adulthood
From Erikson's early writings, several broad approaches to identity theory and research have emerged, laying differential emphasis on the psychosocial, phenomenological, and the contextual nature of identity. This article has reviewed some of the writings and research that have sprung from the identity status model of James Marcia (1966, 1980 ...
What perspectives underlie 'researcher identity'? A review of two
Over the past two decades, identity has emerged as a concept framing studies of early career researcher experience. Yet, identity is an amorphous concept, understood and used in a range of ways. This systematic review aimed to unpack the underpinnings of the notion of researcher identity. The final sample consisted of 38 empirical articles published in peer-reviewed journals in the last 20 ...
Identities in and around organizations: Towards an identity work
There is an emergent identity work perspective that draws on multiple intertwined streams of established identities theorizing and identities-related research. This perspective is characterized loosely by five broad sets of assumptions: (i) selves are reflexive and identities actively worked on, both in soliloquy and social interaction; (ii) identities are multiple, fluid and rarely fully ...
Dynamics of Identity Development in Adolescence: A Decade in Review
In the current review, we discuss progress in the field of identity research between 2010 and 2020. One of the key developmental tasks in adolescence and young adulthood is to develop a coherent sense of self and identity (Erikson, 1968).Personal identity refers to one's sense of the person one genuinely is, including a subjective feeling of self‐sameness and continuity over contexts and time.
Identity development process and content: Toward an integrated and
This introductory summary provides an overview of the content of the special issue entitled "Identity Development Process and Content: Toward an Integrated and Contextualized Science of Identity." The 16 theoretical and empirical articles that comprise this special issue were selected to highlight innovative methodologies, theoretical integration, and multicultural perspectives on the ...
Full article: The Landscape of Identity Model: An Integration of
In recent years the interest in qualitative identity research has been growing, as can be seen in the programs of the International Society for Research on Identity conferences in 2017 and 2019 (ISRI, Citation 2020), and in the increasing number of qualitative studies on identity (among many others Carlsson et al., Citation 2015; Kunnen & Bosma ...
What perspectives underlie 'researcher identity'? A review of two
Yet, identity is an amorphous concept, understood and used in a range of ways. This systematic review aimed to unpack the underpinnings of the notion of researcher identity. The final sample ...
Identity, positionality and reflexivity: relevance and application to
Abstract. This article introduces the reader to the concepts of identity, positionality and reflexivity and outlines their relevance to research paramedics. We outline how a researcher's identity and positionality can influence all aspects of research, including the research question, study design, data collection and data analysis.
Advancing Identity Theory: Examining the Relationship between Activated
In supraliminal or "conscious" priming, a participant is exposed to priming stimuli (here, the moral identity characteristics) as part of a conscious task (Bargh and Chartrand 2000). 5 Following prior research on moral identity activation (Aquino et al. 2007), the task was for subjects to write a story about themselves using either the ...
(PDF) What is identity? A sociological perspective
National identity on the other hand is a person's identity or sense of belonging to one or more states or to one or more nations. Thus, Kehily (2009) argues that while identity plays a huge role ...
(PDF) Identity: Personal AND Social
Identity has been defined as "unitary" or. "multiple", "real" or "constructed", "stable" or "fluid", "personal" or "social", and in many other ways that often seem ...
Identity effects in social media
Identity cues appear ubiquitously alongside content in social media today. Some also suggest universal identification, with names and other cues, as a useful deterrent to harmful behaviours online.
PDF What Is Identity (As We Now Use the Word)?
ABSTRACT Thepaperundertakesanordinarylanguageanalysisofthecurrentmeaningsof\iden-tity,"acomplicatedandunclearconceptthatnonethelessplaysacentralroleinongoing
A Global Perspective on Gender Roles and Identity
Among the social determinants that affect the health and well-being of young people throughout the world, gender is a pivotal influence, with both subtle and overt, immediate as well as longer term influences on adolescent development, resources and opportunities, and ultimately, adolescent and adult health. Most societies are profoundly gendered; these gender roles and expectations affect ...
Research Guides: Research Impact: Your Researcher Identity
Your researcher identity is formed by combining all of your research outputs (e.g., articles, books, datasets, conference proceedings, blog posts, etc) and its impact that may be aligned with or act as an author profile. As a researcher, it is critical to have control in managing your researcher identity. Your researcher identifier can:
Dissociative identity disorder: out of the shadows at last?
(Mis)diagnosing DID. The combination of insufficient training in recognising trauma-related dissociation, limited exposure to accurate scientific information about DID, symptom similarities with other disorders (such as schizophrenia, bipolar disorder and borderline personality disorder) and the aetiology debate has led to a reluctance to consider a diagnosis of DID, leading to under- and ...
It Looks Like "Theirs": When and Why Human Presence in the Photo Lowers
The present research advances the current understanding by incorporating viewers' need for self-identity into their response model. Six studies, including an analysis of field data (14,725 Instagram photos by a top travel influencer) and five controlled experiments, find that the presence (vs. absence) of another human in the photo of an ...
Applying intersectionality in vision impairment research: A scoping
The way in which intersectionality theory was taken up in vision impairment research is described using three overarching themes including: (1) as a lens for the interpretation of findings; (2) as a general conceptual framework for the article; and (3) as a tool for data analysis.
Autistic identity: A systematic review of quantitative research
Autism can be considered both a personal and social identity. Identifying the factors contributing to positive Autistic identity development is crucial given the potential implications for mental health and wellbeing. In this systematic review, we aimed to synthesize quantitative literature on Autistic identity to identify the (individual and environmental) factors associated with Autistic ...
Identity
Identity: An International Journal of Theory and Research, under the sponsorship of the International Society for Research on Identity (ISRI), provides an interdisciplinary and international publication outlet for conceptual, empirical, and methodological developments and emerging trends in the field of identity research.. The Journal brings together leading research in identity undertaken by ...
Transgender athletes face an uncertain future at the Olympics as
Travers has received funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada for research related to transgender youth and from Sport Canada to fund research related to gender ...
The Lesser-Known Side of Harris's Identity: Asian American
A version of this article appears in print on , Section A, Page 11 of the New York edition with the headline: The Lesser-Known Side of Harris's Identity. Order Reprints | Today's Paper | Subscribe
Research Guides: Finding and Reading Journal Articles : Journal
A 20-page article may perfectly fit a researcher's needs. Sustaining that argument for 200 pages might be unnecessary -- or impossible. The quality of a research article and the legitimacy of its findings are verified by other scholars, prior to publication, through a rigorous evaluation method called peer-review. This seal of approval by other ...
At the Paris Olympics, AIN hides the identity of the few Russian and
PARIS (AP) — Exactly one week after thousands of athletes sailed through the opening ceremony at the Paris Olympics, a gold medal was finally won Friday by a member of the neutral collective of athletes.. Ivan Litvinovich was barred from boarding a boat on the River Seine — just like all 32 athletes from Russia and Belarus whose Olympic team identity has been made almost invisible because ...
Implications of Identity Resolution in Emerging Adulthood for Intimacy
Typically, adolescence and emerging adulthood are seen as an especially crucial time for identity development (Erikson, 1968; Arnett, 2015; Schwartz et al., 2013; Meeus, 2011; McLean & Syed, 2015).This is a time of life when youth have relatively ample opportunities and motivation to explore what kind of person they want to be, and what direction they would like their life to take (Arnett, 2000).
As Trump Attacks Her Identity, Harris Responds on Her Own Terms
Vice President Kamala Harris condemned former President Donald J. Trump's remarks. But she also made it clear she would not engage in a debate with a white man critiquing her Black identity.
Summer Reflections: What students are saying about SURE
I hope my research project provides a great learning experience for my graduate school ambitions. I have enjoyed the research project and am looking at completing more research in graduate school and potentially pursue a research-related career. ... Brian Pennington offers insights on multi-religious identity for Religious News Service article.

Article contents

Introduction

Erikson’s Psychosocial Orientation

Erikson’s Psychosocial Approach and Marcia’s Identity Status Model

Personality and Behavioral Correlates of the Identity Statuses

Self-Esteem

Locus of Control

Authoritarianism

Ego Development

Moral Reasoning

Additional Personality and Behavioral Variables

Relationships and the Identity Statuses

Identity Status Change from Adolescence Through Adulthood

Events Associated with Identity Status Change

Identity Development in Adulthood

What the Identity Statuses Mean

Conclusions

Further Reading

Related Articles

What perspectives underlie ‘researcher identity’? A review of two decades of empirical studies

Cite this article

Similar content being viewed by others

“Dilemmas” of Early Career Researchers from “Dilemmas” to Problems

Managing the Dual Identity: Practitioner and Researcher

Career Theory for Change: The Influences of Social Constructionism and Constructivism, and Convergence

Introduction

Framing the study

Dimensions of identity

Aim of review

Scope of the review

Search terms and article filtering

Descriptive characteristics of the studies

Meta-theoretical frameworks of studies

Dimensions to define identity

Individual versus social

Stability versus dynamism

Unity versus multiplicity

Thinking versus action

Relationship among dimensions and meta-theoretical frameworks in the researcher identity studies

Cluster 1. Transitioning among identities

Cluster 2. Balancing identity continuity and change

Cluster 3. Personal identity development through time

Cluster 4. Personal and stable identity

Emerging patterns across clusters

Perspectives on action

Interaction of dimensions and meta-theories

Limitations

Future research

Author information

Corresponding author

Additional information

Electronic supplementary material

Rights and permissions

About this article

Share this article

Identity: Personal AND Social

Identity effects in social media

Access options

Similar content being viewed by others

Realtime user ratings as a strategy for combatting misinformation: an experimental study

Users choose to engage with more partisan news than they are exposed to on Google Search

Friendship paradox biases perceptions in directed networks

Code availability

Acknowledgements

Author information

Contributions

Corresponding author

Ethics declarations

Peer review

Additional information

Supplementary information

Reporting Summary

About this article

Share this article

This article is cited by

Quick links

Research Impact

Your Researcher Identity

Researcher Identifiers

Other Researcher Identifiers