Although multiple personal identity models have been proposed since Erikson’s pioneering conceptualizations, there is a lack of studies comparing the existing models. The present investigation aimed at reducing the 21 personal identity scales on the basic dimensions of identity in emerging adults. The study sample encompassed 385 participants (78.4% female), ages ranging from 18 to 29 years (M = 21.60, SD = 2.73). The psychometric properties of all the instruments used here were shown to be favourable in the Serbian context. The method used here is “bass-ackwards” sequential factors Principal Component Analysis. This method yielded five components: General Identity Factor, Firm Commitments, Deliberate Identity Construction, Immature Identity Style, and Deliberate Exploration. External correlates (internal locus of control, self-esteem, anxiety, and depression) of the five dimensions are meaningful and point to their (mal) adaptive nature. The study concludes with the limitations, especially pertaining to the general factor of identity (its possible artefactual nature).
AdamsG. R.MarshallS. K. (1996). A developmental social psychology of identity: Understanding the person-in-context. Journal of Adolescence, 19(5), 429–442. https://doi.org/10.1006/jado.1996.0041
2.
ArnettJ. J. (2000). Emerging adulthood: A theory of development from the late teens through the twenties. American Psychologist, 55(5), 469–480. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066x.55.5.469
3.
BalistreriE.Busch-RossnagelN. A.GeisingerK. F. (1995). Development and preliminary validation of the ego identity process questionnaire. Journal of Adolescence, 18(2), 179–192. https://doi.org/10.1006/jado.1995.1012
4.
BennionL. D.AdamsG. R. (1986). A revision of the extended version of the objective measure of ego identity status: An identity instrument for use with late adolescents. Journal of Adolescent Research, 1(2), 183–197. https://doi.org/10.1177/074355488612005
5.
BerzonskyM. D. (1988). Self-theorists, identity status, and social cognition. In LapsleyD. K.PowerF. C. (Eds.), Self, ego, and identity (pp. 243–262). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-7834-5_12
BerzonskyM. D. (2004). Identity processing style, self-construction, and personal epistemic assumptions: A social-cognitive perspective. European Journal of Developmental Psychology, 1(4), 303–315. https://doi.org/10.1080/17405620444000120
8.
BerzonskyM. D. (2011). A social-cognitive perspective on identity construction. In SchwartzS. J.LuyckxK.VignolesV. L. (Eds.), Handbook of identity theory and research (pp. 55–76). Springer Science + Business Media. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-7988-9_3
9.
BerzonskyM. D.SoenensB.LuyckxK.SmitsI.PapiniD. R.GoossensL. (2013). Development and validation of the revised identity style inventory (ISI-5): Factor structure, reliability, and validity. Psychological Assessment, 25(3), 893–904. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0032642
10.
BosmaH. A.KunnenE. (2001). Determinants and mechanisms in ego identity development: A review and synthesis. Developmental Review, 21(1), 39–66. https://doi.org/10.1006/drev.2000.0514
11.
BrownT. A. (2015). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research (2nd ed.). The Guilford Press.
12.
BrowneM. W.CudeckR. (1993). Alternate ways of assessing model fit. In BollenK. A.LongJ. S. (Eds.), Testing structural equation models (pp. 136–162). Sage.
13.
CaspiA.HoutsR. M.BelskyD. W.Goldman-MellorS. J.HarringtonH.IsraelS.MeierM. H.RamrakhaS.ShalevI.PoultonR.MoffittT. E. (2013). The p factor: One general psychopathology factor in the structure of psychiatric disorders?Clinical Psychological Science: A Journal of the Association for Psychological Science, 2(2), 119–137. https://doi.org/10.1177/2167702613497473
CôtéJ. E. (2002). The role of identity capital in the transition to adulthood: The individualization thesis examined. Journal of Youth Studies, 5(2), 117–134. https://doi.org/10.1080/13676260220134403
16.
CôtéJ. E. (2016). The identity capital model: A handbook of theory, methods, and findings. [Unpublished manuscript]. Department of Sociology, The University of Western Ontario.
17.
CôtèJ. E.SchwartzS. J. (2002). Comparing psychological and sociological approaches to identity: Identity status, identity capital, and the individualization process. Journal of Adolescence, 25(6), 571–586. https://doi.org/10.1006/jado.2002.0511
18.
CrocettiE.RubiniM.MeeusW. (2007). Capturing the dynamics of identity formation in various ethnic groups: Development and validation of a three‐dimensional model. Journal of Adolescence, 31(2), 207–222. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2007.09.002
19.
CrocettiE.SchwartzS. J.FermaniA.KlimstraT.MeeusW. (2012). A cross-national study of identity status in Dutch and Italian adolescents. European Psychologist, 17(3), 171–181. https://doi.org/10.1027/1016-9040/a000076
20.
CrocettiE.SchwartzS. J.FermaniA.MeeusW. (2010). The Utrecht-management of identity commitments scale (U-MICS): Italian validation and cross-national comparisons. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 26(3), 172–186. https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759/a000024
21.
CrocettiE.ScrignaroM.SicaL. S.MagrinM. E. (2012). Correlates of identity configurations: Three studies with adolescent and emerging adult cohorts. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 41(6), 732–748. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-011-9702-2
22.
CrocettiE.SicaL. S.SchwartzS. J.SerafiniT.MeeusW. (2010). The functions of identity scale: Validation in Italian late adolescents and emerging adults. TPM - Testing, Psychometrics, Methodology in Applied Psychology, 17(2), 55–71.
23.
CrocettiE.SicaL. S.SchwartzS. J.SerafiniT.MeeusW. (2013). Identity styles, dimensions, statuses, and functions: Making connections among identity conceptualizations. European Review of Applied Psychology, 63(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erap.2012.09.001
24.
DaviesS. E.ConnellyB. S.OnesD. S.BirklandA. S. (2015). The general factor of personality: The “Big One,” a self-evaluative trait, or a methodological gnat that won’t go away?Personality and Individual Differences, 81, 13–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2015.01.006
25.
DimitrovaR.HatanoK.SugimuraK.Ferrer-WrederL. (2019) (In this issue). TheErikson Psychosocial Stage Inventory in adolescent samples: Factorial validity and equivalence of identity as measured from the United States and Japan. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 35(5), 680–684. https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759/a000456
26.
EriksonE. H. (1968). Identity: Youth and crisis. Norton & Co.
27.
EriksonE. H. (1980). Identity and the life cycle. W W Norton & Co.
28.
FabrigarL. R.WegenerD. T. (2012). Exploratory factor analysis. Oxford University Press.
29.
FaulF.ErdfelderE.LangA.-G.BuchnerA. (2007). G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39(2), 175–191. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193146
30.
GoldbergL. R. (2006). Doing it all bass-ackwards: The development of hierarchical factor structures from the top down. Journal of Research in Personality, 40(4), 347–358. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2006.01.001
31.
GolinoH.ShiD.ChristensenA. P.GarridoL. E.NietoM. D.SadanaR.ThiyagarajanJ. A.Martinez-MolinaA. (2020). Investigating the performance of exploratory graph analysis and traditional techniques to identify the number of latent factors: A simulation and tutorial. Psychological Methods, 25(3), 292–320. https://doi.org/10.1037/met0000255
GuberinićM.ĆirovićN.Opsenica KostićJ.MitrovićM.JankovićI.Spasić ŠneleM. (2025). Functions of identity scale: Validation in Serbian emerging adults. Psihologija. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.2298/PSI240210031G
34.
HornJ. L. (1965). A rationale and test for the number of factors in factor analysis. Psychometrika, 30(2), 179–185. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02289447
35.
HuL.-T.BentlerP. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118
36.
HudsonG.AlexanderP. C. (2024). EGAnet: Exploratory graph analysis – A framework for estimating the number of dimensions in multivariate data using network psychometrics. R package version 2.0.5. https://r-ega.net
37.
IlićM.RokvićN. M. (2021) Adaptacija skale sinteze identiteta (EPSI) [Paper presentation] 69. Congress of Serbian Psychologists.
KerpelmanJ. L.PittmanJ. F.LamkeL. K. (1997). Toward a microprocess perspective on adolescent identity development. Journal of Adolescent Research, 12(3), 325–346. https://doi.org/10.1177/0743554897123002
40.
KotovR.KruegerR. F.WatsonD.AchenbachT. M.AlthoffR. R.BagbyR. M.BrownT. A.CarpenterW. T.CaspiA.ClarkL. A.EatonN. R.ForbesM. K.ForbushK. T.GoldbergD.HasinD.HymanS. E.IvanovaM. Y.LynamD. R.MarkonK.WrightA. G. C. (2017). The hierarchical taxonomy of psychopathology (HiTOP): A dimensional alternative to traditional nosologies. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 126(4), 454–477. https://doi.org/10.1037/abn0000258
41.
KroenkeK.SpitzerR. L.WilliamsJ. B. W. (2001). The PHQ-9: Validity of a brief depression severity measure. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 16(9), 606–613. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1525-1497.2001.016009606.x
42.
KrogerJ.MarciaJ. E. (2011). The identity statuses: Origins, meanings, and interpretations. In SchwartzS. J.LuyckxK.VignolesV. L. (Eds.), Handbook of identity theory and research (pp. 31–53). Springer Science + Business Media. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-7988-9_2đ
43.
LiC. (2016). The performance of ML, DWLS, and ULS estimation with robust corrections in structural equation models with ordinal variables. Psychological Methods, 21(3), 369–387. https://doi.org/10.1037/met0000093
LoehlinJ. C.GoldbergL. R. (2014). Do personality traits conform to lists or hierarchies?Personality and Individual Differences, 70, 51–56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2014.06.018
47.
LuyckxK.GoossensL.SoenensB. (2006). A developmental contextual perspective on identity construction in emerging adulthood: Change dynamics in commitment formation and commitment evaluation. Developmental Psychology, 42(2), 366–380. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.42.2.366
48.
LuyckxK.GoossensL.SoenensB.BeyersW. (2005). Unpacking commitment and exploration: Preliminary validation of an integrative model of late adolescent identity formation. Journal of Adolescence, 29(3), 361–378. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2005.03.008
49.
LuyckxK.SchwartzS. J.BerzonskyM. D.SoenensB.VansteenkisteM.SmitsI.GoossensL. (2008). Capturing ruminative exploration: Extending the four-dimensional model of identity formation in late adolescence. Journal of Research in Personality, 42(1), 58–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2007.04.004
50.
LuyckxK.SchwartzS. J.GoossensL.BeyersW.MissottenL. (2011). Processes of personal identity formation and evaluation. In SchwartzS. J.LuyckxK.VignolesV. L. (Eds.), Handbook of identity theory and research (pp. 31–53). Springer Science + Business Media. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-7988-9_4
51.
MannerströmR.HautamäkiA.LeikasS. (2016). Identity status among young adults: Validation of the dimensions of identity development scale (DIDS) in a Finnish sample. Nordic Psychology, 69(3), 195–213. https://doi.org/10.1080/19012276.2016.1245156
52.
MarciaJ. E. (1966). Development and validation of ego-identity status. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 3(5), 551–558. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0023281
53.
MarciaJ. E. (1967). Ego identity status: Relationship to change in self-esteem, “general maladjustment,” and authoritarianism1. Journal of Personality, 35(1), 118–133. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.1967.tb01419.x
54.
MarciaJ. E. (1993). The ego identity status approach to ego identity. In MarciaJ. E.WatermanA. S.MattesonD. R.ArcherS. L.OrlofskyJ. L. (Eds.), Ego identity: A handbook for psychosocial research (pp. 3–21). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4613-8330-7_1
55.
MarinkovićB.BorovićL. (2022). Personality traits and identity status of adolescents: A person-centered approach. ГОДИШЊАК ЗА ПСИХОЛОГИЈУ, 19(1), 101–116. https://doi.org/10.46630/gpsi.19.2022.06
56.
MarshH.MorinA.ParkerP.KaurG. (2014) (In this issue). ExploratoryStructural Equation Modeling: An Integration of the Best Features of Exploratory and Confirmatory Factor Analysis. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 10, 85–110. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-032813-153700
57.
MastrotheodorosS.Motti-StefanidiF. (2016). Dimensions of identity development scale (DIDS): A test of longitudinal measurement invariance in Greek adolescents. European Journal of Developmental Psychology, 14(5), 605–617. https://doi.org/10.1080/17405629.2016.1241175
58.
McNeishD.AnJ.HancockG. R. (2018). The thorny relation between measurement quality and fit index cutoffs in latent variable models. Journal of Personality Assessment, 100(1), 43–52. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223891.2017.1281286
59.
MeeusW. (1996). Studies on identity development in adolescence: An overview of research and some new data. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 25(5), 569–598. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf01537355
60.
MeeusW.IedemaJ.MaassenG. H. (2002). Commitment and exploration as mechanisms of identity formation. Psychological Reports, 90(3), 771–785. https://doi.org/10.2466/pr0.2002.90.3.771
61.
MeeusW.Van De SchootR.KeijsersL.SchwartzS. J.BranjeS. (2010). On the progression and stability of adolescent identity formation: A five‐wave longitudinal study in early-to-middle and middle-to-late adolescence. Child Development, 81(5), 1565–1581. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2010.01492.x
62.
MusekJ. (2007). A general factor of personality: Evidence for the Big One in the five-factor model. Journal of Research in Personality, 41(6), 1213–1233. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2007.02.003
63.
RevelleW. (2024). psych: Procedures for psychological, psychometric, and personality research. Northwestern University. R package version 2.4.6. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=psych
64.
RevelleW.WiltJ. (2013) (In this issue). Thegeneral factor of personality: A general critique. Journal of Research in Personality, 47(5), 493–504. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2013.04.012
65.
RivnyákA.JárdaháziE.AratóN.PéleyB.LángA. (2022). The assessment of dual-cycle identity models among secondary school students: The Hungarian adaptation of DIDS and U-MICS. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 13, Article 804529. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2022.804529
66.
RokvićN. (2019). The validation of the Serbian version of the general anxiety disorder scale (GAD7): A pilot study. Engrami, 41(2), 68–79. https://doi.org/10.5937/engrami1902068r
67.
RokvicN.KarataşS.CrocettiE. (2021). Validation of the Serbian version of the Utrecht-management of identity commitments scale (U-MICS) in an adult population. Identity, 22(4), 326–336. https://doi.org/10.1080/15283488.2021.1913166
68.
RokvićN. M.JovanovićT. (2021). Adaptacija skale Dimenzije razvoja identiteta (DIDS) [Paper presentation] 69. Congress of Serbian Psychologists.
69.
RokvićN. M.JovovićR. (2021). Validacija Skale rezolucije identiteta (Identity stage resolution index, ISRI) [Paper presentation] 69. Congress of Serbian Psychologists.
70.
RosenbergM. (1965). Society and the adolescent self-image. Princeton University Press.
71.
RosenthalD. A.GurneyR. M.MooreS. M. (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. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02087944
72.
RosseelY. (2012). lavaan: An R package for structural equation modeling. Journal of Statistical Software, 48(2), 1–36. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v048.i02
SchmittD. P.AllikJ. (2005). Simultaneous administration of the Rosenberg self-esteem scale in 53 nations: Exploring the universal and culture-specific features of global self-esteem. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89(4), 623–642. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.89.4.623
75.
SchmittT. A.SassD. A.ChappelleW.ThompsonW. (2018). Selecting the “best” factor structure and moving measurement validation forward: An illustration. Journal of Personality Assessment, 100(4), 345–362. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223891.2018.1449116
76.
SchwartzS. J. (2001). The evolution of Eriksonian and, Neo-Eriksonian identity theory and research: A review and integration. Identity, 1(1), 7–58. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532706xschwartz
77.
SchwartzS. J. (2007). The structure of identity consolidation: Multiple correlated constructs or one superordinate construct?Identity, 7(1), 27–49. https://doi.org/10.1080/15283480701319583
78.
SchwartzS. J.ZamboangaB. L.WangW.OlthuisJ. V. (2009). Measuring identity from an Eriksonian perspective: Two sides of the same coin?Journal of Personality Assessment, 91(2), 143–154. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223890802634266
SerafiniT. E.MaitlandS. B. (2013). Validating the functions of identity scale: Addressing methodological and conceptual matters. Psychological Reports, 112(1), 160–183. https://doi.org/10.2466/03.07.20.pr0.112.1.160-183
81.
SharpC.WrightA. G. C.FowlerJ. C.FruehB. C.AllenJ. G.OldhamJ.ClarkL. A. (2015). The structure of personality pathology: Both general (‘g’) and specific (‘s’) factors?Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 124(2), 387–398. https://doi.org/10.1037/abn0000033
82.
SpitzerR. L.KroenkeK.WilliamsJ. B. W.LöweB. (2006). A brief measure for assessing generalized anxiety disorder. Archives of Internal Medicine, 166(10), 1092–1097. https://doi.org/10.1001/archinte.166.10.1092
83.
SubotićS.KneževićI.DimitrijevićS.MiholjčićD.ŠmitS.KaraćM.MijatovićJ. (2015) (In this issue). The factor structure of the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) in a nonclinical sample. In SubotićS. (Ed.), ZBORNIK RADOVA: MEĐUNARODNA KONFERENCIJA O DRUŠTVENOM I TEHNOLOŠKOM RAZVOJU (SVESKA I) (pp. 20–28). Univerzitet za poslovni inženjering i menadžment Banja Luka.
84.
TrapnellP. D.CampbellJ. D. (1999). Private self-consciousness and the five-factor model of personality: Distinguishing rumination from reflection. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76(2), 284–304. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.76.2.284
85.
Van BorkR.EpskampS.RhemtullaM.BorsboomD.Van Der MaasH. L. J. (2017). What is the p-factor of psychopathology? Some risks of general factor modeling. Theory & Psychology, 27(6), 759–773. https://doi.org/10.1177/0959354317737185
86.
VelicerW. F.EatonC. A.FavaJ. L. (2000). Construct explication through factor or component analysis: A review and evaluation of alternative procedures for determining the number of factors or components. In GoffinR. D.HelmesE. (Eds.), Problems and solutions in human assessment (pp. 41–71). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-4397-8_3
87.
VignolesV. L.SchwartzS. J.LuyckxK. (2011). Introduction: Toward an integrative view of identity. In SchwartzS. J.LuyckxK.VignolesV. L. (Eds.), Handbook of identity theory and research (pp. 31–53). Springer Science + Business Media. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-7988-9_1
88.
VosylisR.ErentaitėR.CrocettiE. (2017). Global versus domain-specific identity processes. Emerging Adulthood, 6(1), 32–41. https://doi.org/10.1177/2167696817694698
89.
WattsA. L.MakolB. A.PalumboI. M.De Los ReyesA.OlinoT. M.LatzmanR. D.DeYoungC. G.WoodP. K.SherK. J. (2021). How robust is the p factor? Using multitrait-multimethod modeling to inform the meaning of general factors of youth psychopathology. Clinical Psychological Science: A Journal of the Association for Psychological Science, 10(4), 640–661. https://doi.org/10.1177/21677026211055170
90.
ZimmermannG.Lannegrand-WillemsL.Safont-MottayC.CannardC. (2013). Testing new identity models and processes in French-speaking adolescents and emerging adults students. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 44(1), 127–141. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-013-0005-7
91.
ZimmermannG.MahaimE. B.MantzouranisG.GenoudP. A.CrocettiE. (2012). Brief report: The identity style inventory (ISI‐3) and the Utrecht‐management of identity commitments scale (U‐MICS): Factor structure, reliability, and convergent validity in French‐speaking university students. Journal of Adolescence, 35(2), 461–465. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2010.11.013
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
