MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4239884024 · doi:10.22215/etd/2015-10623

Identity Development During Emerging Adulthood: Transitioning Through the University Experience

2015· dissertation· en· W4239884024 on OpenAlexaff
Lisa Menard

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicIdentity, Memory, and Therapy
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBelongingnessErikson's stages of psychosocial developmentIdentity formationPsychologyIdentity (music)Developmental psychologyPsychosocialSocial psychologyMaturity (psychological)Social identity approachPersonal identitySocial identity theorySelf-conceptSocial group

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although identity development is most active during late adolescence and emerging adulthood and post-secondary education is regarded as a normative experience for the majority of individuals in Westernized societies, there remains a lack of longitudinal research investigating identity development during the transition to university.In his formative writings, Erikson emphasized the need for researchers to account for the influence of social context and environment in the examination of identity development.The aim of this study was to explore the process of identity development within early emerging adulthood (18-24 years of age), during the transition to university using Eriksonian-measures.More specifically, this three-wave longitudinal study examined the influences of social capital (social belongingness and university fit), psychosocial maturity (ego strength development), coping strategy use, and perceived stress on identity development.The study included 771 first-year university students at large Canadian university, with 554 females and 217 males aged 18 to 24 (M = 18.35,SD = 1.47).Using the Identity Issues Inventory (I 3 , Côté and Roberts, 2005), identity formation was assessed from two broad perspectives, each with two developmental task domains: selfidentity with Integration and Differentiation; and social identity with the domains of Work roles and Worldview.Multivariate multiple regressions, with interaction terms, were conducted to examine identity development, during the first year of university, after controlling for incoming levels of identity formation in each of the four task domains (Integration, Differentiation, Work roles, and Worldview).Research findings highlighted the importance of social belongingness, perceived fit, and psychosocial maturity, in particular, as capital resources that were supportive of identity development during the first year of university.In addition, participants' perceived levels of stress were found to impede identity formation in both phases of the study (Time1-2, Time 2-3).Finally, the results highlighted some unexpected gender differences in the identity development of university students.Evidence from the present study would suggest that it is from within this complex social context that emerging adults must develop a distinct, cohesive, and adult sense of self.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0000.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.027
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.311 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicIdentity, Memory, and TherapyFrench-language works237,207