Extending the Dark Side of Identity Processes With Identity Distress
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Latent profile analysis of the dimensions of identity scale (DIDS) provides a person-centered configuration of adaptive (commitment, identification with commitment; exploration in breadth and in depth) and maladaptive (ruminative exploration) identity processes. The DIDS focuses on the future domain in the present. In this study DIDS profile analysis was extended to include the Identity Distress Scale (IDS), an affective index of uncertainty and difficulties with identity issues in general content areas relevant to young adults and its impact on adjustment. Identity distress is conceptualized on a continuum from adaptive to dysfunctional in relation to identity development. Its inclusion with identity processes was expected to provide a more nuanced description of the person-centered identity profiles. METHODS: Participants were 914 students (mdn = 19 years; 79.6% women) at a university located in a nonmetropolitan city in the prairie provinces of Canada. During 2017 and 2018 students completed an online survey that included the DIDS, IDS, and various standardized measures of identity, mental health, and adjustment at university. RESULTS: The findings revealed four latent profiles: Carefree Diffusion (6.9%), Troubled Diffusion (24.8%), Achievement (28.2%), and Undifferentiated (40.1%) but neither Foreclosure nor Moratorium were found. These results are consistent with variations in the profiles across other countries and contexts. Expected associations were supported between the profiles and most outcome measures. The low incidence of adaptive identity processes notably exploration was considered in terms of culture and context. CONCLUSIONS: This study adds to the complexity of individual pathways and contextual differences in identity development.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".