Validating the Functions of Identity Scale: Addressing Methodological and Conceptual Matters

Abstract

Various studies have examined the validity of the Functions of Identity Scale; the current study addressed gaps in previous works. Its three main goals were to revise the Control subscale and establish its construct validity, to assess the structural validity of a five-factor model, and to establish the external validity of the subscales. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was employed with a sample of 422 female and 107 male undergraduate students from two universities in Ontario, Canada. The analysis supported the construct validity of the revised five-factor measurement model and the new Personal Control factor. The external validity of each of the subscales was tested, and scale items were revised to increase clarity and readability (to a Grade 5.5 reading level). Rigorous validity testing, strong psychometric properties, low reading level, and a novel focus on the outer workings of identity formation make this scale an attractive addition to current identity measures.

Future-oriented or present-focused? The role of social support and identity styles on ‘futuring’ in Italian late adolescents and emerging adults

“…Individuals with a diffuse-avoidant style tend to operate in a hedonistic, situationspecific fashion (Berzonsky 1990) and, as a consequence, could be seen as 'presentfocused.' Peer support may operate a way that serves to deepen a young-person's diffuseavoidant identity style, which is characterized by procrastination or avoidance of the type of self-related processing (Berzonsky 1990) of which goal-setting and planning for the future are central (Serafini and Adams 2002;Serafini and Maitland 2013). In short, informational and diffuse-avoidant identity styles' effects on futuring are enhanced by the perceived support of friends.…”

“…In order to measure the futuring construct described in this study, we drew upon the scale construction work of Serafini and Adams (2002) and Serafini and Maitland (2013). We combined two subscales (goals and future) of the Italian version of the Functions of Identity Scale (Crocetti et al 2010), with three items measuring goals and three items measuring future.…”

“…From future orientation to 'futuring' (the identity functions model) Although the construct of future orientation has been analyzed from several points of view and by various authors (e.g., Luyckx, Goossens, and Soenens 2006;Markus and Nurius 1986;Seginer, 2008;Waterman, 1993;Zimbardo and Boyd 1999), this study refers to future as a function of identity as first conceptualized by Adams and Marshall (1996) and later expanded by Serafini and Adams (2002) and Serafini and Maitland (2013). Within this framework, future orientation is one of basic functions that identity serves.…”

Functions of Identity in the Context of Being a Student: Development and Validation of the Functions of Student Identity Scale

“…Adolescents with an achieved identity have been shown to have lower levels of external locus of control and higher levels of internal locus of control (Abraham, 1983;Lillevoll, Kroger, & Martinussen, 2013). Similarly, achieved identity has been linked to selfefficacy (Serafini & Maitland, 2013), which implies an internal attribution of success.…”

“…Several studies using exploratory (Serafini & Adams, 2002, Study 1) and confirmatory (Crocetti, Sica, Schwartz, Serafini, & Meeus, 2010;Demir, 2011, Serafini & Maitland, 2013 factor analyses have shown English, Italian, and Turkish versions of this instrument conform to a correlated five-factor structure, corresponding to the five functions of identity, although note that only one study tested a higher-order model (Serafini & Maitland, 2013) . The five subscales of the FIS have been shown to have good internal consistency (.69 < α > .89 ;Serafini & Adams, 2002, Study 1).…”