The Structure of Identity Dysfunction in Self-Report Measures

被引:3
作者
Nielsen, Sienna R. [1 ]
Wright, Aidan G. C. [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Michigan, Dept Psychol, Ann Arbor, MI 48109 USA
[2] Univ Michigan, Eisenberg Family Depress Ctr, Ann Arbor, MI 48104 USA
关键词
BORDERLINE-PERSONALITY-DISORDER; MCLEAN SCREENING INSTRUMENT; INTERPERSONAL PROBLEMS; INCREMENTAL VALIDITY; EMOTION REGULATION; CIRCUMPLEX SCALES; VALIDATION; DISTURBANCE; CONSTRUCTION; RELIABILITY;
D O I
10.1080/00223891.2024.2362982
中图分类号
B849 [应用心理学];
学科分类号
040203 ;
摘要
Identity dysfunction is considered core to psychopathology, contributing to emotional and interpersonal problems across psychiatric diagnoses. Despite its centrality in theories of personality and psychopathology, the empirical research on the structure of identity dysfunction is fragmented by a plethora of self-report measures assessing varied domains of identity dysfunction. This project examines conceptual domains of identity dysfunction in self-report assessments, with the goal of elucidating a clear structure of identity dysfunction to advance both theory and measurement. Toward this aim, we a) investigate the factor structure of identity dysfunction in existing self-report measures, using exploratory factor analysis and b) examine relationships between identity dysfunction and closely related constructs, using exploratory structural equation modeling. We assess responses from 632 young adults to 17 commonly used identity functioning self-report measures. In a series of exploratory factor analyses, we identified four content-domains of Identity Dysfunction (Self-Alienation, Susceptibility to External Influence, Self-Dysregulation, and Contingent Self-Esteem) and three content domains of Identity Clarity (Self-Consistency, Reflective Functioning, and Authentic Living). These content domains were largely well-represented by a single factor. In a series of exploratory structural equation models, emergent factors related similarly to personality, emotion dysregulation, and values and problems in interpersonal relationships.
引用
收藏
页码:12 / 27
页数:16
相关论文
共 50 条
[21]   Responsiveness of Self-Report Measures in Individuals With Vertigo, Dizziness, and Unsteadiness [J].
Friscia, Lauren A. ;
Morgan, Michael T. ;
Sparto, Patrick J. ;
Furman, Joseph M. ;
Whitney, Susan L. .
OTOLOGY & NEUROTOLOGY, 2014, 35 (05) :884-888
[22]   Reliability and Validity of Two Self-Report Measures of Cognitive Flexibility [J].
Johnco, Carly ;
Wuthrich, Viviana M. ;
Rapee, Ronald M. .
PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT, 2014, 26 (04) :1381-1387
[23]   How reliable are self-report measures of mileage, violations and crashes? [J].
af Wahlberg, A. E. ;
Dorn, L. .
SAFETY SCIENCE, 2015, 76 :67-73
[24]   Self-report measures of secure attachment in adulthood: A systematic review [J].
Justo-Nunez, Miranda ;
Morris, Lydia ;
Berry, Katherine .
CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGY & PSYCHOTHERAPY, 2022, 29 (06) :1812-1842
[25]   Perceptions of Gender Differences in Self-Report Measures of Emotional Intelligence [J].
Lopez-Zafra, Esther ;
Gartzia, Leire .
SEX ROLES, 2014, 70 (11-12) :479-495
[26]   Calibration of Self-Report Measures of Physical Activity and Sedentary Behavior [J].
Welk, Gregory J. ;
Beyler, Nicholas K. ;
Kim, Youngwon ;
Matthews, Charles E. .
MEDICINE AND SCIENCE IN SPORTS AND EXERCISE, 2017, 49 (07) :1473-1481
[27]   Self-Report Measures of Psychopathy: What is their Role in Forensic Assessments? [J].
Kelsey, Katherine R. ;
Rogers, Richard ;
Robinson, Emily V. .
JOURNAL OF PSYCHOPATHOLOGY AND BEHAVIORAL ASSESSMENT, 2015, 37 (03) :380-391
[28]   Depressive Personality Disorder: A Comparison of Three Self-Report Measures [J].
Miller, Joshua D. ;
Tant, Adam ;
Bagby, R. Michael .
ASSESSMENT, 2010, 17 (02) :230-240
[29]   Athlete Self-Report Measures in Research and Practice: Considerations for the Discerning Reader and Fastidious Practitioner [J].
Saw, Anna E. ;
Kellmann, Michael ;
Main, Luana C. ;
Gastin, Paul B. .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SPORTS PHYSIOLOGY AND PERFORMANCE, 2017, 12 :127-135
[30]   Assessment of mindfulness by self-report [J].
Baer, Ruth .
CURRENT OPINION IN PSYCHOLOGY, 2019, 28 :42-48