Occupational identity development, school performance, and social support in adolescence: findings of a Dutch study.

Meeus, Wim

INTRODUCTION

According to Erikson (1968), the most important developmental task in adolescence is the formation of an identity. Marcia's (1966) identity status model is held to be the major elaboration of Erikson's views on identity formation in adolescence (Cote & Levine, 1988). Identity, Marcia suggests, is an ego structure--an internal, self-constructed and dynamic organization of aspirations, skills, beliefs, and individual history.

Following Erikson, Marcia looks upon adolescence as the period in which youngsters experience an identity crisis, which they solve by making choices regarding their future in a number of life domains. Crisis and commitment are the core variables in Marcia's identity status model. These variables make it possible to distribute adolescents over four identity statuses. Identity diffusion indicates that the adolescent has made no commitment as yet regarding a specific developmental task and may or may not have experienced a crisis in that domain. Foreclosure holds that the adolescent has made a commitment without having experienced a crisis. In Moratorium, the adolescent is in a state of crisis and has made no commitment or at best an unclear one. Identity achievement signifies that the adolescent has surmounted the crisis and made a commitment.

Table 1.
Marcia's identity status model

 IDENTITY FORECLOSURE MORATORIUM IDENTITY
 DIFFUSION
ACHIEVEMENT

CRISIS/
EXPLORATION yes or no no actual yes, past

COMMITMENT no yes unclear yes

Reviews of research using Marcia's paradigm (Marcia, 1980; Waterman, 1982) indicate that the identity statuses can be divided into two groups: identity achievement and moratorium are generally associated with positive characteristics (e.g., high levels of self-esteem, autonomy, reasoning in terms of moral values), whereas foreclosure and identity diffusion are associated with negative characteristics (e.g., low levels of self-esteem, autonomy, reasoning). While there are exceptions (cf. Meeus, 1991), overall the division is valid (see Marcia, 1980, and Archer & Waterman, 1988, for a discussion of whether the various identity status categories for men and women can indeed be divided into the same two groups).

Marcia's paradigm assumes that identity formation is domain-specific. That is, adolescents will or may have a distinct identity status in the areas of school/occupation, politics/ideology, and intimate relationships. The present study concentrated on the development of occupational identity, and the factors that influence this process.

Adolescence, Status Insecurity, School

The transition from school to job is a crucial passage in adolescence. In general, the lifelong occupational die is cast at an early age. In view of the fact that occupational position is a major indicator of social status, one can define adolescence as the period in which social status is assigned (Kreutz, 1974).

This stamps adolescence as a time of both opportunity and uncertainty. Side by side are the challenge to move up the social ladder and the threat of moving down. Young people may aspire to a higher occupational level than that of their parents (upward mobility); a lower occupational level implies downward mobility.

As can be adduced from much research on schooling and occupational careers (Diederen, 1983; Meijers & Wesselingh, 1983; Meijers, 1989), the educational level attained determines labor-market opportunities. For this reason, the transition from a lower to a higher educational level in adolescence can be defined as upward mobility as well, and the move from a higher to a lower educational level as downward mobility.

Educational level and school performance, then, are very important to young people. A review article spanning thirty years of research (Nurmi, 1991) indicates that, in planning for the future, adolescents are most preoccupied with their careers in school and work. Thus, education and occupation become more important during adolescence while the importance of leisure time decreases (Nurmi, 1989).

Recent studies confirm Nurmi's conclusions. Diekstra, Garnefski, De Heus, De Zwart, Van Praag, and Warnaar (1991) show that 86% of all Dutch students find school important. German research (Hurrelmann, 1990) indicates that adolescents look upon poor school performance as their most serious problem. Verhofstadt-Deneve (1991) reports similar findings with respect to Belgian youngsters. That school is important is underscored by the fact that poor school performance is related to psychosomatic complaints--headaches, nervousness, poor concentration (Hurrelmann, Engel, Holler, & Nordlohne, 1988)--aggressive behavior (Engel, 1988), and juvenile delinquency (Hirschi, 1972; Junger-Tas, 1985). In brief, poor school performance is conducive to greater status insecurity and hence to behavioral problems in adolescence.

It therefore seems obvious that a relationship exists between occupational identity formation and educational achievement. A successful school career reduces status insecurity because the adolescent can justifiably anticipate attainment of an attractive job, while downward occupational mobility is less likely. In terms of Marcia's model, this means that good school performance should lead to a "higher" identity status with respect to occupation--moratorium or identity achievement. Two studies confirm this hypothesis. Cross and Allen (1970) report that the school performance of students who have attained the identity achievement status is significantly better than that of students in the other statuses. Berzonsky (1985) has demonstrated that the school performance of students in the identity achievement and moratorium statuses outstrips that of students in foreclosure. Additional indirect support can be derived from studies by Waterman (1970, cited by Marcia, 1980), Orlofsky (1978), and Grotevant and Thorbecke (1982). Waterman has shown that the attitude toward studying among identity achievement students is better than that of students in the other statuses; Orlofsky as well as Grotevant and Thorbecke report that identity achievement and moratorium students score higher on achievement motivation.

Personal Networks in Adolescence

Another major process during adolescence is that of the "second separation-individuation" (Blos, 1967). Young people shed parental influence and increasingly orient themselves to their peers.

The degree of influence that parents and peers have on adolescents has been investigated for at least thirty years under the heading of parent-peer conflict (for a review, see Meeus, 1989). These studies have yielded two important conclusions. First, parental and peer influence need not necessarily conflict. This result was first established by Kandel and Lesser (1969) and replicated since (see the review by Conger & Petersen, 1984). This is also true for Dutch adolescents (Meeus, 1989). Second, there is general confirmation of the hypothesis that parent-peer influence is situational. This hypothesis was formulated by Brittain in 1968 and states that in some domains parental influence is greater, and in others that of peers. For issues relating to the future (school, occupation), the influence of parents is of greater weight, while for other issues (e.g., leisure time), peer influence is more significant. A study among sixteen-year-olds (Meeus, 1989) provided support for the situational hypothesis. In the area of personal relationships, the mother's influence was found to be greatest; with respect to school, the father exerted more influence; and for leisure time, adolescents conformed to their friends' views. However, longitudinal follow-up research (Meeus, Raaijmakers, & Vollebergh, 1991) indicates that this pattern is age-specific. At age eighteen, the influence of friends is greatest in each of the three domains, or equal to that of the most influential parent. This indicates that the situational hypothesis as valid for middle adolescence; in late adolescence there is an obvious trend wherein the influence of peers becomes strongest.

In this study, two questions were posed: (1) How does school performance influence occupational identity formation? It was expected that the development of occupational identity benefits from good school performance. Such performance will correlate with a high-level occupational identity status; that is, either identity achievement or moratorium. (2) How does social support, by means of personal networks, influence the formation of occupational identity? Since occupational career is strongly influenced by educational career, it was expected that social support provided by personal networks relative to the school domain would have more impact on occupational identity formation than would social support via personal networks relative to the domains of leisure time and intimate relationships. Since the average age of the sampled adolescents was eighteen, it was further expected, based on research by Meeus et al. (1991), that the influence on occupational identity formation of social support provided by friends would outstrip that of social support available from parents.

METHOD

Subjects

Three hundred adolescents, whose average age was just over eighteen years, participated in the survey. Half of them were at intermediate-level high schools for occupational or vocational training, 25% attended high schools for advanced occupational training, and 25% attended high schools that prepared them for university. Gender division in the sample was fifty-fifty. The adolescents were administered a questionnaire, which they completed during a 45-minute class period.

Measures

Occupational identity. A Dutch translation of the Dellas Identity Status Inventory-Occupation (DISI-O) was used to measure occupational identity. The DISI-O is one of the most promising instruments for measuring occupational identity (Bosma, 1985). It contains 35 items and allows ascription to a student of one of the following types of identity status: identity achievement, moratorium, foreclosure, diffused-diffused, and diffused-luck. This division is identical to that of Marcia, except for the subdivision of diffusion. Diffused-diffused respondents are entirely unconcerned regarding their future occupation, while diffused-luck respondents do not worry because they place their trust in luck.

The 35 items are ordered in seven sets of five. Each item in a set stands for one of the five identity status categories. (Examples of DISI-O items include: identity achievement--"I have looked into various kinds of work, made my choice, and am satisfied with my occupation"; moratorium--"At this time I am still checking on a number of things to get a clear picture of the occupation I want"; foreclosure--"I have long known what occupation I want to take up. That is why I did not have to look at other jobs"; diffused-diffused--"I am not so concerned with a profession yet; I do not want to choose until the time is ripe"; diffused-luck--"You never know what course your career will take, so I am not worrying much about occupations.") In every set, the respondent is asked to check the item that fits him or her best. DISI-O, then, relies on forced choices. The number of items checked for each status are added together, and the respondent is assigned to a status when at least four of the seven possibilities relative to that status are checked. The DISI-O takes about twenty minutes to complete.

Personal social networks and social support. To delineate the personal network, a version of the role-relation approach (Fischer, 1982) was used. Respondents indicate the degree to which they experience social support from a standard set of persons, each of whom assumes a distinct role. The standard set consisted of father, mother, and friends. Respondents delineated their personal network three times: for the domains of school, personal relationships, and leisure time.

School performance. The respondents' assessment of their school performance was measured using the three-point item proposed by Van der Linden and Roeders (1983). In Category 1, the respondent considers his or her school performance generally good; Category 2, school performance is about average; Category 3, school performance is assessed as generally poor.

Additional measures. Along with data concerning the usual background variables (e.g., gender, father's occupational level), respondents were asked about feelings of loneliness, number of friends, and leisure-time behavior.

RESULTS

Occupational Identity

As expected, correlations between the items of a single status were highest; for identity achievement these correlations varied between .48 and .73; for moratorium between .12 and .45; for foreclosure between .62 and .85; for diffused-diffused between .13 and .45; and for diffused-luck between .15 and .46. Reliability coefficients (Cronbach's alpha) over the item sets of the five status types varied between .65 and .94, in accord with the values reported by Dellas and Jernigan (1981).

In assigning respondents to an identity status, we followed the convention of Dellas and Jernigan (1987) of combining diffused-diffused and diffused-luck into one status--diffusion. Respondents were assigned to this status if they checked off four or more items of the two-item sets.

Of the 294 respondents (data for 6 respondents could not be used because of missing responses on DISI-O items), we were able to classify 261 (89%). Studies of Dellas and Jernigan (1981, 1987) yielded similar results. Distribution was as follows: identity achievement, 17% of the respondents; moratorium, 28%; foreclosure, 15%; and diffusion, 40%.

No relationship was found between status classification and age, ||Chi~.sup.2~(15, N = 261) = 11.10, p |is greater than~ .05; gender, ||Chi~.sup.2~(3, N = 261) = 7.26, p |is greater than~ .05; and father's occupational level, ||Chi~.sup.2~(18, N = 255) = 13.93, p |is greater than~ .05.

Occupational Identity, School, Relationships and Leisure Time.

We expected and found a significant relationship between school performance and occupational identity, ||Chi~.sup.2~(3, N = 261) = 13.58, p |is less than~ .01 (to avoid proliferation of n |is less than~ 5 cells, Categories 2 and 3 of the school performance variable were combined). School performance of 91% of those assigned to the identity achievement status was good; for those in moratorium and foreclosure, 70%; and diffused, 60%. We further found a relationship between type of training and status classification, ||Chi~.sup.2~(9, N = 261) = 23.22, p |is less than~ .01. Foreclosure was more frequent among students with intermediate vocational and advanced occupational training (i.e., the occupation-oriented programs). Evidently, the choice of occupation-oriented training goes with an occupational orientation which is fixed fairly early and without a great deal of reflection.

Table 2.
Reliability coefficients and number of respondents per identity
status

IDENTITY STATUS RELIABILITY
 DELLAS & PRESENT N %
 JERNIGAN, 1981 STUDY

IDENTITY ACHIEVEMENT .91 .89 44 17%
MORATORIUM .84 .74 75 28%
FORECLOSURE .92 .94 38 15%
DIFFUSED-DIFFUSED .73 .70
DIFFUSED-LUCK .64 .65
DIFFUSION (DD + DL) 104 40%

Also investigated (using ANOVA and chi-square) was the association between occupational identity and two other life domains: relationships and leisure time. Occupational identity proved unrelated to feelings of loneliness, F(3, 255) = .57, p |is greater than~ .05; the number of good friends, ||Chi~.sup.2~(6, N = 261) = 2.46, p |is greater than~ .05; or the ability to spend leisure time enjoyably, F(3, 257) = 1.79, p |is greater than~ .05.

Occupational Identity and Social Support Via Personal Networks

The structure of the personal networks in the three domains was similar to that found in a study by Meeus et al. (1991). In each of the domains (school, leisure time, and relationships), the social support provided by friends proved more important or no less important than that offered by either parent. By way of nine analyses of variance (three domains by three reference persons), we next determined the connection between occupational identity and social support via personal networks. As expected, we found this connection to exist in the case of friends relative to school, F(3, 247) = 2.67, p |is less than~ .05. Successive application of Scheffe's test and a t test showed that students in the identity achievement and moratorium statuses experienced more social support from friends regarding school than did those in the foreclosure and diffused statuses, t(249) = 2.69, p |is less than~ .01. No other significant connections were found between personal network support and occupational identity. That is, parental social support was not related to occupational identity in any of the three domains, nor was social support by friends related to occupational identity relative to the domains of leisure time and relationships.

DISCUSSION

The Dutch version of the DISI-O seems an adequate instrument for measuring the formation and development of occupational identity. The internal consistency of the scales for the various identity status classifications varies from sufficient to very high, and is comparable to that of the original instrument. Moreover, if a few simple rules are applied, approximately 90% of the respondents can readily be classified as belonging to one of the four identity status categories. We note that, among Dutch eighteen-year-olds, occupational identity is still only weakly developed.

Occupational identity formation is related to the school career. Youngsters who perform well at school evince a stronger occupational identity than do those whose school performance is poor. Success in school reduces status insecurity in adolescence because it holds the promise of attractive future occupations. This encourages young people to become occupation-oriented.

There appears to be no connection between occupational identity formation and the development of relationships or leisure-time behavior. Adolescents may have few or many friends, their leisure time may be spent in satisfactory or unsatisfactory ways--but none of this affects their occupational identity. This underscores the domain-specific character of development during adolescence, which was assumed by Marcia. The careers at school and at work are of a piece; they constitute a single domain of development, one in which a person's social status is determined.

Although relational development as such is not connected with occupational identity formation, we do not imply that significant others play no role in the process. In late adolescence, peers are more important referents than are parents. The social support provided by friends relative to problems at school encourages development of occupational identity. The social support offered by parents in this domain is less important, as is their support in the domains of relationships and leisure time. Further, social support by friends in the domains of relationships and leisure does not influence occupational identity formation. This confirms the view that development in the domain of school/occupation on the one hand, and development in the domains of relationships and leisure time on the other, are relatively unconnected processes.

REFERENCES

Archer, S., & Waterman, A. (1988). Psychological individualism: Gender differences or gender neutrality? Human Development, 31, 65-81.

Berzonsky, M. (1985). Diffusion within Marcia's identity-status paradigm: Does it foreshadow academic problems? Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 14, 527-538.

Blos, P. (1967). The second individuation process of adolescence. Psychoanalytic Study of the Child, 23, 162-186.

Bosma, H. (1985). Identity development in adolescence. Groningen: doctoral dissertation.

Brittain, C. (1968). An exploration of the bases of peer-compliance and parent-compliance in adolescence. Adolescence, 13, 445-458.

Conger, J., & Petersen, A. (1984). Adolescence and youth: Psychological development in a changing world. New York: Harper & Row.

Cote, J., & Levine, C. (1988). A critical examination of the ego identity status paradigm. Developmental Review, 8, 147-185.

Cross, H., & Allen, J. (1970). Ego identity status, adjustment, and academic achievement. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 34, 288.

Dellas, M., & Jernigan, L. (1981). Development of an objective instrument to measure identity status in terms of occupation crisis and commitment. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 41, 1039-1050.

Dellas, M., & Jernigan, L. (1987). Occupational identity status development, gender comparisons, and internal-external control in first-year air force cadets. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 16, 587-600.

Diederen, J. (1983). De keuze van een beroep |Occupational choice~. Nijmegen: ITS.

Diekstra, R., Garnefski, N., Heus, P. de, Zwart, R. de, Praag, B. van, & Warnaar, M. (1991). Scholierenonderzoek 1990: Gedrag en gezondheid |Survey on Schoolchildren 1990: Behavior and health~. Den Haag: NIBUD.

Engel, U. (1988). Youth, mobility and social integration. In J. Hazekamp, W. Meeus, & Y. te Poel (Eds.), European contributions to youth research (pp. 81-93). Amsterdam: Free University Press.

Erikson, E. (1968). Identity: Youth and crisis. New York: Norton & Co.

Fischer, C. (1982). To dwell among friends: Personal networks in town and city. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Grotevant, H., & Thorbecke, W. (1982). Occupational identity formation. Developmental Psychology, 18, 396-405.

Hirschi, T. (1972). Causes of delinquency. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Hurrelmann, K. (1990). Parents, peers, teachers and other significant partners in adolescence. International Journal of Adolescence and Youth, 2, 211-236.

Hurrelmann, K., Engel, U., Holler, B., & Nordlohne, E. (1988). Status insecurity and psychosomatic disorders in adolescence. Journal of Adolescence, 25, 205-215.

Junger-Tas, J. (1985). De theorie van sociale controle of sociale binding |The theory of social control~. Tijdschrift voor Criminologie, 27, 244-265.

Kandel, D., & Lesser, G. (1969). Parental and peer influences on educational plans of adolescents. American Sociological Review, 34, 213-223.

Kreutz, H. (1974). Soziologie der Jugend. Munich: Juventa.

Linden, F. van der, & Roeders, P. (1983). Schoolgaande jongeren, hun leefwereld en welbevinden |Schoolchildren, their life world and well-being~. Nijmegen: Hoogveld Instituut.

Marcia, J. (1966). Development and validation of ego-identity status. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 3, 551-558.

Marcia, J. (1980). Identity in adolescence. In J. Adelson (Ed.), Handbook of

adolescent psychology (pp. 159-187). New York: Wiley.

Meeus, W. (1989). Parental and peer support in adolescence. In K. Hurrelmann & U. Engel (Eds.), The social world of adolescents (pp. 167-185). New York: De Gruyter.

Meeus, W. (1991). Jeugd en identiteit. De adolescente identiteit in theorie en empirie: Erikson en Marcia |Youth and identity. Adolescent identity: Erikson and Marcia~. In C. Klaassen (Ed.), Jeugd als sociaal fenomeen |Youth as a social phenomenon~ (pp. 83-105). Amersfoort: Acco.

Meeus, W., Raaijmakers, Q., & Vollebergh, W. (1991). Political intolerance and youth centrism in adolescence: An overview of Dutch research and some recent longitudinal findings. In G. Breakwell (Ed.), Social psychology of political and economic cognition (pp. 97-120). London: Academic Press.

Meijers, F. (Ed.). (1989). Jongeren op weg |Youngsters on their way~. Leiden: sectie Jongerenstudies en jeugdbeleid.

Meijers, F., & Wesselingh, A. (1983). Over de reproduktie van het onderwijs. De maatschappelijke ongelijkheidsdiskussie opnieuw bekeken |On the educational reproduction of social inequality~. Comenius, 3, 93-114.

Nurmi, J. (1989). Development of orientation to the future during early adolescence: A four-year longitudinal study and two cross-sectional comparisons. International Journal of Psychology, 24, 195-214.

Nurmi, J. (1991). How do adolescents see their future? A review of the development of future orientation and planning. Developmental Review, 11, 1-59.

Orlofsky, J. (1978). Identity formation, achievement, and fear of success in college men and women. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 7, 49-62.

Verhafstadt-Deneve, L. (1991). Adolescentiepsychologie |Adolescent psychology~. Leuven-Apeldoorn: Garant.

Waterman, A. (1982). Identity development from adolescence to adulthood: An extension of theory and a review of research. Developmental Psychology, 18, 341-358.