Florida State University Libraries

Transcription

1 Florida State University Libraries Electronic Theses, Treatises and Dissertations The Graduate School 2014 Identity, Cohesion, and Enmeshment Across Cultures Summer Brooke Gómez Follow this and additional works at the FSU Digital Library. For more information, please contact

2 FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF HUMAN SCIENCES IDENTITY, COHESION, AND ENMESHMENT ACROSS CULTURES By SUMMER BROOKE GÓMEZ A Dissertation submitted to the Department of Family and Child Sciences in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Degree Awarded: Spring Semester, 2014

3 Summer Brooke Gómez defended this dissertation on April 7, The members of the supervisory committee were: Ronald L. Mullis Professor Directing Dissertation Tomi Gomory University Representative Ann Mullis Committee Member Lenore McWey Committee Member The Graduate School has verified and approved the above-named committee members, and certifies that the dissertation has been approved in accordance with university requirements. ii

4 For any kid who ever felt controlled and not supported. And for any kid that has suffered because their strengths were blithely overlooked or discouraged. For my clients, who have been and continue to be the best mentors I could ever dream of. And for the ghosts that haunt the Dade County hallways of my youth. iii

5 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I appreciatively acknowledge Sigmund Freud, Erik Erikson, James Marcia, Seth Schwartz, and all dedicated identity scholars for teaching me how to place careful value on the examined lives of others. I am grateful to my committee for their unique contributions: Ann Mullis for her frankness and her dedication to precision; Lenore McWey for her ability to meet each student as a person and still uncompromisingly command her students personal bests; Nick Mazza for his example of leadership, and his rare ability to function as a scholar-practitioner; Tomi Gomory for his dedication to critical thought and his strong personal commitment to his students professional development. Thank you all. I also want to thank my major professor, identity scholar Ron Mullis, first and foremost for his patience with me with regard to both my sometimes stubborn nature and also with regard to sticking with me well into his retirement. Thank you, Dr. Ron, for your guidance and for going the distance, literally, to prove that you believed in me and my work. I have had the luxury and pleasure of a wonderful education in the great State of Florida. Highlights for me have included the gifted program in Miami-Dade and Broward County Public Schools, which kept me interested in learning; the Dade County Police Benevolent Association, whose scholarship started me on my way not only with financial support but also with a deeply appreciated vote of confidence and sense of purpose and pride; the Honors College at Florida International University, which gave me a liberal arts experience and a level of personal development support I now know I could not have done without; the National Student Exchange program, which pushed me out of my comfort zone and fueled a sense of daring and adventure that I am still gleefully cultivating to this day; and of course the Florida State University, forever my alma mater and the beautiful moss-draped backdrop of my becoming. I am grateful to so many influential mentors from my past, especially Linda Meehan for grounding me with an appreciation for the unique ecology of my home state; Shearon Lowery for helping me to pinpoint my academic and professional passions; Bill Kurtines for introducing me to the field of identity scholarship and encouraging me to move toward it; Neil Kressel for inspiring me to ask the questions that I believe matter most; Connor Walters for teaching me about all humans by starting with children; Judge Kathleen Kearney and Katrina Boone for preparing me well to deal with the real world; and Larry and Sandy Barlow as well as Lenore McWey and Robert E. Lee for top notch clinical training. Finally, I extend my deepest gratitude to my incredible family and friends: my grandparents Guillermo and Angelina Gómez for funding my undergraduate education, for championing the overall value of education, and for exemplifying the import of community; my Uncle Charlie for inspiring me with his bright blend of ambition, creativity, and talent, and for always introducing me to others in the context of my capability; my Aunt Donna and Uncle Ed for showing me how to balance sanity and ambition with family and art; my Aunt Sandra, the Chafins, and my cousins for keeping me in touch with my roots and core values; Nany, Glen, Nelly, Benji, Mardele, Tony, Ronnie, Sylvia, Kenny, Trevor, Katrina, and Chelsie for being vocally proud of me; and iv

6 my bold, brave, and uniquely brilliant friends for always asking about me with genuine interest and unconditionally encouraging me. Most important, I am grateful to my parents, Joy and Bill Gómez as well as my husband, Joe Anson. Thank you, Mom and Dad, for giving in every conceivable way from a seemingly bottomless well fed by faith and love and for teaching me what s worth fighting for in life. And thank you, Joe, for teaching me that love is a choice you make each moment every day for over thirteen years. I would not exist in any recognizable way without the three of you and my gratitude and love for each of you knows no bounds. Thank you from the bottom of my heart for every second I am blessed to have with you all. v

7 TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Tables...x List of Figures... xi Abstract... xii 1. INTRODUCTION...1 Basis for Research...1 Study Overview...1 Key Variables...2 Rationale for Study...2 Theoretical Underpinnings of the Research...4 Research Questions...5 Hypotheses LITERATURE REVIEW...7 Theoretical Frameworks...7 Ego Identity Theory...7 Overview of Marcian identity statuses...8 Identity diffusion...8 Identity foreclosure...8 Moratorium...8 Identity achievement...9 Rationale for using the ego identity development framework...9 Life Course Theory...10 Norms, position, and roles...10 Family stages...11 Transition...11 Family life course...11 Multiple dimensions of time...12 Rationale for using family life course development framework...13 Family Differentiation: One-dimensional versus Two-dimensional model...13 Critical Review of Theoretical Frameworks...17 Marcian ego identity theory...17 Family life course development framework...18 Relations between Family Differentiation and Ego Identity...18 Relations between Family Differentiation and Psychological Well-Being...19 Relations between Ego Identity and Psychological Well-Being...20 The Role of Culture and Ethnicity...21 Importance of Comparing Ethnic Groups...21 Ethnoracial Groups in the Research...23 Rationale for Focus on White Non-Hispanic Participants...23 Rationale for Focus on Hispanic Participants...25 vi

8 Research Participants...29 Summary Descriptions of Variables...30 Family Differentiation...30 Cohesion...30 Enmeshment...30 Ego Identity...30 Commitment...30 Exploration...31 Psychological Well-Being...31 Life Satisfaction...31 Depressive symptoms...31 State anxiety...31 Review of Relationships among Variables in the Research...32 Cohesion and commitment...32 Cohesion and exploration...32 Enmeshment and commitment...32 Enmeshment and exploration...33 Commitment and psychological well-being...33 Exploration and psychological well-being...34 Family differentiation and psychological well-being...34 Family differentiation, identity formation, and psychological well-being METHOD...37 Sampling and Participant Recruitment...37 Selection of Recruitment Sites...37 Age Range of Participants...37 Participant Recruitment...38 Ethnoracial Criteria for Participants...38 Descriptive Statistics and Frequencies...38 Combined sample...38 Hispanic subsample...39 Non-Hispanic subsample...40 Measures...41 Family Differentiation...41 Ego Identity...42 Psychological Well-Being...42 Reliability Statistics...43 Participant Demographic Information...43 Analysis...44 Assumptions of Structural Equation Modeling (SEM)...45 Model specification...45 Exogenous variables measured without error...45 Completeness of data set...45 Multivariate normality...45 vii

9 Overall assessment of assumptions...46 Structural Equation Model Identification...46 Structural Equation Models...46 Model 1: Configural model...46 Model 2: Measurement invariance model...47 Model 3: Hypothesized model...47 Model 4: Modified model...48 Power Analysis, Sample Size, and Missing Data...48 Statistical Predictions...49 Ethical Considerations RESULTS...54 Structural Equation Models...54 Model 1: Configural Model...54 Model 2: Measurement Invariance Model...55 Model 3: Hypothesized Model...55 Model 4: Modified Model...60 Research Questions & Hypotheses...61 Mean Differences by Gender, College Major, and Data Collection Site DISCUSSION...63 Review of Notable Findings...63 Theoretical Implications of Findings...63 Ethnoracial Differences...64 Implications for the Role of Family Differentiation in Ego Identity Theory...66 Effect of cohesion on commitment...67 Effect of cohesion on exploration...68 Effect of enmeshment on commitment...68 Effect of enmeshment on exploration...68 Direct Effects of Family Differentiation on Psychological Well-Being...69 Relational Clinical Implications of Theoretical and Empirical Findings...70 Limitations of the Research...71 Measurement and Comparability of Family Differentiation across the Literature...71 Limitations of Sample...71 Exclusion of non-students...71 Restriction of age range...72 Regional bias...72 Model Fit...73 Mediation in the Structural Equation Models...73 Future Research...74 Future Study 1: Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA)...74 Future Study 2: The Role of Gender in Ego Identity Development...74 viii

10 Future Study 3: Replication with Nationally Representative...75 Sample of Hispanic Participants...75 Summary and Conclusions...75 APPENDICES...78 A. INFORMED CONSENT FOR FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY...78 B. INFORMED CONSENT FOR FLORIDA INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY...77 C. PARTICIPANT PACKET...81 D. FACTOR LOADING ESTIMATES FOR MODEL 3: HYPOTHESIZED MODEL...87 E. FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY INSTITUTIONAL REVIEW BOARD HUMAN SUBJECTS APPROVAL LETTER...99 F. FLORIDA INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY INSTITUTIONAL REVIEW BOARD HUMAN SUBJECTS APPROVAL LETTER REFERENCES BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH ix

11 LIST OF TABLES 1 Demographic Variables by Ethnoracial Subsample Statistically Significant Path Coefficients for Model 3: Hypothesized Model Percentage of Variance Explained by Model 3: Hypothesized Model Latent Variables Included in the Structural Equation Models: Descriptive Statistics and Reliability. Non-Hispanic N = 233; Hispanic N = Measurement Items for Cohesion and Enmeshment Measurement Items for Commitment Measurement Items for Exploration Measurement Items for Depressive Symptoms Measurement Items for Life Satisfaction and Anxiety Cohesion and Enmeshment Factor Loading Estimates for Model 3: Hypothesized Model Commitment Factor Loading Estimates for Model 3: Hypothesized Model Exploration Factor Loading Estimates for Model 3: Hypothesized Model Depression Factor Loading Estimates for Model 3: Hypothesized Model Life Satisfaction and Anxiety Factor Loading Estimates for Model 3: Hypothesized Model...98 x

12 LIST OF FIGURES 1 Structural equation modeling (SEM) diagram reflecting the statistical predictions of the study Structural equation modeling (SEM) Model 3: Hypothesized Model, with standardized parameters...60 xi

13 ABSTRACT The impact of family differentiation (cohesion and enmeshment), as measured by the Colorado Self-Report of Family Functioning Inventory, on ego identity development (exploration and commitment), as measured by the Ego Identity Process Questionnaire, was examined. This study also examined the impact of family differentiation on psychological well-being, both directly and indirectly via ego identity development. The psychological well-being variables were life satisfaction, measured by the Satisfaction with Life Scale; depressive symptoms, measured by the Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale (CES-D); and state anxiety, measured by a short form of the state-trait anxiety inventory (STAI-6). The research questions were: 1) Do cohesion and enmeshment influence commitment and exploration? 2) Do cohesion and enmeshment influence psychological well-being (anxiety, depressive symptoms, and life satisfaction)? 3) Do these relationships differ between non-hispanic white participants and Hispanic participants of any race? Participants were undergraduate college students at two public universities in the southeastern United States. The total sample size was N = 563. Structural equation modeling (SEM) was used to examine the hypothesized relationships. This study also examined indirect effects via commitment and exploration, identity formation variables drawn from the ego identity development paradigm. Results show that, consistent with the study predictions, cohesion had significant positive effects on commitment and life satisfaction, and significant negative effects on depressive symptoms and anxiety (both directly and indirectly via by commitment). Also as predicted, commitment had a significant positive direct effect on life satisfaction, and significant negative direct effects on depressive symptoms and anxiety. However, no effects were observed for enmeshment or exploration, and no differences were observed in these relationships between the Hispanics and non-hispanics. Implications for ego identity theory and family relations theory are discussed, as well as limitations of the study methodology and proposals for future research. xii

14 CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION Basis for Research This study expanded upon a European study by Manzi, Vignoles, Regalia, and Scabini (2006). Manzi et al. (2006) used confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) to establish the concept of family differentiation as consisting of two dimensions (cohesion and enmeshment). Manzi et al. (2006) used structural equation modeling (SEM) to examine the impact of both cohesion and enmeshment on identity threat and on measures of psychological well-being. Manzi et al. (2006) also compared a model generated from Italian participants with a model generated from British participants. They found significant differences in the impact of family differentiation across cultures. Study Overview This study examined the relational concept of family differentiation in the context of ego identity formation and the relevance and function of the two-dimensional model of family differentiation. However, instead of investigating the impact of family differentiation on identity threat, this study examined the effect of family differentiation on the identity development processes outlined within the Marcian identity status paradigm (Marcia, 1966) by using the Marcian concepts of commitment and exploration. This study is a response to a long-standing call within the literature for better understanding of the relational underpinnings of ego identity development (Marcia, 1989). This study examined the impact of family differentiation on identity development using the same outcome measures of life satisfaction, depressive symptoms and anxiety reported by Manzi et al. (2006). In addition to five race categories, the United States Census Bureau (USCB) recognizes two ethnic categories: Hispanic and Non-Hispanic (Humes, Jones, & Ramirez, 2011). This study compares two ethnoracial groups based on racial and ethnic categories used in the 2010 United States Census: non-hispanic whites and Hispanics of any race. Thus, the present study serves as a United States counterpart to the work of Manzi et al. (2006) by highlighting the relevance and, subsequently, the function of family differentiation across United States ethnoracial groups of late adolescent and early adult participants in a theoretically comparable life stage. 1

15 Key Variables The impact of four independent variables was studied. These include two family differentiation variables: cohesion and enmeshment. The other two independent variables are identity formation variables: commitment and exploration. However, commitment and exploration (representing identity formation) are also dependent variables in the study. Cohesion and enmeshment (representing family differentiation) are the only independent variables that are exogenous to the study's model. Three dependent variables were used to measure psychological outcomes: life satisfaction, depressive symptoms, and anxiety. These variables serve as broad measures of psychological well-being. Moreover, research has shown these three particular outcome variables to be associated with identity threat, an important variable relevant to the understanding of ego identity (Manzi et al., 2006). Rationale for Study Family and identity scholars have acknowledged family differentiation as a possible key factor underlying the emotional development of older adolescents and young adults. Family differentiation is the extent and nature of emotional interdependence among family members. Scholars have often described family differentiation as a one-dimensional construct, with estrangement (low interdependence) and enmeshment (high interdependence) as opposite poles of a single spectrum (e.g., Campbell, Adams, & Dobson, 1984; Minuchin, 1974; Olson, 1982). Each of these extremes has been theoretically associated with maladaptive family functioning (e.g., Campbell et al., 1984; Minuchin, 1974; Olson, 1982). Moderate values on this spectrum correspond to cohesion and have been theoretically associated with more adaptive outcomes. (e.g., Campbell et al., 1984; Minuchin, 1974; Olson, 1982). In recent years, scholars (e.g., Manzi et al., 2006) have criticized this one-dimensional model in two important ways. Some researchers have challenged the generalizability of the onedimensional model of family differentiation across ethnic groups (e.g., Chun & MacDermid, 1997; Fuhrman & Holmbeck, 1995). Other scholars have proposed that a two-dimensional model (e.g., Barber & Buehler, 1996; Manzi et al., 2006; Scabini, 1985) would be a more accurate way of describing family differentiation. The two-dimensional model of family differentiation represents cohesion and enmeshment as distinct dimensions. Addressing these criticisms, Manzi et al. (2006) compared family differentiation among Italian and British participants. Manzi et al. (2006) found that cohesion and enmeshment were 2

16 best represented as two distinct dimensions in both British and Italian samples. These two dimensions were positively correlated in the Italian sample. However, they were uncorrelated for the British sample. Manzi et al. (2006) also found that higher family cohesion led to decreased identity threat across groups. This in turn led to higher levels of life satisfaction and lower levels of depressive symptoms and anxiety. The findings for family cohesion were very similar in the Italian and British samples. However, cultural differences were observed for enmeshment. For British participants enmeshment levels led to significantly increased identity threat. This in turn led to lower levels of life satisfaction and higher levels of depressive symptoms and anxiety. In contrast, for Italian subjects, there were no significant effects of enmeshment on identity threat, life satisfaction, depressive symptoms, or anxiety. This cultural difference is consistent with the stronger emphasis on individual autonomy in British compared to Italian culture. The findings of Manzi et al. (2006) provide evidence that the two-dimensional model of family differentiation more accurately represents the nature of family differentiation. The finding applies across cultural groups. Thus, this study will assume the two-dimensional model rather than the one-dimensional model of family differentiation. A major purpose of this study is to examine the indirect effects of family differentiation on psychological well-being via identity formation variables drawn from the ego identity development paradigm (Marcia, 1966). This is justified because Manzi et al. (2006) found that family differentiation affected psychological outcomes indirectly via identity threat. Manzi et al. (2006) measured identity threat levels at a time when their older adolescent and young adult participants were experiencing major life stage transitions. However, this study examines indirect effects via identity formation variables (cohesion and enmeshment) rather than via identity threat. Thus, this study will be the first to investigate the indirect effects of family differentiation on psychological outcomes via cohesion and enmeshment. Freud (1933) proposed that ego identity development was the product of relational dynamics in the family of origin. Marcia (1989) has also urged study of the impact of relational dynamics on ego identity development. There are several attempts in the literature to address the relationship between family relational dynamics and the Marcian ego identity statuses (e.g., Adams, Dyk, & Bennion,1987; Arseth, Kroger, Martinussen, & Marcia, 2009; Campbell et al., 1984; Faber, Edwards, Bauer, & Wetchler, 2003; Jackson, Dunham, & Kidwell, 1990; Marcia, 3

17 1966; Mullis, Brailsford, & Mullis, 2003; Watson & Protinsky, 1988). However, none of these studies have yielded decisive findings or succeeded in explaining the variance in ego identity variables using family dynamics variables. Moreover, no study has used the two-dimensional model of family differentiation to explain the ego identity development processes of older adolescents or young adults. In summary, the present study used structural equation modeling [SEM] to examine the impact of family differentiation (cohesion and enmeshment) on the ego identity variables (commitment and exploration). This study also examined the impact of the ego identity variables on psychological well-being outcomes (anxiety, depressive symptoms, and life satisfaction) and tested whether these relationships vary across the two ethnoracial groups studied. Theoretical Underpinnings of the Research Family life course development theory and ego identity development theory are the two theoretical frameworks used in the present research. Family life course development theory is a synthesis of family development theory and the life course perspective (White & Klein, 2002). Family life course development theory posits that society imposes certain norms governing behavior within a family. The resulting within-system expectations depend upon system member's stages of development and positions within the family, as well as upon the entire system's place in the developmental process. Transitions at the level of the family or the individual from one stage of development to another are key components of this framework. Problems are presumed to arise when these transitions are off-time (too early or too late). The use of the family life course development theoretical framework will enhance the theoretical generalizability of the findings across cultures and eras (e.g., Hammer, 2003). Specific norms related to life stage transitions vary across cultures and eras. However, life course development theory facilitates comparison of the results of this study with those of studies on other populations. This is because it is possible to discuss psychological outcomes in terms of life course transitions across cultures. The Marcian ego identity status paradigm (Marcia, 1966) holds that individuals may be classified into one of four ego identity statuses: achievement, moratorium, diffusion, and foreclosure. An individual s identity status is determined by two underlying dimensions: commitment and exploration. Commitment is the extent to which an individual s decisions reflect a stable pattern of identity. Exploration is the extent to which an individual engages in 4

18 active, reflective construction of their own identity. Achievement status indicates high commitment and high exploration. Moratorium status indicates low commitment and high exploration. Diffusion status indicates low commitment and low exploration. Foreclosure status indicates high commitment and low exploration. Identity commitment is presumed to provide individuals with a sense of purpose (Crocetti, Klimstra, Keijsers, Hale, & Meeus, 2009) and thus expected to enhance overall psychological well-being: Commitment is expected to reduce anxiety because it reduces uncertainty about life goals. Commitment is expected to reduce depressive symptoms because a sense of purpose reduces feelings of helplessness. Finally, commitment is expected to increase life satisfaction because it implies that the individual is living according to their own selfselected standards. By contrast, exploration is expected to have a positive impact on psychological wellbeing outcomes for white non-hispanic participants. This is supported by empirical evidence using various measures of adaptive functioning (e.g., Arseth et al., 2009; Crocetti et al., 2009; Hardy & Kisling, 2006). However, it is expected that the impact of exploration will be less positive for Hispanics of any race, due to cultural differences in the function of individual autonomy (e.g., McAdoo, 1981; Watson & Protinsky, 1988). This prediction is also consistent with the findings of Manzi et al. (2006) regarding British and Italian cultures; Italian participants were less affected by exploration when compared to British participants. Research Questions The present study addresses the following research questions: 1. Does family differentiation (cohesion and enmeshment) relate to identity formation (commitment and exploration levels) of adolescents and/or young adults? 2. Does family differentiation predict psychological well-being? 3. Do the findings above differ between non-hispanic whites and Hispanics of any race? Hypotheses 1. Family differentiation (cohesion and enmeshment), will relate to the identity formation (commitment and exploration levels) of adolescents and/or young adults by explaining a significant amount of variance in ego identity status scores, which will be measured by the Ego Identity Process Questionnaire (EIPQ; Balistreri, Busch-Rossnagel, & Geisinger, 1995). 5

19 2. Family differentiation (cohesion and enmeshment) will both directly and indirectly predict psychological well-being (anxiety, depressive symptoms, and life satisfaction). Indirect effects will occur via ego identity variables (commitment and exploration). 3. Differences between ethnic groups will be found with regard to the determinants of psychological well-being (anxiety, depressive symptoms, and life satisfaction). For participants who identify themselves as Hispanic, higher levels of enmeshment will be less associated with diminished psychological well-being. Psychological well-being was represented in terms of anxiety, depressive symptoms, and life satisfaction as measured by the Satisfaction with Life Scale (Diener, Emmons, Larsen, & Griffin, 1985); the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES-D; Radloff, 1977); and the short form of the Spielberger State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI-6; Marteau & Bekker, 1992), respectively. Similarly, for participants who identify as Hispanic (compared to those who identify as non-hispanic whites), higher levels of exploration will be significantly less associated with diminished psychological well-being (anxiety, depressive symptoms, and life satisfaction as measured by the instruments mentioned above). 6

20 CHAPTER TWO LITERATURE REVIEW This chapter reviews literature regarding connections among family differentiation, identity formation (independent variables) and psychological well-being (dependent variables). In addition, this chapter will focus on evidence for the role of indirect effects via identity status in explaining the impact of family differentiation on psychological well-being. Theoretical frameworks used in this study are first discussed to help in the conceptualization of the major variables. Theoretical Frameworks Ego identity theory (e.g., Marcia, 1995; Schwartz, 2001) and family life course development theory (Elder, 1985; White & Klein, 2002) are used as theoretical frameworks for this study in conceptually explaining relationships between family differentiation, identity status, and the psychological well-being of older adolescents and young adults. Ego Identity Theory Rooted in the work of Sigmund Freud and Erik Erikson, identity theory is relevant across social science and humanities disciplines (Bosma, Graafsma, Grotevant, & de Levita, 1994; Marcia, 1966; Schwartz, 2001; and Society for Research on Identity Formation [SRIF], 2013). Ultimately basing his foundational theoretical work on the Freudian notion that one s concept of self can be traced to early child-parent interaction (Schwartz, 2001), Erikson was the first researcher to use the phrase ego identity in the 1960s in describing the resolution of one of his most well-known crisis stage; identity vs. role confusion (Kroger, 2003). This crisis stage is associated with adolescents. Assuming a period of intrapsychic destructuring and, ultimately, crisis resolution, the crisis stages that theoretically follows is intimacy vs. isolation and it is associated with young adults (Erikson, 1959). In midcentury, Erikson built on Freudian concepts by expanding his focus of the then-emerging body of research on personality throughout the life course, depicting the ideal emergence of adult identity as the result of a series of resolutions to staged crises (Thomas, 2005). James Marcia, in turn, is the intellectual progenitor of most modern research on identity development (Schwartz, 2001; Waterman, 1988). There has been some debate in the literature about how directly compatible Marcia s (1966) seminal work on identity status is with the Eriksonian concepts it is presumed to be built 7

21 upon (Blasi & Glodis, 1995; Côté & Levine, 1988; van Hoof, 1999). However, it is undeniable that Marcia s work has been influential among identity theorists beyond Erikson for half a century (Kroger, 2003; Schwartz, 2001; Waterman, 1988). Schwartz (2001) referred to the works of Freud, Erikson, and Marcia as the fundamentals of identity theory (p. 8). Overview of Marcian identity statuses. Marcia (1966) is best known for establishing four basic identity statuses: Diffusion, foreclosure, moratorium, and achievement. Marcia s four basic identity statues differ from Erikson s psychological stages in that they are not construed as stages at all, but ways of summarizing personality traits that may or may not describe a person at any point in life. Further, these four stages represent a unique combination of either higher or lower levels of exploration and commitment. Exploration refers to the degree to which an individual leads an examined life, or makes personal choices with an eye toward the active construction of the self. Commitment refers to an individual s ability to consistently identify with those values and roles one has chosen to represent oneself and to make new choices that reflect a stable and consistent pattern of self-selected identity. Identity diffusion. A status of identity diffusion reflects low commitment and low exploration. That is, a person that could be described as identity diffused would lack both stable conception of self and a current sense that she ought to be seeking such a conception. An example of this might be a young adult child, living with her parents, not attending school, not finding a group of peers that she has much in common with, not pursuing any particular career path, and not expressing any interest in any change with regard to these matters. Identity foreclosure. A status of identity foreclosure represents high commitment and low exploration. That is, a person that could be categorized as identity foreclosed would, without significant consideration of other possible lifestyles, adopt a role, a set of values, and likely a set of peers and hobbies consistent with a lifestyle that was modeled for them or expected of them, often by elders or authority figures. An example of this status might be an adolescent who decides on a career path that her parents want for her even though she is unsure as to the importance of this career for herself. Moratorium. Moratorium is an identity status characterized by low commitment and high exploration. People best described as having this identity status are currently engaged in questioning any previous assumptions, are constructing a sense of self, and are not immediately interested in defining themselves, their most appropriate roles, or the type of lifestyle that best 8

22 fits them. For example, if the adolescent noted above decides that she will go to college to pursue the career path her parents want for her now, but also plans to explore other careers once she leaves home for college. In this case, she does not want to challenge her parents now on the issue of careers and will wait until she is emotionally ready to decide for herself. Identity achievement. This identity achievement status is unique in that it arguably implies that a person that could best be described as identity achieved has been through a moratorium stage and that what she has achieved is the ability to make and consistently stick with lifestyle and identity choices with awareness. This status implies at least a previous period of high exploration as well as a high level of commitment. Rationale for using the ego identity development framework. Given the theoretical role of family differentiation in foundational descriptions of ego identity formation ranging from Freud (1933) to Marcia (1966), it is worth specifically considering what the observable connection might be between the two-dimensional model of family differentiation, including the dimensions of cohesion and enmeshment, and the identity formation process. In general, it is appropriate to examine family differentiation in terms of its impact on identity formation because youth within families are theoretically presumed to be struggling to take on the demands of adulthood by identifying their own values and needs as separate from parents who socialize them (Grotevant, 1983). Further, the use of the identity development as a theoretical framework in the context of this study also provides an opportunity for a theoretical contribution. This study is intended to address a long-standing call within the literature for enhanced cultural literacy on the part of identity scholars (e.g., Côté and Levine, 1988). Scholars have frequently implied or suggested that identity foreclosure is associated with less favorable outcomes than identity achievement (e.g., Arseth et al., 2009). Schwartz (2001) combined multiple perspectives on the identity foreclosure status as part of an effort to offer a broad historical overview of Marcian identity scholarship. He cited Marcia (1980) in describing the identity foreclosed individual as being associated with some degree of closed-mindedness, smug self- satisfaction, and rigidity and (p. 12), going on to say that foreclosed individuals tend to become increasingly attached to their current circumstances and to the individuals who have helped to put those circumstances in place, and they tend to resist change at almost any cost (p.12). Schwartz (2001) explains that the identity foreclosed individual has a high degree of commitment in the relative absence of 9

23 prior exploration (p.12), arguably implying some contextual level dysfunction inherent in an individual that enters into a higher commitment status without exploration. This study will critically examine the argument that the negative connotation exemplified by this language reflects culturally relevant assumptions across the identity literature. To this end, this study examined whether the impact of enmeshment on exploration and also on psychological wellbeing is less negative for Hispanics than for non-hispanic whites. Life Course Theory The family life course development framework represents a synthesis of two theoretical frameworks: a) Family development theory, and, b) The life course perspective (White & Klein, 2002; see also Bengston & Allen, 1993; Elder, 1998; Elder, Johnson, & Crosnoe, 2003; Rodgers & White, 1993). Family development theory emerged in the 1950s. It is rooted in an interest in the family as a unit of analysis. The life course perspective evolved in the 1970s and is based on the notion of life stages that are tied more to the timing of significant events (e.g., birth of a child or marriage) than to chronological time. White and Klein (2002) argued that these two theories can be construed as different aspects of a single framework. The integration of family development theory with the life course perspective affords the researcher an organized way to consider the development of not just the individual but the family in the context of history, society, stage of life, and family-specific life changing events. Norms, positions, and roles. Norms are societal rules that regulate group and individual behavior. The family life course development framework acknowledges that while some norms are constant across the life span, such as the societal prohibition of theft, others are tied to an age and stage graded continuum. For example, in the U.S. we do not generally expect adolescents to maintain steady employment; at the onset of adulthood or completion of education, that expectation changes. Position refers to an individual's place in a family structure relative to others. This concept is useful in differentiating families from within and between other groups. For example, in U.S. society, we generally conceptualize families as being comprised of mothers, fathers, sons, daughters, sisters, and brothers. These primary positions allow us to conceptualize other culturally relevant positions, such as grandmothers, grandfathers, aunts, uncles, and cousins. Thus, a grandmother can be thought of as a mother or father s mother and an aunt can be thought of as a mother or father s sister. 10

24 A role is the set of norms applicable to a family position. Roles, like the norms they are tied to, can be age and stage graded. For example, in many societies, when people think of the concept of a son, they think of somebody that is financially dependent on a father or mother. Indeed, as a child or adolescent, a son may be likely to be largely dependent on his parent(s) for financial support. However, as that son ages, his role may change in accordance with societal norms (e.g., adult sons become gainfully employed and achieve financial independence). In this example, the role of the son position evokes societal norms about gender as well as autonomy. Family stages. As opposed to Erikson s (1968) or Marcia s (1966) identity developmental categories, which focus more on individual development, a family stage represents a period of time with distinct expectations for changing interdependent family roles. Individual roles and role interaction within the family generally change with passing family stages. For example, after a family has entered the stage of launching children, steady employment is associated with autonomy for a young adult son. Therefore, steady employment is an appropriate element for the role a young adult son. In the context of the family stage immediately prior to this, however, primary identification with the role of an employee during adolescence is correlated with criminality and antisocial behavior (Wright, Cullen, & Williams, 2002). Transition. In the family life course development framework, a transition is the passage from one individual or family stage to another. A transition may be on-time or off-time. Offtime transitions are associated with deleterious consequences for family units and family members. Timing is regulated by age and stage graded social norms. For example, if the transition from adolescence into the adjacent phase of adulthood is too early, or off time, due to a financial necessity for employment during adolescence, antisocial behavior such as theft, vandalism, or physically violent outbursts may be more likely to follow (Wright et al., 2002). The family life course development framework holds that transitions, such as the individual transition from high school or college student to high school or college graduate or dropout are formally marked by distinct events (e.g., graduation day or day of formal withdrawal from school), but can be characterized by a prolonged transition process. Family life course. Family life course is family development, conceptualized as an unending series of individual and group transitions form one stage to another. The family life course is organized along the lines of on-time and off-time transitions and roles are regulated by 11

25 societal and cultural norms. Interaction within a family and the interaction of the family and society keep development continuous. Multiple dimensions of time. Scholars rooted in the family life course development recognize that although the measurement of time may be uniformly regimented, the experience of time is quite the opposite. This framework also posits that people experience time not so much a function of precisely calculated minutes, hours, weeks and years, but in terms of significant events. This framework appreciates that the family developmental process is not based solely on an unfolding of biological events. Development is directly influenced by historical factors as well as societal norms about the order in which specific events are to take place. Further, this framework recognizes the tendency of people to intentionally organize their individual and familial growth along the lines of these sequencing norms. Family stages of development are not just sequential but they also influence one another. For example, the more time an adolescent spends engaging in behaviors such as studying and participating in extracurricular activities that lead her to become embedded in the high school phase of her life, the more likely she is to graduate high school (Alexander, Entwisle, & Kabbani, 2001). This refers not only to the amount of total time spent in a phase, but also to the way the behavior and events that occur during a given stage predict future transitions. Although individuals and families certainly stray from expected sequences, the life course development framework assumes that this has consequences that can often be measured and predicted. In an examination of the effects of unemployment on the transition from adolescence to adulthood in Norway, Hammer (1996) found that young, unemployed men were more likely than their female counterparts to remain living at home with their parents and also had more of a tendency to behave according to traditional gender roles. From a family life course development perspective, this could be explained by assuming that these young men, perceiving pressure to conform to a societal norm of adult financial independence and autonomy, behave in ways that are especially consistent with and age and stage appropriate gender roles in an effort to compensate and self-regulate the family developmental process. This is consistent with and relevant to more recent empirical findings (e.g., Haid et al., 2010). Hammer (2003) and his multinational team followed up with this work, offering a more thorough exploration of the effects of unemployment on young people in the context of European and Western society. Employing concepts from the family life course development framework, they were able to 12

26 organize a complex discussion of the potential longitudinal family and individual consequences of unemployment among 15 to 24 year old males and females within the broader social context of time-limited opportunities, poverty, and marginalization. Rationale for using family life course development framework. Employing concepts from the family life course development framework in this study will afford an opportunity to organize and address the complexity of relevant societal and cultural expectations for the purpose grasping as much as possible about the perspectives of participants that live within the ever-evolving context of U.S. society. This framework will also help to bridge the gap between the inevitable limitations of a study that only addresses a sample of participants living in Florida and in U.S. society at a given point in history and the international community of identity research consumers. For example, by employing this framework in this study to conceptualize participant age in terms of life stage and generally expected major transitions in socio-economic and broader societal context, a researcher studying a different population in another time may be able build on this work by using the life course development framework to also explain those participants' ages in terms of life stage and generally expected major transitions in socioeconomic and broader societal context. Employing the family life course development framework in this research project offers a strong opportunity for theoretical generalizability. In short, the family life course development framework facilitates comparison of the results of this study to those of research on other populations, because although specific transition-related norms vary across cultures, it is possible to discuss the family and individual experience in terms of life course transitions and family life course transitions regardless of culture or broader societal setting. Family Differentiation: One-dimensional versus Two-dimensional Model The concept of family differentiation, or the extent and nature of emotional interdependence among family system members, has been extensively addressed by relational social scientists and researchers. Historically, researchers (e.g., Minuchin, 1974 & Olson, 1982) have used a single dimension to explain family differentiation where an ideal balance of autonomy is indexed as a single dimensional construct. This model of differentiation has been termed the one-dimensional model (Manzi et al., 2006), and historically it has gone relatively unchallenged by identity and family science scholars. 13

27 In recent years, however, the one-dimensional model of differentiation has been criticized as not fully capturing family differentiation. For example, some researchers have challenged the model's generalizability across cultural and ethnic boundaries (e.g., Chun & MacDermid, 1997; Fuhrman & Holmbeck, 1995). Others have suggested that a two-dimensional model better accounts for the nature of family differentiation (e.g., Barber & Buehler, 1996; Manzi et al., 2006; Scabini, 1985). Such a model would reflect two separate dimensions of differentiation including family cohesion and family enmeshment. Previous research has further highlighted the distinction between a one- versus twodimensional model. For example, Campbell et al. (1984) conducted a study on cohesion and enmeshment that has been cited often in identity formation literature. The study explored the relationships between two independent variables, identity status and gender, and four outcome variables: connectedness, communication, individuality, and satisfaction with independence. Campbell et al. asserted that their research was a response to Grotevant's contributions (Grotevant, 1983; Cooper, Grotevant, & Condon, 1984) regarding the family differentiation constructs, stating our interpretation of Grotevant's position is that a moderate degree of connectedness, reflected through shared affection and an acceptance of individuality, provides the psychological foundation and security to begin the searching process of self-defined commitments (p. 512). This statement is consistent with the one-dimensional model of cohesion and enmeshment. In effect, the authors define enmeshment as a high level of cohesion, or connectedness: they use the term enmeshment to explain that extreme affection (enmeshment) between adolescents and their parents and limited family-based tolerance for individuality might enmesh adolescents and encourage foreclosure in identity formation (p. 512). The authors further concluded that the one- dimensional model of cohesion and enmeshment is supported. However, the authors' hypotheses themselves, specifically the supported ones, actually appear to be more consistent with a two-dimensional model of family differentiation. Consider what it would have looked like had Campbell et al. (1984) constructed hypotheses designed to test a two-dimensional model of family differentiation. They might have predicted that highcommitment (foreclosed or identity-achieved) adolescents would have more affectionate relationships with their parents than those in low commitment statuses (moratorium or diffuse). 14

28 In fact Campbell et al. did predict this; and the hypothesis was supported. They might have also predicted that high-exploration adolescents (identity-achieved or moratorium) would have more perceived independence (lower enmeshment) from their parents than their lower exploration counterparts (foreclosed or diffused). Campbell et al. predicted this as well; and this hypothesis was also supported. To focus on both family differentiation and identity development, Watson and Protinsky (1988) examined family interactions and their relationship to adolescent identity development in black U.S. families. They assumed a one dimensional model of enmeshment and set out to explore the extent to which enmeshment predicted identity status. The researchers theorized that a higher enmeshment status would be predictive of identity foreclosure, and that hypothesis was supported by their study. However, contrary to their stated expectations, the researchers also concluded that high enmeshment levels were predictive of identity achievement status. Support of a two-dimensional model of family differentiation including cohesion and enmeshment comes from Fuhrman and Holmbeck (1995) who examined relationships between adolescent emotional autonomy and parent child relationships. Participants included 96 adolescents at an urban Catholic school in a large city in the eastern United States (U.S.). The mothers and teachers of subjects also participated in the study. The authors employed multiple regression to test this relationship and to test eight moderating variables. Ultimately, the authors concluded that the effect of emotional autonomy on the parent-child relationship varies according to the unique qualities of the relationship, specifying that emotional autonomy predicted a reduction in adjustment only when the parent-child relationship could be characterized as warm and low conflict. Emotional autonomy actually predicted higher adjustment if the parent-child relationship could be considered cold or high conflict. As a more direct test of both the one-dimensional and two-dimensional models, Barber and Buehler (1996) examined the viability of the two-dimensional model compared to the onedimensional model of cohesion and enmeshment among U.S. children. In measuring the independent variables, Barber and Buehler (1996) used the cohesion and enmeshment subscales of the Colorado Self Report of Family Functioning Inventory [CSRFFI]. Each CSRFFI subscale consists of five 4-point items. They used exploratory factor analysis with oblimin (nonorthogonal) rotation, an analysis that allows factors to be correlated. The authors' analysis established a two-factor solution, which explained 54 percent of the variance in item responses. 15

29 In measuring outcomes, the authors utilized four subscales of the Child Behavior Checklist Youth Self Report (CBC): Withdrawn (α =.57), Anxious-Depressed (α =.87), Delinquent (α =.62), and Aggressive (α =.79). The researchers further identified the moderating variables of grade in school and gender. The researchers drew from a population of white, middle income, fifth, eighth, and tenth grade children in suburban Tennessee. The authors recruited the entire population of school children within a selection of grade levels and schools, with a 65 percent response rate (N = 471). In their analysis, the researchers employed multiple regression to compare both linear (two-dimensional) and curvilinear (one-dimensional) models of cohesion and enmeshment. Linear models yielded nine significant results related specifically to cohesion and enmeshment, while the curvilinear models yielded only one significant result, supporting the conclusion that cohesion and enmeshment are best conceptualized as two distinct dimensions, each having a unique linear relationship with relevant outcomes. Barber and Buehler (1996) concluded that a two-dimensional model was supported by their analysis. In this study, the authors measured cohesion and enmeshment separately and found differences in the ways that cohesion and enmeshment predicted an established set of outcomes. In addition, the authors noted that the independent variables, cohesion and enmeshment, interacted with one another, adding further support to their conclusion that a twodimensional model was a more reasonable and accurate understanding of the nature of cohesion and enmeshment. It is noteworthy that Barber and Buehler (1996) made a point of attempting to isolate white, middle income children within their sample for study to the extent of removing fully 53 potential participants, roughly ten percent of their overall sample, explaining only that they did this because the vast majority of their sample size was comprised of white, middle income children. This study cannot be taken to explain the relevance of the cohesion and enmeshment constructs in a cross cultural or minority culture context, especially with regard to outcomes. Chun and MacDermid (1997) studied the implications of what they referred to as differentiation and individuation levels for 170 Korean adolescents in what would be the US equivalent of ninth or tenth grade. They directionally hypothesized that Korean adolescents' individuation levels would be negatively correlated with self-esteem. They also hypothesized that gender would play an important role in interrelationships between individuation and that differentiation between and adolescent and his or her same-sex parent would be more strongly 16

30 related to adolescent individuation than differentiation among parents or in the adolescent's relationship with the opposite sex parent. These hypotheses were supported. In addition, the influence of father-adolescent differentiation on adolescent individualization (beta =.32) was found to be much stronger than the influence of mother-adolescent differentiation; for girls the converse was true (beta=.61). Considered in the context of our non-homogenous society, this study is a powerful argument for studying and understanding the implications of family differentiation outside of a narrow cultural or ethnic reference group. Critical Review of Theoretical Frameworks Marcian ego identity theory. Though Marcia (1966) did not present his ego identity theory as a stagewise model, he developed his identity statuses by expanding upon Erik Erikson s stagewise psychosocial crisis resolution paradigm. Further, the Marcian identity status of identity achievement arguably implies that an individual has passed through a period of moratorium on her way to achievement. Therefore, a stagewise element of the theory appears to be implied. This stagewise element may contribute to a tendency for scholars in the field to assume a high value of exploration. Empirically, this valuation may not be universal. Additionally, some findings suggest that commitment may be associated with positive outcomes even in the absence of exploration. In other words, commitment, inclusive of identity achievement as well as identity foreclosure, may be associated with positive outcomes (e.g. Arseth, Kroger, Martinussen, & Marcia, 2009); Crocetti, Klimstra, Keijsers, Hale, & Meeus, 2009; Mullis et al., 2003; Watson & Protinsky, 1988). Yet, due to a theoretically inherent emphasis on the value of exploration as opposed to commitment, it is possible that the data that supports this may be at risk for being under-acknowledged. Much of the research that has been done on ego identity development has not addressed the inter-related issues of culture, race, and ethnicity. Historically, many studies in this area have used data from participants that predominantly identify as white (Schwartz, 2005). Côté and Levine (1988) issue a call for a richer contextual understanding of the impact of culture on the study of ego identity formation. However, more recent findings support the notion that ethnic identity is a legitimate and stand-alone domain of ego identity and further suggest that a strong personal sense of ethnic identity may be associated with positive outcomes (Schwartz et al., 2010; Umaña-Taylor et al., 2009). 17

31 Family life course development framework. The family life course development framework has been criticized in important ways (Hutchinson, 2011). The underlying theory may have difficulty in accommodating heterogeneity within a society. The usefulness of the theory may be questioned with regard to societies where individuals lives follow highly diverse patterns, such as the United States. This is because the theory presupposes the existence of patterns in development over the life course. However, life course development theory does not presuppose that individuals lives follow any one particular pattern. Therefore the theory is flexible enough to be adapted to describe the life course across many cultures. A second, perhaps more serious criticism of life course development theory is that it does not address the connections between individuals and large institutions. This may be particularly relevant for Hispanic participants, whose ethnic identity is potentially being molded in part by institutions such as the United States Census Bureau. However, although this theory taken alone may not emphasize these connections, the present study explicitly does accomplish this emphasis without particular impediment from the family life course developmental framework. Relations between Family Differentiation and Ego Identity Regardless of whether the concept is represented as one dimensional or two dimensional, and regardless of whether the one or two dimensions are termed cohesion, enmeshment, differentiation, emotional autonomy, attachment, or independence, it is both theoretically and empirically clear that relational dynamics within the family system of an older adolescent or young adult are predictive of identity status (Adams et al., 1987; Arseth et al., 2009; Campbell et al., 1984; Faber et al., 2003; Jackson et al., 1990; Marcia, 1966; Watson & Protinsky, 1988). Further, a review of the literature and the chronologically progressive nature of conclusions about the underlying constructs have revealed a compelling case for assuming a twodimensional model of family differentiation. This is underscored by the explicit testing of a twodimensional model (Barber & Buehler, 1996; Manzi et al., 2006). It is also established that the concept of Marcian identity status is of practical value in part because the Marcian identity statuses can be predictive of measurably positive outcomes and prosocial behaviors, especially in older adolescents or younger adults (Arseth et al., 2009; Crocetti et al., 2009; and Hardy & Kisling, 2006). It would therefore be worthwhile to pursue a detailed understanding of the potential effect of family differentiation on psychological wellbeing via Marcian ego identity variables. 18

32 Although there are several Marcian identity status-specific examples of scholarly attempts to isolate these underlying family relational dynamics in the literature (Adams et al., 1987; Arseth et al., 2009; Campbell et al., 1984; Faber et al., 2003; Jackson et al. 1990; Marcia, 1966; Mullis et al., 2003; Watson & Protinsky, 1988), none to date have assumed or tested a specific, two-dimensional model of family differentiation in relation to the Marcian identity statuses. Further, despite strong support of the contextual relevance and function of a twodimensional model of family differentiation, there is no discernible trend in the literature of moving toward any universal, operationalized language to describe the relational dynamics that may quantifiably explain the evolution of commitment and exploration statuses in older adolescents and young adults. This is the case despite the Freudian notion of ego identity evolving as a consequence of relational dynamics within an individual's family of origin (Freud, 1933) and the inherent relational processes embedded in the Eriksonian intimacy vs. isolation crisis associated with adolescents moving toward young adulthood (Erikson, 1959). Relations between Family Differentiation and Psychological Well-Being The present study uses three measures of psychological well-being as outcome (dependent) variables: life satisfaction, as measured by the Satisfaction with Life Scale (SLS; Diener et al., 1985); depressive symptoms, as measured by Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale (CES- D; Radloff, 1977) and anxiety, as measured by a short form of the State- Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI-6; Marteau & Bekker, 1992). These variables were selected for several reasons. First, Manzi et al. (2006) used these same measures to show that these outcomes are related to identity threat. The present research instead hypothesizes that these psychological well-being outcomes will be related to identity formation variables (commitment and exploration). Second, Manzi et al. (2006) also used these same measures to show that these psychological well-being outcomes were related to family differentiation (cohesion and enmeshment). The present research hypothesizes the same relationships. Manzi et al. (2006) found family differentiation to be related to the particular psychological well-being variables that are to be examined in this study. Specifically, in the British sample, cohesion was negatively related to depressive symptoms and positively related to 19

33 life satisfaction. Enmeshment was positively related to both anxiety and depressive symptoms. In the Italian sample, cohesion was negatively related to both anxiety and depressive symptoms, and was positively related to life satisfaction. Manzi et al. s (2006) results show the impact of identity development and psychological well-being. These results also form the basis of the hypotheses in this study. In related findings, Fuhrman and Holmbeck (1995) concluded that the effect of emotional autonomy on the parent-child relationship varies according to the quality of the relationship. Emotional autonomy predicted a reduction in adjustment only when the parent-child relationship could be characterized as warm and low conflict. Emotional autonomy actually predicted higher adjustment if the parent-child relationship could be considered cold or high conflict. Emotional autonomy is conceptually opposed to enmeshment. If the impact of emotional autonomy depends on the quality of the relationship, this impact may also depend on cultural differences, as hypothesized in this study and as actually found by Manzi et al. (2006). Relations between Ego Identity and Psychological Well-Being Manzi et al. (2006) used the same measures of psychological well-being selected for this study to show that these outcomes are related to identity threat. The present research builds on this finding by hypothesizing that these psychological well-being outcomes will be related to identity formation variables (commitment and exploration). Barber and Beuhler (1996) found that higher enmeshment predicted less desirable outcomes for a combined depressive symptoms-anxiety variable as well as for withdrawal and aggression. Regression slopes ranged from.14 to.26. In contrast, higher cohesion predicted more desirable outcomes for depressive symptoms-anxiety, withdrawal, aggression, and delinquency. Regression slopes ranged from -.24 to Furthermore, researchers used growth mixture modeling (GMM) to show that adolescents could be categorized into two classes: those whose anxiety began high and increased; and those whose anxiety began low and declined. Those in the high anxiety class tended to show lower levels of commitment over time (Crocetti et al., 2009). More broadly, ego identity status has been found to predict adaptive psychological functioning and prosocial behaviors in young adults as well as older adolescents. A metaanalysis of fourteen studies found that secure attachment (the most adaptive attachment style) is more frequently observed among individuals with identity-achieved status than foreclosed or 20

34 diffuse status (Arseth et al., 2009). Securely attached individuals are comfortable depending on others and having others depend on them. (Arseth et al., 2009, p. 5). Another meta-analysis of twenty-one studies found that individuals with high-exploration identity statuses also experienced greater levels of intimacy (Arseth et al., 2009). Hardy and Kisling (2006) found three measures of prosocial behavior to correlate with ego identity status. Community service, prosocial activities, and prosocial behavioral tendencies each correlated positively with identity achievement (p. 363). Each of these three measures also correlated negatively with identity diffusion. Moreover, the higher commitment statuses (achievement and foreclosure) were associated with higher levels of affection between parent and child (Campbell et al., 1984). The Role of Culture and Ethnicity Côté and Levine (1988) called for a richer contextual understanding of the impact of culture and ethnicity on the study of ego identity formation. This study represents a relatively early appeal for identity scholars to acknowledge the perils of an inherent culture of reference bias across the literature. It also argues that cultural and ethnic literacy incorporated into identity research as well as related intervention programs could ultimately benefit clinicians and clients. Importance of Comparing Ethnic Groups One goal of this study is the preliminary isolation of a possible culture of reference within the family differentiation and identity literature. The United States is different from Europe in its governmental structure: States have some independence from the Federal government, and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland [U.K.] and Italy are a part of the European Union, but states in the U.S. are not separate, sovereign, or formal countries with unique, established cultural roots, norms, and expectations extending back in excess of a thousand years (Côté & Levine, 1988). The modern civic and legal nationality of a Floridian, for example, is identical to that of a Georgian or a Californian. For this reason, it would not be sufficient or justifiable to simply compare participants from one state versus another state in the present study, because to do so would not capture the contrast in cultural norms and expectations as described by Manzi et al. (2006). The present study will accomplish this by focusing on participants who identify themselves as non-hispanic Whites and Hispanics of any race. 21

35 Field (2002) describes the melting pot perspective as optimistic, but as Glazer (1993) and Vertovec (2010) have asserted, one important criticism of the melting pot perspective is that it was inherently ethnocentric in prioritizing the ultimately British Colonial cultural values of the early U.S. power elite over the values of residents from other backgrounds. Another criticism of the melting pot perspective is that even when its proponents did place significant value on the contributions of early European immigrants, they still often ignored the contributions of other minority groups in the U.S., notably African-Americans (Baldwin, 1955; DuBois, 1925; and Glazer, 1993). Glazer (1993) explained that as professionals continued to explore the value of the melting pot perspective, eventually the trend in the literature moved away from a debate about the ideal balancing point on an assimilation continuum ranging from amalgamation to acculturation, or Americanization (e.g., Hollinger, 2006; Vought, 2004), aided by the metaphor of the melting pot, to advocacy for cultural pluralism (Kallen, 1956), or the idea that it is worthwhile for persons of varied ethnic backgrounds to hold on to their unique cultural identities. Hollinger (2006) is a post-multiculturalist scholar that has articulated the concept of postethnicity and argued that U.S. citizens should ideally retain and receive respect for expressing a cultural identity but, in case of immediate conflict, prioritize national, non-ethnic, ideologicallybased norms and expectations where possible in an effort to preserve peaceful societal progress. Hollinger's post-ethnicity concept is open to criticism about the risk of unwitting, myopically inherent ethnocentrism in defining those supposedly non-ethnic, ideologically-based norms and expectations. As Baldwin (1955) noted, whether one is exploring the benefits of a more assimilationist or more multiculturalist worldview, separateness can be forcefully imposed on the individual by the reaction of others to physiological differences in the power elite as distinct from ethnominorities, despite any intellectual or individual desire to transcend ethnicity. Thus, as Vertovec (2010) explained, begins another, more modern post-multiculturalist cycle of debate between the optimistic idealism originally present in the melting pot perspective and the risks of excessive emphasis on cultural separateness. It is in this post-multiculturalist context, then, that the present study examined the value of family differentiation and identity development in furthering a broad academic understanding 22

36 of cross-cultural relations. This will be accomplished by the explicit and contextual justification of the two comparison groups. This represents an important methodological advance, but it is in line with contemporary professional standards because in the context of understanding cultural and ethnic diversity, identity scholars have given greater consideration of postmulticulturalism. For example, Glazer (1993) credited the Eriksonian concept of ego identity with giving diversity scholars and historians a language with which to explore the experience of the individual as a separate entity and as a member of a group. In addition, Glazer (1993) attributed the notion of modern American identity and its avoidance of explicit ethnic reference (p. 125) in part to Erikson's own experiences with Americanization as something that Erikson acknowledged helped him in his initial conceptualization of ego identity. Ethnoracial Groups in the Research The present study featured a comparison of two ethnoracial groups based on the racial and ethnic categories used in the 2010 United States Census: non-hispanic whites and Hispanics of any race (Humes et al. 2011). This methodological choice stands in contrast to comparing groups from different countries or states (Manzi et al., 2006). The goal of the present study is to capture potential differences between a societal culture of reference and a culture, ethnicity, ethnominority, ethnoracial group, or as Emerson (Field, 2002) described it, a U.S. group that is not yet fully assimilated into ethnocultural majority norms. Rationale for Focus on White Non-Hispanic Participants British-Americans are not necessarily representative of ethnocultural U.S. majority or reference group norms. Vertovec (2010) explained that current immigration and emigration patterns represent unprecedented, accelerated movement and freedom of movement of different national and ethnic groups within Western, democratic societies, including in the U.K. Vertovec (2010) argued that despite this superdiversity (p. 86) in the U.K., a power elite-driven culture of reference and even frank xenophobia currently culturally co-exists with accepted societal sentiments to the contrary, possibly as a result of the influence of the multiculturalist paradigm. Thus, it is not currently reasonable to assume anything about the culture of self-identified British-Americans, in part because they may be part of the new British superdiversity trend and not steeped in British majority cultural norms, and in part because British citizens are themselves undergoing a tremendous shift in the definition and implications of majority ethnocultural norms and roles. Given that the U.S. culture of reference is arguably based on British Colonial majority 23

37 ethnocultural norms from nearly two and a half centuries ago (Glazer, 1993), the argument must be made that any modern U.S. resident that identifies specifically as British-American might be more a product of any segment of present-day U.K. culture than a U.S. culture of reference. Given Manzi, et. al's (2006) decision to study Italian participants and highlight Italian culture, Italian-Americans in the context of this study represents a convenient, and by no means exhaustive, example of the ambiguous concept of whiteness in the U.S.: In isolating participants for the present study that identify per USCB guidelines as white alone, and not ethnically Hispanic, as a potential representative for the U.S. culture of reference, it is important to consider the field of academic whiteness studies (e.g., Jacobson, 1999; Kolchin, 2002; Taylor, 2004), which, in a post-multiculturalist context, implies that U.S. whiteness is more of a complex, socially constructed privilege status as opposed to a product of an individual's genetic lineage. For example, the USCB (Humes et al., 2011) allowed census respondents to select one of five races, or to write in their race in their own words. The USCB then categorized respondents that asserted via free-response that they were Italian, Italian-American, or even European- American as white. Assuming that the USCB's categorization policies represent one institutional, bureaucratic, standardized definition of whiteness in the U.S. today, Italian-Americans can in an important respect be considered white in the present-day U.S. and, therefore, per the assumptions of whiteness studies (e.g., Jacobson, 1999; Kolchin, 2002; Taylor, 2004), afforded a privileged social status and by extension the right to further co-construct the meaning of the term white in the U.S. moving forward, making Italian-Americans an active part of the culture of reference in the U.S. Of course, this argument could also be made for Irish-American census respondents, Polish-American census respondents, or any number of groups that the USCB (Humes et al., 2011) has decided to categorize as white, even if, like Italian-Americans, those groups were not historically afforded a socially privileged status in the U.S. (e.g., Behdad, 2005; Guglielmo, 2004). The legacy of discrimination against Italian immigrants, particularly in the twentieth century U.S. (e.g., Behdad, 2005; Guglielmo, 2004), is one example of the difficulties in cultural assimilation. Today, people in the U.S. who identify with their Italian heritage have the option of celebrating their heritage openly and, if they desire to do so, simultaneously working to incorporate their ideas of what it means to be Italian-American into the notion of what it means to be part of U.S. culture or white in general. In this way, modern self-identified Italian- 24

38 Americans, like other USCB-defined white groups, are afforded an opportunity to retain and refine a personal sense of cultural separateness while maintaining an identity as a part of a U.S. culture of reference and a unified national culture. This process has led scholars to assert that the Italian- American identity is unique, distinct from the Italian or Italian immigrant identity, and a recognizable contributor to the overall modern national identity and culture of reference (e.g., Guglielmo, 2004; Guglielmo & Salerno, 2003). The present study featured U.S. participants of different ethnicities, and as such may be in a unique position to offer insight into that balance. In the context of an evolving postmulticulturalist perspective, this study will focus on all participants that identify or are classified per USCB (2011) standards as white alone in an effort to capture members of a present-day, actively co-constructed culture of reference that are afforded the opportunity to keep, define, and celebrate their separateness while simultaneously contributing to the idea of whiteness in the U.S. Rationale for Focus on Hispanic Participants There are five USCB categories that allow respondents to identify themselves as nonwhite: a) black or African-American; b) American Indian or Alaska Native; c) Asian, or d) Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander groups, or e) some other race (Humes et al., 1999, p. 2). Researchers have offered recent confirmation that ethnic identity achievement is not only reasonably conceived of as a dimension of ego identity, it is reliably measurable and even specifically associated with positive outcomes (e.g. Schwartz, Zamboanga, Weisskirch, & Wang, 2010; Umaña-Taylor, Gonzales-Backen, & Guimond, 2009). Yet in recent empirical studies, researchers have also found that participants that selfidentify as Hispanic, as opposed to other racial or ethnocultural groups, stand out in the realm of ethnocultural identity exploration and commitment. For example, Juang and Syed (2010) compared multiple ethnocultural groups and found that participants that did not identify as white were more likely than white participants to engage in cultural socialization, or social activities that increased a sense of belonging to an ethnocultural group, with their families, and that this type of socialization was particularly likely to predict an increased a sense of ethnocultural identity for white participants, who, ostensibly, as members of a privileged social group, may not otherwise have been prompted to think about their cultural uniqueness. However, Juang and 25

39 Syed (2010) also found that self-identified Hispanic participants were the only group that differed significantly from white participants in that Hispanic participants demonstrate significantly more cultural identity exploration than their white-identified counterparts. Schwartz, Mason, Pantin, and Szapocznik (2009) analyzed longitudinal data of Hispanic early to middle adolescents with a variety of national heritage backgrounds and found that for participants that tended to experience increasing levels of identity confusion as they moved toward later adolescence and identity development, family functioning initially predicted identity confusion at earlier ages, but at older ages, increased levels of identity confusion in turn predicted lower levels of family functioning. Further, Syed and Azimitia (2008) found that selfidentified Latino/Chicano and self-identified Asian participants tended to have a stronger sense of ethnocultural identity achievement as opposed to white and mixed-ethnicity participants, and indicated in open-ended narratives that they had spent more time contemplating an overall sense of ethnocultural identity in the first place. Taken in concert, recent research has indicated that that there is a unique component to the intergenerational transmission of ideas about U.S. Hispanic self-identification (e.g., Juang & Syed, 2010), that there is evidence that, for Hispanic families specifically, identity confusion of a mid-adolescent can predict a decrease in family functioning (Schwartz et al., 2009), and that people that specifically identify as Hispanic in the U.S. have spent more time thinking about what their ethnocultural identity means to them than their white, mixed-ethnicity, and other nonwhite identified counterparts (Juang & Syed, 2010; Syed & Azimitia, 2008). This is in line with Phinney's (1990) assertion that ethnocultural identity develops concurrently with ego identity and, if an individual decides that her ethnocultural identity is an important part of her overall identity, it becomes an integral part of her overall ego identity, ostensibly due to an intense period of ethnocultural identity exploration that preceded ethnocultural identity achievement. Phinney (1990) asserted that this is evident because people with a developed sense of ethnocultural identity often demonstrate this by raising the issue of ethnocultural identity themselves, often in everyday social interactions. Consistent with the post-multiculturalist perspective, evidence suggests that a bicultural worldview may be beneficial (e.g., Chae & Foley, 2010). In addition, evidence suggests that ethnocultural ego identity achievement is associated with positive outcomes (e.g., Schwartz et al., 2010; Umaña-Taylor et al., 2009). Nevertheless, people in the U.S. who identify as Hispanic 26

40 or partly Hispanic tend to struggle with the relevance of taking on a Hispanic identity (e.g., Syed & Azimitia, 2008), or else expend more effort exploring their ethnocultural identity than other people in the U.S. (e.g., Juang & Syed, 2010; Schwartz et al., 2009; Syed & Azimitia, 2008). One possible explanation for this pattern of recently published results is that the Hispanic-identified people in the U.S. occupy a unique position in the current U.S. ethnoracial spectrum. Although a Hispanic person in the U.S. may consider themselves white-alone, or some other race, or a mix of races, they may or may not think of their status as Hispanic, non- Hispanic, or mixed Hispanic and non-hispanic as relevant to their race or ethnocultural identity. This may create a kind of ethnocultural ego identity cognitive dissonance between an individual s cultural views about race that have been handed down through generations to a Hispanic-identified person and the conflicting messages that U.S. society is currently sending them about identifying as ethnically Hispanic. As Boyd (2010) explains, the term Hispanic describes a broad range of people with varied national, racial, and ethnic origins, most notably outside of the U.S. Further, the person that is described as Hispanic in the U.S. may have simply identified as white or black in her home country, or her grandparent's or great-grandparent's home country. Boyd's (2010) assertions about the strong cultural legacy of European Colonialism, most notably Spanish Colonialism in Latin America, combined with the legacy of brutality, oppression, and slavery suffered by persons of African and/or indigenous heritage in the many parts of the world touched by Spanish Colonialism are an excellent example of why the specific Hispanic racial identity of a Hispanic-identified person in the U.S. is essential to understanding the rich, multinationally relevant U.S. ethnocultural Hispanic identity. In attempting to grasp the possible impact of racial constructs and discrimination and brutality against Hispanic persons that were not labeled as white before immigrating to the United States, whether in this generation or a previous generation, it may be helpful to consider the broader implications of DuBois' (1925) suggestion that: the race problem is the other side of the labor problem; and the black man's burden is the white man's burden. At least it will be of absorbing interest, to step within these distant world shadows, and, looking backward, to view the European and white American labor problem from this wide perspective, remembering always that empire is the heavy hand of capital abroad. (p. 386) 27

41 Although the USCB (Humes et al., 2011) allows participants to identify as any race and either Hispanic or non-hispanic, conforming respondents are not permitted to identify as, for example, white-alone without deciding to describe themselves as Hispanic or non-hispanic. This is because the USCB defines the term Hispanic as an ethnicity and not a race. This is, in fact, the only ethnic category that the USCB employed in its most recent census, making a respondent's self- identification as either a Hispanic or a non-hispanic a unique experience. Further, respondents that opted to ignore the five main race categories as well as the Hispanic ethnicity prompt and simply write in as a free response that they were Hispanic or Mexican, Mexican-American, Chicano, Puerto Rican, Cuban, Latino, Spanish, or any other preidentified Hispanic group (p. 2), were in effect labeled as non-white, or some other race (p. 2), as opposed to, for example, a person that might have written in that they were Italian-American and subsequently categorized by the USCB as white. This speaks to a nation that is at odds with the possibly strong expectation of a Hispanic person in the U.S. that they have a right to describe themselves as white, black, or any other race without consideration of their status as ethnically Hispanic or not Hispanic. People in the U.S. who identify as both Hispanic and any race are essentially being asked to choose between those two identities in cases where doing so does not necessarily fit with their conception of ethnocultural identity. Thus, the USCB's decision to recognize Hispanic vs. non- Hispanic as a sole ethnic category places respondents that identify as Hispanic in a uniquely ambiguous category that may in many cases be very much at odds with ethnocultural aspects of a respondent's established sense of identity and may arguably represent and even partially create a presently transitional, unique, and ambiguous U.S. ethnoracial status. Although the discussion here is not empirical proof of the mechanisms that facilitate a unique ethnocultural status for self-identified Hispanic persons in the U.S., or even proof of the unique general ambiguity of the Hispanic ethnoracial status, it does lend strong and sufficient literature support of the methodological choice to target participants that identify as Hispanic. The goal of the present study is to isolate participants that are less likely to represent an ethnic or national culture of reference, and self-identified Hispanic participants in the U.S. are empirically, bureaucratically, and philosophically more likely to capture that dynamic, arguably even more so than established minority groups, perhaps as a direct result of their currently ambiguous ethnoracial status. 28

42 Research Participants Participants for this study were students at one of two large state universities in the southeastern United States within the age range Marcia (1980) posited that a large amount of ego identity development takes place for older adolescents that ranged from the ages of 18-21, consistent with the Eriksonian identity vs. role confusion crisis. Marcia (1989) also asserted that shifts in Eriksonian ego identity crisis stages took place after an interval of intrapsychic destructuring and crisis resolution. This is in line with the family life course development framework concept of family stages. However, it has also been theoretically posited and empirically supported that U.S. women may be more likely to commence work on the Eriksonian identity vs. role confusion crisis only after they have resolved the intimacy vs. isolation crisis (e.g., Campbell et al., 1984; Grotevant, 1983; Schiedel & Marcia, 1985; Mullis et al., 2003), or may possibly work through both crises concurrently (e.g., Archer & Waterman, 1994). Moreover, based on the family life course development framework, the status of college student in itself may represent a transitional stage and further encourage ego identity crisis development, resolution, and periods of intrapsychic destructuring (Erikson, 1959) as the U.S. students, like their counterparts in the study by Manzi et al. (2006), prepare for an adult life after building a foundation for it in college in their late adolescence and/or early adulthood, although it should be noted that this does not reflect the adulthood preparation experiences of all U.S. adolescents. Finally, there are ethnocultural considerations. For example, Manzi et al. (2006) reported that 71.6 % of British participants in their study planned on living away from home in the near future and, by contrast, only 8.5% of their Italian counterparts had the same intention (p. 679). There may be a cognate dynamic in Hispanic vs. white participants, and dynamics may differ in older adolescents vs. young adults. Marcia (1980) asserted that persons ranging in age from may have resolved the identity vs. role confusion Eriksonian crisis. Therefore, allowing participants' ages to range from 18-26, or in other words, to target older adolescents and young adults, should sufficiently allow the present study to capture and feature an empirical exploration of the relevance of all of these factors. 29

43 Summary Descriptions of Variables Based on the previous research outlined in the literature review, the present study uses a two-dimensional assessment of family differentiation. Unlike previous research (e.g., Manzi et al., 2006), the present study examines the effect of family differentiation on psychological wellbeing, both directly and indirectly via identity formation. Moreover, two separate ethnic groups were used as samples for this study. The variables examined in this research are described below. Each of these variables and their theoretical underpinnings has been discussed in the preceding sections of this chapter. Family Differentiation Cohesion. Cohesion is the extent to which family members share supportive emotional bonds. As reflected in the items on the Cohesion subscale of the Colorado Self-report of Family Functioning Inventory, cohesive families share a feeling of togetherness, help and support one another, and get along well with each other. (Bloom, 1985, p. 232, Table 3). Members of cohesive families are able to rely on one another for emotional support. A lack of cohesiveness results in a sense of isolation which may lead to poor psychological outcomes. Enmeshment. Enmeshment is the extent to which the family restricts the autonomy of its members. As reflected in the items on the Enmeshment subscale of the Colorado Self-report of Family Functioning Inventory, members of enmeshed families feel pressured to spend most free time together. They feel guilty if they wanted to spend some time alone. (Bloom, 1985, p. 234, Table 3). Members of enmeshed families may have difficulty establishing independent identities, since individual activities and interests must be subordinated to family goals and values. Ego Identity Commitment. Commitment is an individual s ability to consistently identify with those values and roles one has chosen to represent oneself and to make new choices that reflect a stable and consistent pattern of self-selected identity (Marcia, 1966). An individual with a high level of commitment in a particular domain will pursue relatively consistent goals within that domain. For example, a person with a high level of commitment within the professional domain will pursue positions that advance a particular career path, rather than applying for miscellaneous jobs selected haphazardly. As reflected in the Ego Identity Process Questionnaire, individuals with a high level of commitment in the professional domain are unlikely to alter [their] 30

44 vocational goals. Those with a high level of commitment in the family domain have firmly held views concerning [their] role in [their] family. (Balistreri et al., 1995, p. 192). Exploration. Exploration is the degree to which an individual leads an examined life, or makes personal choices with an eye toward the active construction of the self. An individual with a high level of exploration in a particular domain would have put time and effort into considering various options within that domain, rather than selecting the most obvious option presented by their family or other circumstances. As reflected in the Ego Identity Process Questionnaire, individuals with a high level of exploration in the ideological domain have considered different political views thoughtfully. (Balistreri et al., 1995, p. 192). Psychological Well-Being Life satisfaction. Life satisfaction is the cognitive component of subjective well-being, in contrast with positive affect and negative affect, which are the emotional components (Diener et al., 1985). Satisfaction with life involves an individual s evaluation of their own life as whole by their own personal standards. It is a global assessment of a person's quality of life according to his chosen criteria (Shin & Johnson, 1978, p. 478, cited in Diener et al., 1985, p. 71). The Satisfaction with Life Scale is narrowly focused to assess global life satisfaction and does not tap related constructs such as positive affect... (Diener et al., 1985, p. 71). Depressive symptoms. Depressive symptoms are behaviors, emotions, and thoughts which are associated with a clinical diagnosis of a depressive disorder, but which are also observed to a lesser extent in individuals who do not meet diagnostic criteria for such a disorder. As reflected in the CES-D, depressive symptoms include crying spells, feeling sad, poor appetite, and feelings of inferiority. The CES-D scale is designed to measure depressive symptomatology in the general population (Radloff, 1977, p. 385). This scale is contrasted with other depressive symptoms scales which are designed for clinical settings. Individuals with a score of 16 or higher on the CES-D may be at risk for clinical depression. (Lewinsohn, Seeley, Roberts, & Allen, 1997). State anxiety. State anxiety is an attribute of the individual's current emotional state, in contrast to trait anxiety, which is an individual's general tendency toward anxiety across a wide range of situations. As measured by the short-form of the state scale of the STAI-6, state anxiety involves feeling tense, upset, and worried. (Marteau & Bekker, 1992). 31

45 Review of Relationships among Variables in the Research This section reviews the predicted relationships among the variables in this study, and highlights the key theoretical and empirical arguments for these predictions. Relevant theoretical and empirical arguments have been discussed in detail in earlier sections of this chapter. Cohesion and commitment. Cohesion was hypothesized to have a positive direct effect on commitment across ethnoracial groups. Identity theorists, as early as Freud (1933) and including Marcia (1989), have asserted the impact of family dynamics on identity development. A cohesive family theoretically provides adolescents with a sense of emotional security that allows them to feel confident in committing to particular identity choices. Empirical work has borne this out. Campbell et al. (1984) found that high commitment (identity-achieved or foreclosed) adolescents had more affectionate relationships with their parents than adolescents in lower commitment statuses; affectionate relationships are conceptually similar to family cohesion. Watson and Protinsky (1988) found that cohesion predicted identity achievement and foreclosure. Both articles asserted a one-dimensional model of family differentiation; this study will be the first to use the two-dimensional model of family differentiation to empirically examine the possibility that cohesion influences commitment. This will represent a significant advance in the literature if the two-dimensional model is supported, as it was in Manzi et al. (2006). Cohesion and exploration. Cohesion was hypothesized to have a direct positive effect on exploration, the same across ethnic groups. Watson and Protinsky (1988) found that high cohesion levels were predictive of identity achievement status, which is consistent with high exploration. These authors used a one-dimensional model of family differentiation; the present research will be the first to use the two-dimensional model to empirically examine the possibilities that cohesion influences exploration. Enmeshment and commitment. Enmeshment was hypothesized to have a direct positive effect on commitment across ethnic groups. Enmeshment may foster commitment by pushing adolescents and young adults to make identity choices in accordance with family norms. Watson and Protinsky (1988) found that high enmeshment levels were predictive of identity achievement and identity foreclosure statuses which are consistent with high commitment. Since these authors were using the one-dimensional model, high enmeshment levels are equivalent to high cohesion 32

46 levels. The present research will be the first to use the two-dimensional model to empirically examine the possibility that cohesion influences exploration. Enmeshment and exploration. For non-hispanic whites, enmeshment was hypothesized to have a direct negative effect on exploration. Enmeshment limits the autonomy of adolescents and young adults; therefore it was expected to reduce opportunities for exploration. Consistent with this notion, Campbell et al. (1984) found that high-exploration adolescents (identityachieved or moratorium) had greater perceived independence from their parents, corresponding to lower enmeshment levels, compared to their foreclosed or diffused counterparts. Again, these authors used a one-dimensional model of family differentiation; the present study will be the first to use the two-dimensional model to empirically examine the possibility that cohesion influences exploration. However, for Hispanics, the effect of enmeshment on exploration was hypothesized to be less negative (meaning a smaller negative effect, zero effect, or a positive effect) than for whites. This is because, for Hispanics, enmeshment was expected to be less distinct from cohesion (consistent with an oblique model of family differentiation) than it is for white non-hispanics, perhaps due the value of autonomy in cultural context (e.g., Fuhrman & Holmbeck, 1995; Chun & MacDermid, 1997; Manzi et al., 2006). Commitment and psychological well-being. Commitment was hypothesized to have positive direct effects on each of the three psychological well-being outcomes: anxiety, depressive symptoms, and life satisfaction. These effects were expected to be the same across ethnoracial groups. These predictions are based on the premise that identity commitment provides individuals a sense of purpose (e.g., Crocetti et al., 2009) that enhances psychological well-being in general, which may be manifest in a wide range of outcome variables. Commitment was expected to reduce anxiety because it reduces uncertainty about life pursuits. Commitment was expected to reduce depressive symptoms because a sense of purpose reduces feelings of helplessness. Finally, commitment was expected to increase life satisfaction because it implies that the individual is pursuing goals in accordance with the standards he or she has firmly accepted. With regard to anxiety, there is empirical support for the prediction: in a large longitudinal study, Crocetti et al., (2009) found that increases in commitment predicted decreases in anxiety. These particular psychological well-being outcomes have been selected in part because they are of general interest: depressive symptoms and anxiety are related to 33

47 important clinical diagnoses and are probably the most widely studied affective states; satisfaction with life is one of the most highly general psychological well-being outcomes. In addition, the psychological well-being outcomes outcomes have been selected because they are the same outcomes examined in Manzi et al. (2006), allowing for comparability between the present study and the study on which it is modeled. Exploration and psychological well-being. For white non-hispanic participants, exploration was hypothesized to have a positive effect on each of the psychological well-being outcomes: anxiety, depressive symptoms, and life satisfaction. Empirical evidence supports the positive effects of exploration on a wide array of measures of adaptive functioning (e.g., Arseth et al., 2009; Crocetti, et. al, 2009; Hardy & Kisling, 2006). However, none of these studies considered cultural differences; and all of them included a large majority of participants described as white or European-American. For Hispanic participants, exploration was hypothesized to have less positive effect (meaning a smaller positive effect, no effect, or a negative effect) compared to white non-hispanic participants. It was expected that due the culturally relevant value of autonomy, exploration will be less influential outside of the contextual culture of reference (e.g., McAdoo, 1981; Watson & Protinsky, 1988). Family differentiation and psychological well-being. The present study posits that family differentiation, conceptualized in terms of both cohesion and enmeshment, directly predicts three facets of psychological well-being. The preceding subsections of this study have detailed how psychological well-being will be conceptualized in terms of life satisfaction; level of depressive symptoms; and state anxiety, as measured by the satisfaction with life scale (Diener et al., 1985); the CES-D scale (Radloff, 1977); and the short-form of the state scale of the STAI-6 (Marteau & Bekker, 1992). Empirically, each of these predictions is directly supported (e.g., Manzi et al. 2006). Theoretically, family differentiation was hypothesized to directly predict these facets of psychological well-being because ego identity status is known to predict a variety prosocial behaviors and adaptive psychological functioning in older adolescents and young adults (e.g., Arseth et al., 2009; Crocetti et al., 2009; and Hardy & Kisling, 2006), and identity theorists have long held that a better understanding of the relational and cultural dynamics underlying the ego identity development process could only serve to strengthen the 34

48 predictive and practical value of the Marcian ego identity status paradigm (e.g., Marcia, 1989; Côté & Levine, 1988). The direct effects of cohesion on each of the three psychological well-being outcomes (anxiety, depressive symptoms, life satisfaction) were expected to be beneficial, and the same across ethnic groups. These predictions are based on the premise that cohesiveness in a family system provides individuals a sense of stability that enhances adaptive functioning in general, which may be manifest in a wide range of psychological outcome variables. These predictions are supported theoretically (e.g., Minuchin, 1974; Olson, 1982; Scabini, 1985) as well as empirically (e.g., Barber and Buehler; Campbell et al., 1984; Manzi et al., 2006; and Watson & Protinsky, 1988). For white non-hispanic participants, enmeshment was expected to have a detrimental direct effect on each of the psychological well-being outcomes: anxiety, depressive symptoms, and life satisfaction. These predictions are also supported theoretically (e.g., Minuchin, 1974; Olson, 1982; Scabini, 1985) as well as empirically (e.g., Barber and Buehler; Campbell et al., 1984; Manzi, et al., 2006; and Watson & Protinsky, 1988). However, for Hispanic participants, enmeshment was expected to have a less detrimental effect (meaning a smaller detrimental effect, no effect, or a beneficial effect) compared to white non-hispanic participants. For Hispanic participants, it was expected that enmeshment will be less distinct from cohesion (consistent with an oblique model of family differentiation) than it is for white non-hispanics, possibly due to the value of autonomy in cultural context (e.g., Fuhrman & Holmbeck, 1995; Chun & MacDermid, 1997; Manzi et al., 2006). The facets of psychological well-being used in the present study are justified in the methods chapter of this study on their own merits as established, valid, and reliable ways to predict practical aspects of adaptive psychological functioning. Furthermore, the measurement of these variables will yield greater generalizability of results. This study represents only the second effort in the literature (Manzi, et. al., 2006) to determine the extent to which the two dimensional model family differentiation directly predicts adaptive psychological functioning and the first effort to investigate the indirect effect of family differentiation on psychological functioning via the ego identity development process. Family differentiation, identity formation, and psychological well-being. The twodimensional model of family differentiation will be examined in this study. The two- 35

49 dimensional model of family differentiation is based upon strong empirical evidence from scholars that have explicitly tested this model (e.g., Barber & Buehler, 1996; Manzi et al., 2006). This study will be the first to use the two-dimensional model to empirically examine the possibility that family differentiation will predict psychological well- being (anxiety, depressive symptoms, and life satisfaction) both directly and indirectly via ego identity variables. Although the call for greater evidence of the relational underpinnings of the identity development process in older adolescents and young adults is as long-standing (e.g., Freud, 1933; Marcia, 1989) as the scholarly call for a richer contextual understanding of the practical import of complex cultural literacy on the part of identity scholars, (e.g., Côté and Levine, 1988), no scholars to date have been able to isolate these underlying relational dynamics. Further, among those who have conducted research citing this goal explicitly, (e.g., Adams et al., 1987; Arseth et al., 2009; Campbell et al., 1984; Faber et al., 2003; Jackson et al. 1990; Marcia, 1966; Mullis et al., 2003; Watson & Protinsky, 1988), none to date have assumed or tested a specific, two-dimensional model of family differentiation in relation to the Marcian identity statuses. The present analysis involves considering the direct relationships between family differentiation and identity development; identity development and various aspects of psychological well-being; and family differentiation and various aspects of psychological wellbeing because the hypothesized relationships are empirically and theoretically supported. This approach justifies the question of whether the effect of family differentiation on practical psychological outcomes may occur, at least in part, indirectly via the ego identity development process. Comparing two carefully selected ethnic groups will contribute to understanding the implications of how different ethnic groups reflect the adulthood preparation experiences of all U.S. adolescents. Finally, there are ethnocultural considerations. For example, Manzi et al. (2006) reported that 71.6 % of British participants in their study planned on living away from home in the near future and, by contrast, only 8.5% of their Italian counterparts had the same intention (p. 679). There may be an analogous dynamic in Hispanic vs. white participants, and dynamics may differ in late adolescents vs. young adults. Marcia (1980) asserted that persons ranging in age from may have resolved the identity vs. role confusion Eriksonian crisis. Therefore, allowing participants' ages to range from 18-26, i.e., to target late adolescents and young adults, should allow the present study to capture and feature an empirical exploration of the relevance of all of these factors. 36

50 CHAPTER THREE METHOD This chapter includes a discussion of the sample, measures, procedures and analyses used for this study. Statistical predictions for the structural equation modeling (SEM) analysis and ethical considerations for this study also are presented. Sampling and Participant Recruitment This study used purposive, nonprobability sampling of two state universities in the southeastern United States: the Florida State University (FSU), located in Tallahassee, Florida; and the Florida International University (FIU), located in Miami, Florida. Selection of Recruitment Sites These universities were selected based on the demographic profiles of their enrolled students to yield adequate numbers of participants in each of the ethnoracial groups examined in the study. FSU (2012) reports total enrollment of 72.1% white; 13.6% Hispanic; 9.2% black, 2.9% Asian; American Indian 0.4%; two or more races 1.8%. FIU (2012) reports total enrollment of 61% Hispanic; 15% white non-hispanic; 13% black; 4% Asian or Pacific Islander; 7% other minority groups. Thus, FSU s student body has self-identified as majority white (but also has a significant minority of Hispanics) and FIU s student body has self-identified as majority Hispanic (but also has a significant minority of white non-hispanics). Therefore, it was expected that recruitment from these two universities would yield sufficient numbers of participants in each of the ethnoracial groups to be studied, and indeed this was the case. Age Range of Participants Participants for this study were students within the age range As discussed in Chapter Two, this age range is theoretically grounded and is intended to capture participants whose ages roughly correspond to two Eriksonian crisis states (Erikson, 1959). For that reason, references to those two subgroups are reflected by the use of the phrases older adolescent and young adult, in order to distinguish between these two groups. From a family life course perspective, this entire group might be referred to as emerging adults (e.g., Schwartz et al., 2009; Schwartz et al., 2010). However, this is potentially subject to debate because, as detailed in Chapter 2, it remains unclear in what order people confront the Eriksonian crisis states. 37

51 Participant Recruitment Upon approval from the institutional review boards (IRBs) of both universities, (Appendices E & F) participants were recruited by reviewing public records to determine the names and addresses of university instructors teaching classes at both universities. Instructors of these classes were asked for their permission to visit their classes in order to request that their students voluntarily participate in the study. Students in these classes received a brief oral explanation of the purpose of study and then were given the opportunity to receive a copy of the informed consent form (Appendix A and B for FSU and FIU, respectively) and a copy of the participant packet (Appendix C). In order to prevent oversampling, data were collected in phases, reviewing the number of study relevant participant packets after each phase, and commencing a new phase of data collection only if necessary. Ethnoracial Criteria for Participants Participants were asked (anonymously) to self-identify their race and ethnicity using United States Census Bureau (Humes et al., 2011) categories. The 2010 Census prompted all respondents to self-identify as one or more of five races: a) white; b) black or African-American; c) American Indian or Alaska Native; d) Asian; or e) Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander groups. In addition, respondents were permitted to identify as some other race (p. 2). Respondents were also given the option to write in a race in a free-response fashion; however, free responses were subsequently categorized by the USCB as falling into one of these six categories. The present study followed the same procedure. The USCB allowed respondents to describe a multiple-race background, and categorized the number of respondents in any particular category as either that category alone or that category alone-or-in-combination (p.4). In addition to race, the USCB prompted respondents to choose between two ethnic categories: a) Hispanic; and b) non-hispanic. Ethnoracial categories were defined by the combination of racial and ethnic categories. All data analyzed in this study were from participants that identified as either 1) white alone and non-hispanic or 2) Hispanic, regardless of race. Data collected from other participants were not analyzed. Descriptive Statistics and Frequencies Combined sample. There were 723 total participants, (individuals that submitted a signed informed consent form as well as a participant packet that was at least partially completed): 326 participants were from Florida State University (FSU) in North Florida and

52 were from Florida International University (FIU) in South Florida. Of these, 131 participant packets were excluded from the analysis because the participant did not identify themselves as a member of an ethnoracial category targeted by this study. Of the total participants, 12.03% were black or African-American; 3.6% were Asian; 2.07% selected multiple races; and 0.41% identified as some other race. In addition, 11 participants (1.52%) were excluded based on their age; 4 (0.55%) because they did not report their race, age, or both; and 14 (1.94%) because they left more than 40% of items blank on at least one measurement scale. The resulting final sample size of valid cases used for all analyses was N=563 (See Table 1). Of these, 305 (54.17%) packets were collected at FIU; and 258 (45.83%) packets were collected at FSU. Of the total valid cases, 364 (64.65%) participants were female and 199 (35.35%) were male. Of the total valid cases, 330 (58.61%) participants identified as Hispanic and 233 (41.39%) identified as non-hispanic. According to MacCallum, Browne, and Sugawara (1996), this sample size yields power exceeding.95 for the SEM analyses conducted. By design, participants who reported any race other than white, or who did not report a race, were only included in the analysis if they identified as Hispanic. Of the 563 total valid cases, 481 (85.44%) participants identified as white; 9 (1.60%) as black or African American; 4 (0.71%) as Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander; 2 (0.36%) as Asian; 51 (9.06%) as some other race; and 2 (0.36%) selected more than one race. Fourteen participants (2.49%) did not report a race. Among the 563 total valid cases, the mean age was (SD = 1.97); the median was 19; and the mode (27.89%) was 18. The minimum age for inclusion in the analysis was 18; and the maximum was 26. Most of the participants in the sample were under 21 years old (68.21%); 93.78% were under 24 years old. Of the 563 total valid cases, 175 (31.08%) participants listed majors in professional fields (e.g., law, medicine, or nursing); 121 (21.49%) in psychology; 105 (18.65%) in other social science fields; 69 (12.26%) in science, technology, engineering, or mathematics; 50 (8.88%) in humanities or arts; 17 (3.02%) had multiple majors that included more than one of these categories; 23 (4.09%) indicated they had not declared a major; and 3 (0.53%) did not report their major. Hispanic subsample. Of the 330 valid cases in the Hispanic subsample, 271 (82.12%) participant packets were collected at FIU and 59 (17.88%) were collected at FSU. Of the valid 39

53 cases in the Hispanic subsample, 214 (64.85%) participants were female and 116 (35.15%) were male. Of the Hispanic valid cases, three quarters (248; 75.15%) participants identified as white; 9 (2.73%) as black or African American; 4 (1.21%) as Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander; 2 (0.61%) as Asian; 51 (15.45%) as some other race; and 2 (0.61%) selected multiple race categories. Fourteen participants (4.24%) identified as Hispanic, but did not report a race. Among the 330 valid cases in the Hispanic subsample, the mean participant age was (SD = 2.12); the median was 20; and the mode (26.97%) was 18. The minimum age was 18 and the maximum was 26. Most participants (62.73%) were under the age of 21 and 91.82% of participants were under 24. Non-Hispanic subsample. Of the 233 valid cases in the non-hispanic subsample, 199 (85.14%) participant packets were collected at FSU in North Florida and 34 (14.59%) were collected at FIU in South Florida. Of the valid cases in the non-hispanic subsample, 150 (64.38%) participants were female and 83 (35.62%) were male. All of the 233 non-hispanic valid cases identified as white; this was inevitable due to the study inclusion criteria. Among the 233 valid cases in the non-hispanic subsample, the mean age was (SD = 1.76); the median was 19; and the mode (29.18%) was 18. The minimum age was 18 and the maximum was 26. Three quarters of participants in this subsample were under 21 (75.97%); 96.57% were under

54 Table 1 Demographic Variables by Ethnoracial Subsample Hispanic Non-Hispanic Combined Site FSU 59 (17.88%) 199 (85.14%) 258 (45.83%) FIU 271 (82.2%) 34 (14.59%) 305 (54.17%) Gender Female 214 (64.85%) 150 (64.38%) 364 (64.65%) Male 116 (35.15%) 83 (35.62%) 199 (35.35%) Race White 248 (75.15%) 233 (100%) 481 (85.45%) Black 9 (2.73%) 0 (0%) 9 (2.73%) NHPI 4 (1.21%) 0 (0%) 4 (1.21%) Asian 2 (0.61%) 0 (0%) 2 (0.61%) Other 51 (15.45%) 0 (0%) 51 (15.45%) Multiple 2 (0.61%) 0 (0%) 2 (0.61%) Unreported 14 (4.24%) 0 (0%) 14 (4.24%) Age (Mean) (S.D. = 2.12) (S.D. = 1.76) (S.D. = 1.97) Note. Data are frequencies except where specified. Percentages shown are percentages of the ethnoracial group represented in the demographic category at hand. NHPI = Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander. By design, 100% of the non-hispanic subsample identified as white. Measures The measurement instruments used for this study are found in the participant packet (Appendix C). Following the recommendation of Dillman (2007), spacing and similarity of visual elements are used in the participant packet to enhance readability. Family Differentiation Following Barber & Buehler (1996) and Manzi et al. (2006), cohesion and enmeshment were measured by the appropriate subscales of the Colorado Self- Report of Family Functioning Inventory (Bloom, 1985). Each subscale contains five 6-point items ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 6 (strongly agree). Manzi et al. (2006) reported acceptable or good reliability for both scales (cohesion: Italy =.78; U.K.. =.88; enmeshment: Italy =.74; U.K., =.65). An example of an item measuring cohesion is family members really helped and supported one 41

55 another. An example of an item measuring enmeshment is family members found it hard to get away from each other. Ego Identity Commitment and exploration were measured by the Ego Identity Process Questionnaire (EIPQ; Balistreri, et. al, 1995). The present study employed this instrument instead of another instrument used widely by identity scholars, the Extended Objective Measure of Ego Identity Status II (Bennion & Adams, 1986), because the latter measures each of the Marcian identity statuses as a distinct continuous variable, rather than treating commitment and exploration as variables. The EIPQ includes 32 items. There are eight domains within the EIPQ, and four items per domain. Two items per domain measure commitment; the other two items measure exploration. The eight domains measured by the EIPQ may be broken down into four ideological domains and four interpersonal domains. The four ideological domains are politics, religion, occupation, and values. The four interpersonal domains are friendships, dating, gender roles, and family (Schwartz, 2004). Each item on the EIPQ presents the respondent with 6 Likert-type points, ranging from strongly disagree to strongly agree. Twenty of these items are positively worded; twelve are negatively worded (Balistreri et al., 1995). The EIPQ is typically used to assign individuals to Marcian identity statuses (achievement, foreclosure, diffusion, and moratorium) using median splits on the commitment and exploration subscales. The present research does not involve assignment of identity statuses. Instead, this study treats commitment and exploration as continuous variables in all SEM analyses. Schwartz (2004) provided construct validation of the EIPQ by relating it to a measure of psychological agency, the Multi-Measure Agentic Personality Scale (Côté, 1997). Balistreri et al., (1995) reported an acceptable EIPQ reliability of α =.75 for commitment and α =.76 for exploration. Balistreri et al., (1995) also reported one week test-retest reliability of r =.90, p < 0.01; and a correlation between exploration and commitment of r = , p < Psychological Well-Being Three measures comprise psychological well-being. Life satisfaction was measured by the Satisfaction with Life Scale (Diener et al., 1985), consisting of five 7-point items. This 42

56 measure is intended, as Manzi et al. (2006) describe it, to assess global life satisfaction (p. 679). Manzi et al. (2006) reported good reliability for this measure (Italy, α =.83; U.K., α =.80). Depression was measured by the CES-D (Radloff, 1977), an instrument that requires participants to indicate how frequently they have experienced each of twenty depressive symptoms on a 4-point scale. In Manzi et al., both Italian and British samples had reliability of α =.89. Anxiety about an upcoming life stage transition was measured by a short form of the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI-6), an instrument developed by Marteau & Bekker (1992). This measure presents respondents with words that participants are asked to rate for how well or poorly their mood has been described with regard to their upcoming life stage transition. It has six 4-point items. Manzi et al. (2006) report good reliability for this measure (Italy, α =.85; U.K., α =.83). Reliability Statistics Alpha reliability statistics were computed for all latent variables. These computations were performed for the full sample of valid cases (n=563) and also for each of the ethnoracial groups separately (Hispanic, n=330; non-hispanic, n=233). Alpha statistics ranged from adequate to very good for all scales. Differences between the ethnoracial subsamples were small. Alpha-if-item deleted (AID) scores did not indicate any poorly performing items on any of the scales. For the full sample of valid cases, alpha reliability scores were: cohesion, α =.88; enmeshment, α =.76; commitment, α =.75; exploration, α = 70; life satisfaction, α =.83; depressive symptoms, α =.89; anxiety, α =.84. For the non-hispanic subsample, alpha values were: cohesion, α =.88; enmeshment, α =.77; commitment, α =.73; exploration, α = 73; life satisfaction, α =.84; depressive symptoms, α =.88; anxiety, α =.84. For the Hispanic subsample, alpha values were: cohesion, α =.88; enmeshment, α =.73; commitment, α =.75; exploration, α =.67; life satisfaction, α =.83; depressive symptoms, α =.89; anxiety, α =.84. Participant Demographic Information Participants were asked to indicate their gender (male or female); race (white; black or African-American; American Indian & Alaskan Native; Asian; Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander; or some other race); ethnicity (indicated by a yes or no response to the question Are you of Hispanic, Latino, or Spanish origin? ); and age (free response). 43

57 Analysis The data analysis for this study featured multiple-groups structural equation modeling (SEM). This study used a full measurement model (including all of the items from the measurement instruments in the model) rather than a simple path analysis. Scale items were treated as observed variables whereas the family differentiation, ego identity, and psychological well-being variables were treated as latent variables. Following the recommendation of Kenny (2011b), the raw data were inputted rather than analyzing the correlation matrices, because of the likelihood that groups would differ in their variances. The SEM analysis tested the hypotheses that cohesion and enmeshment have indirect effects on psychological well-being via commitment and exploration. Some of the paths were set equal across groups, whereas others were allowed to vary, in accordance with the study hypotheses detailed later. The path coefficients and model fit were examined to determine whether the study hypotheses were supported. Finally, the model was adjusted on the basis of modification indices and the two models will be compared in terms of fit, parsimony, and theoretical implications. SEM analyses were conducted using MPlus software (Muthén & Muthén, 2012). Descriptive statistics, frequencies, and alpha reliability statistics were computed using SPSS. SEM was used to examine relationships among family differentiation, ego identity, and psychological outcomes for the two ethnic groups. The diagram representing the structural paths for the SEM Models is found in Figure 1. The measurement model has been omitted from the figure for clarity. All measurement items are found in the participant packet (Appendix C). The model indicates effects of both cohesion and enmeshment on each of the ego identity variables, commitment and exploration. In turn, commitment and exploration were hypothesized to have direct effects on each of the psychological outcome variables. Four structural equation models were analyzed; each was evaluated using the test of close fit, which tests the null hypothesis that the root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) is less than an arbitrary cut-off value (McCullum, Browne, & Sugawara, 1996). The cut-off value selected for this study was 0.8; values between 0.5 and 0.8 are considered to be a fair fit by these authors. 44

58 Assumptions of Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) Structural equation modeling (SEM) relies on several assumptions which, if violated, may undermine the conclusions drawn from the analysis (Kline, 2012). Below, the major assumptions of SEM are discussed in relation to the data used in this study. Model specification. SEM assumes that the model is properly specified. This means that all relevant variables are included in the model. It is never possible to identify all variables that may affect the outcomes, which renders this assumption is unrealistic. For practical purposes, it is crucial that the variables included be theoretically justified (Kline, 2012). Chapter 2 explains the theoretical justification for the variables included in the SEM models of this study. Therefore, this assumption is met to the extent that could be reasonably expected. Exogenous variables measured without error. SEM assumes that the exogenous variables (in this case cohesion and enmeshment) are measured without error: that their reliability scores are equal to one. This is an inherently unrealistic assumption in the measurement of latent constructs. However, biases are generally only slight when reliability scores are greater than.90 (Kline, 2012). The reliability of cohesion was close to this value (α =.88 for each of the ethnoracial subsamples); however the reliability of enmeshment was α =.76 and α =.73 for the non-hispanic and Hispanic subsamples respectively. This suggests the possibility of bias caused by measurement error with regard to enmeshment. Completeness of data set. If a raw data file is analyzed in SEM (as it is in this study) there must be no missing data. This assumption was met. As discussed later in this chapter, participants with excessive missing data were excluded from the study; missing data for other participants was substituted using the mean-person method (Roth, Switzer, & Switzer, 1999). Multivariate normality. Endogenous variables must have a multivariate normal joint distribution. The endogenous variables in this study were Commitment, Exploration, Depression, Anxiety, and Life Satisfaction. The following steps were taken in order to test the assumption of multivariate normality (Kline, 2012). Univariate kurtosis and skewness statistics were examined for each of the endogenous variables. The most kurtotic variable was Depression (1.28, S.E. =.21). Kurtosis was small for all other variables, with no absolute value exceeding.26. Depression was also the most skewed variable (1.13, S.E. =.10), with no other absolute value exceeding.77. These values show only small to moderate violations of multivariate normality (Kline, 1998). Bivariate scatterplots were examined for each of the ten possible pairings of the endogenous 45

59 variables. None of these scatterplots suggested a non-linear relationship, and none appeared to fit a curvilinear trend line. Further, none of the scatterplots revealed the cone shape characteristic of heteroscedasticity. Mardia s coefficient was calculated using the PAST statistical software (Hammer, Harper, & Ryan, 2001) to assess the multivariate skewness and kurtosis of the endogenous variables. Mardia s coefficient of skewness was (247.1, d.f. = 35), below the threshold of 3 recommended by Kline (1998) for excessive skewness. However, Mardia s coefficient of kurtosis was (4.453, d.f. = 35), exceeding the threshold of 10 recommended by Kline (1998). Overall assessment of assumptions. For the most part, the assumptions of SEM were met in the current data set. However, the moderately large kurtosis and skewness values for Depression may be problematic for the interpretation of the results regarding Depression. The large Mardia s coefficient for kurtosis may be problematic for the model as a whole. Violations of multivariate normality tend to result in underestimates of standard errors, increasing the risk of Type I errors in the testing of path coefficients. On the other hand, these violations also tend to inflate the chi-square statistic, making the model seem like a worse fit than it actually is. However, under some circumstances these violations may instead make a model seem like a better fit than it actually is, and there is no way to determine the direction of the bias. (Kline, 2012). The reliability values for enmeshment may not be large enough to guard against bias arising from measurement error. This suggests the need for improved measurement of this construct in future research. Structural Equation Model Identification SEM requires that both the structural model and the measurement model be overidentified in order to obtain meaningful results. Based on the guidelines provided by Kenny (2011a), the measurement model used in this study is overidentified because for each latent variable there are at least two observed variables. The structural model is overidentified because, for each pair of latent variables, no more than one of the following is the case: a) one directly causes the other; b) the two variables have a correlated disturbance; or c) the two are correlated exogenous variables. Structural Equation Models Model 1: Configural model. A configural model (Kenny, 2011b) was used to determine whether the hypothesized model would be reasonable with a minimum of constraints. The 46

60 configural model applies the same factor and path structure to the Hispanic and non-hispanic groups. In accordance with the hypotheses of the study, this model included direct effects of each of cohesion and enmeshment on each of commitment and exploration. The model also included direct effects of each of commitment and exploration on each of anxiety, depressive symptoms, and life satisfaction. The model also included indirect effects of each of cohesion and enmeshment on each of anxiety, depressive symptoms, and life satisfaction levels, via commitment and exploration. Cohesion and enmeshment were allowed to co-vary. In the configural model, all parameters were allowed to vary across groups, except that, in both groups, factor means were fixed at zero and scale variances are fixed at one. These fixed parameters were necessary in order for the model to be identified. (Kenny, 2011a). Model 2: Measurement invariance model. Since the configural model was acceptable, a measurement invariance model was used to determine whether it was reasonable to assume that the measurement instruments functioned in the same manner for Hispanics and non-hispanics (Kenny, 2011b). This model used the same factor and path structure as the configural model, but held the factor loadings and intercepts constant across groups. Model 3: Hypothesized model. Model 3 was designed to test the substantive hypotheses of this study. The path structure was identical to that in Models 1 and 2. Factor loadings and intercepts were held constant across groups, consistent with the measurement invariance found in Model 2. Structural paths, however, were either set equal or allowed to vary across ethnoracial groups in accordance with the statistical predictions of the study. The paths from cohesion to exploration and to commitment were held constant across groups (Predictions 1 & 2), as was the path from enmeshment to commitment (Prediction 3); however, the path from enmeshment to exploration was allowed to vary across groups (Predictions 4 & 5). The paths from commitment to each of the psychological outcomes (Prediction 6) were held constant across groups. However, the paths from exploration to each of the psychological outcomes (Predictions 7 & 8) were allowed to vary across groups. The indirect paths from cohesion to each of the psychological outcomes via commitment were held constant across groups (Prediction 9). However, the paths from cohesion to each of the psychological outcomes via exploration were allowed to vary (Predictions 10 & 11). Similarly, the indirect paths from enmeshment to each of the psychological outcomes via commitment were 47

61 held constant across groups (Prediction 12); whereas the analogous paths via exploration were allowed to vary (Predictions 13 & 14). The direct paths from cohesion to the psychological outcomes will be held constant across groups (Prediction 15); the direct paths from enmeshment to these outcomes will be allowed to vary across groups (Predictions 16 & 17). Model 4: Modified model. Model 4 was identical to Model 3, except that additional paths were estimated on the basis of modification indices computed from Model 3. Any paths with modification index (M.I.) of 10 or above in Model 3 were added for Model 4. These were: 1. The direct effect of cohesion on life satisfaction, which was allowed to vary across ethnoracial groups inter-item covariances in the non-hispanic group. 3. The following covariances in the non-hispanic group: a. Exploration with commitment. b. Satisfaction with commitment inter-item covariances in the Hispanic group. 5. Four intercepts in the non-hispanic group. 6. Four intercepts in the Hispanic group. Power Analysis, Sample Size, and Missing Data MacCallum, Browne, and Sugawara (1996) provide a framework for determining statistical power for SEM based on sample size and the degrees of freedom of the model. The sample of the present study (N = 563, df = 35) provided power >.95 for rejecting the null hypothesis that RMSEA <.08 in the test of close fit. Mean-person substitution was used for any missing data points on any of the measurement scales. This method substitutes for each missing data point the mean value for that item across all study participants. A Monte Carlo simulation study found this method to be less biased than other methods for addressing missing data (Roth, Switzer, & Switzer, 1999). These results held for situations where up to 40% of items were missing for each scale. Therefore, any participant for whom more than 40% of the items were missing for any measurement scale was excluded from the analysis. Finally, any participant who did not report their race or did not report their ethnicity was excluded from the analysis. This was necessary because the design required that participants be divided into ethnoracial groups for the analysis. 48

62 Figure 1. Structural equation modeling (SEM) diagram reflecting the statistical predictions of the study. Cohesion and enmeshment are allowed to co-vary. Cohesion and enmeshment (family differentiation) directly predict commitment and exploration (identity status components); commitment and exploration (identity status components) directly predict anxiety, depressive symptoms, and life satisfaction levels. Cohesion and enmeshment (family differentiation) directly affect anxiety, depressive symptoms, and life satisfaction levels, and indirectly affect these variables via commitment and exploration. (Direct paths from cohesion and enmeshment to the psychological variables are represented by dashed lines for clarity.) In order to test the study hypotheses regarding differences between the two ethnoracial groups (white non-hispanic; Hispanic), the paths from cohesion to each of the ego identity variables, as well as the paths from commitment to each of the psychological well-being variables, were set equal across groups (Model 3). The paths from enmeshment to each of the ego identity variables, and from exploration to each of the psychological variables, were allowed to vary across groups. Statistical Predictions This section states the statistical predictions tested by the SEM analysis. In all hypotheses involving psychological well-being variables, life satisfaction was measured by the Satisfaction with Life Scale (SLS; Diener et al., 1985); depressive symptoms was measured by the Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale (CES-D; Radloff, 1977) and anxiety was measured by a short form of the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI-6; Marteau & Bekker, 1992). 49

63 1. Cohesion, as measured by the Cohesion subscale of the Colorado Self-Report of Family Functioning Inventory (Bloom, 1985) will have a positive direct effect on commitment, as measured by the Commitment subscale of the Ego Identity Process Questionnaire (Balistreri, Busch-Rossnagel, & Geisinger, 1995). This effect will be the same across ethnoracial groups. 2. Cohesion, as measured by the Cohesion subscale of the Colorado Self-Report of Family Functioning Inventory (Bloom, 1985), will have a positive direct effect on exploration, as measured by the Exploration subscale of the Ego Identity Process Questionnaire (Balistreri, et. al, 1995). This effect will be the same across ethnoracial groups. 3. Enmeshment, as measured by the Enmeshment subscale of the Colorado Self-Report of Family Functioning Inventory (Bloom, 1985) will have a positive direct effect on commitment, as measured by the Commitment subscale of the Ego Identity Process Questionnaire (Balistreri, et. al, 1995). This effect will be the same across ethnoracial groups. 4. For white non-hispanic participants, enmeshment, as measured by the Enmeshment subscale of the Colorado Self-Report of Family Functioning Inventory (Bloom, 1995), will have a negative direct effect on exploration, as measured by the Exploration subscales of the Ego Identity Process Questionnaire (Balistreri, et. al, 1995). 5. For Hispanic participants, the effect of enmeshment, as measured by the Enmeshment subscale of the Colorado Self-Report of Family Functioning Inventory (Bloom, 1985), on exploration, as measured by the Exploration subscale of the Ego Identity Process Questionnaire (Balistreri, et. al, 1995), will be less negative (i.e., a smaller negative effect, zero effect, or a positive effect) than for non-hispanic whites. 6. Commitment, as measured by the Commitment subscale of the Ego Identity Process Questionnaire (Balistreri, et. al, 1995), will have a positive direct effect on life satisfaction and negative direct effects on anxiety and depressive symptoms. These effects will be the same across ethnoracial groups. 7. For white non-hispanic participants, exploration, as measured by the Exploration subscale of the Ego Identity Process Questionnaire (Balistreri, et. al, 1995), will have a positive direct effect on life satisfaction and negative direct effects on anxiety and depressive symptoms. 50

64 8. For Hispanic participants (as compared to white non-hispanic participants), the direct effect of exploration, as measured by the Exploration subscale of the Ego Identity Process Questionnaire (Balistreri, et. al, 1995), will be less positive on life satisfaction and less negative on depressive symptoms and anxiety. 9. Cohesion, as measured by the Cohesion subscale of the Colorado Self-Report of Family Functioning Inventory (Bloom, 1985) will have a positive indirect effect on life satisfaction and a negative indirect effect on depressive symptoms and anxiety, via increases in commitment, as measured by the Commitment subscale of the Ego Identity Process Questionnaire (Balistreri, et. al, 1995). These effects will be the same across ethnoracial groups. 10. For white non-hispanic participants, cohesion, as measured by the Cohesion subscale of the Colorado Self-Report of Family Functioning Inventory (Bloom, 1985), will have a positive indirect effect on life satisfaction and a negative indirect effect on depressive symptoms and anxiety, via increases in exploration, as measured by the Exploration subscale of the Ego Identity Process Questionnaire (Balistreri, et. al, 1995). 11. For Hispanic participants, in comparison to white non-hispanics, cohesion, as measured by the Cohesion subscale of the Colorado Self-Report of Family Functioning Inventory (Bloom, 1985), will have a less positive indirect effect on life satisfaction and a less negative indirect effect on depressive symptoms and anxiety, via increases in exploration, as measured by the Exploration subscale of the Ego Identity Process Questionnaire (Balistreri, et. al, 1995). 12. Enmeshment, as measured by the Enmeshment subscale of the Colorado Self-Report of Family Functioning Inventory (Bloom, 1985), will have a positive indirect effect on life satisfaction and a negative indirect effect on depressive symptoms and anxiety, via increases in commitment, as measured by the Commitment subscale of the Ego Identity Process Questionnaire (Balistreri, et. al, 1995). This effect will be the same across ethnoracial groups. 13. For white non-hispanic participants, enmeshment, as measured by the Enmeshment subscale of the Colorado Self-Report of Family Functioning Inventory (Bloom, 1985), will have a negative indirect effect on life satisfaction and a negative indirect effect on depressive symptoms and anxiety, via reductions in exploration. 51

65 14. For Hispanic participants, in comparison to non-hispanic white participants, enmeshment, measured by the Enmeshment subscale of the Colorado Self-Report of Family Functioning Inventory (Bloom, 1985), will have a less negative indirect effect on life satisfaction and a less positive indirect effect on depressive symptoms and anxiety, via reductions in exploration, as measured by the Exploration subscale of the Ego Identity Process Questionnaire (Balistreri, et. al, 1995). 15. Cohesion, as measured by the Cohesion subscale of the Colorado Self-Report of Family Functioning Inventory (Bloom, 1985) will have a positive direct effect on life satisfaction and negative direct effects on anxiety and depressive symptoms. These effects will be the same across ethnoracial groups. 16. For white non-hispanic participants, enmeshment, as measured by the Enmeshment subscale of the Colorado Self-Report of Family Functioning Inventory (Bloom, 1995), will have a negative direct effect on life satisfaction and positive direct effects on anxiety and depressive symptoms. 17. For Hispanic participants, in comparison to non-hispanic whites, enmeshment, measured by the Enmeshment subscale of the Colorado Self-Report of Family Functioning Inventory (Bloom, 1985), will have a less negative direct effect on life satisfaction and less positive direct effects on anxiety and depressive symptoms. Ethical Considerations The present study required the participation of human subjects in the collection of survey data. This research was conducted with the intention of future publication. In accordance with university rules for both data collection sites, the researcher obtained permission from the Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) of both universities where participants were recruited (FSU and FIU), before beginning data collection. Individuals were required to sign an informed consent form in order to participate in the study. There was one informed consent form for FSU (Appendix A) and another for FIU (Appendix B); each of these forms was approved by the IRB of the university for which it was used. This study required the creation of a new data set, and although this study employed purposive sampling, the researcher did collect some data from participants outside of the target populations. The researcher's intention was to collect data from entire university classes, to avoid any potential undue stress to participants that would have occurred had they been informed their 52

66 data would not be used for this study if they fell outside of the target population demographics (e.g., age 27 or older; non-targeted racial/ethnic demographic responses). The time and efforts of these participants will not be wasted; all data were compiled into a larger data set that may be used for further study. The only people that were asked to refrain from study participation during data collection are students that are under the age of majority in the state of Florida (age 18). 53

67 CHAPTER FOUR RESULTS This chapter reports the results of the present study. The first section reports the results from structural equation modeling (SEM). Four models are reported: 1) a configural model; 2) a measurement invariance model; 3) a hypothesized model (based on the statistical predictions of the study); and 4) a modified model (based on the addition of parameters to the hypothesized model based on modification indices). The second section evaluates each of the study hypotheses. The third section reports statistically significant mean differences in the latent variables by gender and college major, and by data collection site with each ethnoracial group. This study focused primarily on substantive questions rather than on measurement issues. Factor loadings for all measurement items are reported in Appendix D (Tables 10-14). The text of the measurement items is cross-referenced with the item numbers in Appendix D (Tables 5-9). Structural Equation Models Model 1: Configural Model A configural model (Kenny, 2011b) was used to determine whether the hypothesized model would be reasonable with a minimum of constraints. The configural model applies the same factor and path structure to the Hispanic and non-hispanic groups. In accordance with the hypotheses of the study, this model included direct effects of each of cohesion and enmeshment on each of commitment and exploration. The model also included direct effects of each of commitment and exploration on each of anxiety, depressive symptoms, and life satisfaction. The model also included indirect effects of each of cohesion and enmeshment on each of anxiety, depressive symptoms, and life satisfaction levels, via commitment and exploration. Cohesion and enmeshment were allowed to co-vary. In the configural model, all parameters were allowed to vary across groups, except that, in both groups, factor means were fixed at zero and scale variances were fixed at one. These fixed parameters are necessary in order for the model to be identified. (Kenny, 2011a). The root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) for the configural model was (90% CI = 0.052, 0.055). This allows rejection of the null hypothesis for the test of close fit, since the confidence interval falls entirely below the cut-off value of 0.8. Thus, Model 1 was acceptable. The RMSEA is however above the 0.05 level generally considered the cutoff for a 54

68 good fit.(maccullum, Browne, and Sugawara, 1996). The other fit indices for the configural model were: χ 2 = , df = 4928, p <.0001; Akaike (AIC) = ; CFI = 0.707; SRMR = Model 2: Measurement Invariance Model Since the configural model was acceptable, a measurement invariance model was used to determine whether it was reasonable to assume that the measurement instruments functioned in the same manner (Kenny, 2011b) for Hispanic and non-hispanic identified participants. This model used the same factor and path structure as the configural model, but held the factor loadings and intercepts constant across groups. RMSEA for the measurement invariance model was (90% CI=0.052, 0.056). Again, this allows rejection of the null hypothesis for the test of close fit; thus Model 2 was also acceptable, and measurement invariance was supported. The other fit indices for Model 2 were: χ 2 = , df = 5058, p <.001; Akaike (AIC) = ; CFI = 0.697; SRMR = Model 3: Hypothesized Model Model 3 was designed to test the substantive hypotheses of the research. The path structure was identical to that in Models 1 and 2. Factor loadings and intercepts were held constant across groups, consistent with the measurement invariance found in Model 2. Structural paths, however, were either set equal or allowed to vary across ethnoracial groups in accordance with the statistical predictions of the study. The paths from cohesion to exploration and to commitment were held constant across groups (Predictions 1 & 2), as was the path from enmeshment to commitment (Prediction 3); however, the path from enmeshment to exploration was allowed to vary across groups (Predictions 4 & 5). The paths from commitment to each of the psychological outcomes (Prediction 6) were held constant across groups. However, the paths from exploration to each of the psychological outcomes (Predictions 7 & 8) were allowed to vary across groups. The indirect paths from cohesion to each of the psychological outcomes via commitment were held constant across groups (Prediction 9). However, the paths from cohesion to each of the psychological outcomes via exploration were allowed to vary (Predictions 10 & 11). Similarly, the indirect paths from enmeshment to each of the psychological outcomes via commitment were held constant across groups (Prediction 12); whereas the analogous paths via exploration were allowed to vary (Predictions 13 & 14). The direct paths from cohesion to the psychological 55

69 outcomes will be held constant across groups (Prediction 15); the direct paths from enmeshment to these outcomes will be allowed to vary across groups (Predictions 16 & 17). RMSEA for Model 3 was (90% CI = 0.052, 0.055). Once again, this allows rejection of the null hypothesis for the test of close fit, since the confidence interval falls entirely below the cutoff value of 0.8. Thus Model 3 was acceptable. The RMSEA was however above the 0.05 level generally considered the cutoff for a good fit. The other fit indices for Model 3 were: χ 2 = , df = 5070, p <.001; Akaike (AIC) = ; CFI = 0.697; SRMR = The statistical significance and path coefficients of structural paths in Model 3 were examined to evaluate the statistical predictions of the study. Although the model represents a reasonable fit to the data, the results of the model specification were mixed. Table 2 reports the standardized and unstandardized path coefficients for Model 3; Figure 2 is a diagram of the structural paths with the standardized direct effects and covariances for Model 3. The results indicate a positive direct effect of cohesion on commitment (0.175, S.E. = 0.037, p <.001). This provides support for Hypothesis 1. The results indicate the predicted direct effects of commitment on each of the psychological outcomes: depressive symptoms (-0.128, S.E. = 0.047, p <.007); and anxiety ( , S.E. = 0.080, p = 0.022); life satisfaction (.518, S.E. = 0.140, p <.001). These findings provide support for Prediction 6. The results indicate the predicted direct effects of cohesion on the psychological outcomes: depressive symptoms (-0.139, S.E. = 0.023, p <.001); anxiety (-0.151, S.E. = 0.036, p <.001); and life satisfaction (0.533, S.E. = 0.061, p <.001). These findings provide support for Prediction 15. Finally, the results of Model 3 indicate the predicted indirect effects of cohesion on each of the psychological outcomes via commitment: depressive symptoms (-0.024, S.E. = 0.009, p =.008); and anxiety (-0.032, S.E. = 0.014, p = 0.022); life satisfaction (0.091, S.E. = 0.024, p <.001). These findings provide support for Prediction 9. However, the remaining predictions (2-5, 7, 8, 10-14, 16 & 17) were not supported. The associated paths were non-significant. In the case of paths that were allowed to vary across ethnoracial groups, the paths were non-significant for both groups. 56

70 Model 3 explained a statistically significant percentage of the variance in commitment as well as each of the psychological variables (life satisfaction, depressive symptoms, and anxiety) for each of the ethnoracial groups (Hispanic and non-hispanic). The percentage of variance in exploration explained by the model was not statistically significant. Detailed results for percentages of variance explained are found in Table 3. The factor loadings for Model 3, along with their standard errors and p values, are reported in Appendix D. All factor loadings were statistically significant at the.05 level with the exception of one item on the exploration scale. Table 2 Statistically Significant Path Coefficients for Model 3: Hypothesized Model. Direct effect of Unstd. Unstd. S.E. Std. Std. S.E. p Cohesion on Commitment <.001 Depressive <.001 Anxiety <.001 Satisfaction <.001 Commitment on Depressive Anxiety Satisfaction <.001 Indirect effect of Cohesion via Commitment on Depressive Anxiety Satisfaction <.001 Note. All coefficients shown were held equal across ethnoracial groups; the values in this table apply to both groups. Unstd. = Unstandardized. Std. = Standardized. 57

71 Table 3. Percentage of Variance Explained by Model 3: Hypothesized Model. Variable Variance Explained S.E. p Non-Hispanic Commitment 11.5% 3.3% < Exploration 0.0% 0.5% n.s. Satisfaction 34.2% 4.9% < Depressive 18.9% 3.9% < Anxiety 10.8% 3.5% Hispanic Commitment 12.7% 3.5% < Exploration 0.6% 1.1% n.s. Satisfaction 30.3% 4.1% < Depressive 19.9% 3.7% < Anxiety 14.7% 3.8%

72 Table 4. Latent Variables Included in the Structural Equation Models: Descriptive Statistics and Reliability. Non-Hispanic N = 233; Hispanic N = 330 Variable M SD Range α Non-Hispanic Cohesion Enmeshment Commitment Exploration Satisfaction Depressive Anxiety Hispanic Cohesion Enmeshment Commitment Exploration Satisfaction Depressive Anxiety

73 Figure 2. Structural equation modeling ( SEM) Model 3: Hypothesized Model, with standardized parameters. Standardized coefficients are shown for statistically significant structural parameters. Cohesion and enmeshment are allowed to co-vary. Cohesion and enmeshment (family differentiation) directly predict commitment and exploration (identity status components); commitment and exploration directly predict anxiety, depressive symptoms, and life satisfaction levels. Cohesion and enmeshment directly affect anxiety, depressive symptoms, and life satisfaction levels, and indirectly affect these variables via commitment and exploration. (Direct paths from cohesion and enmeshment to the psychological variables are omitted from the figure for clarity.) In order to test the study hypotheses regarding differences between the two ethnoracial groups (white non- Hispanic; Hispanic), the paths from cohesion to each of the ego identity variables, as well as the paths from commitment to each of the psychological well-being variables, were set equal across groups. The paths from enmeshment to each of the ego identity variables, and from exploration to each of the psychological variables, were allowed to vary across groups. However, none of the parameters that were allowed to vary across groups were statistically significant. Model 4: Modified Model Model 4 was identical to Model 3, except that additional paths were estimated on the basis of modification indices computed from Model 3. Any paths with a modification index (M.I.) of 10 or above in Model 3 were added for Model 4. These were: 1) the covariance of exploration and commitment in the non-hispanic group; 2) 53 inter-item covariances in the non- Hispanic group; 3) 60 inter-item covariances in the Hispanic group; 4) four item intercepts in the non-hispanic group; and 5) four item intercepts in the Hispanic group. 60

74 RMSEA for Model 4 was (90% CI = 0.038, 0.042). Yet again, this allows rejection of the null hypothesis for the test of close fit, since the confidence interval falls entirely below the cutoff value of 0.8. The confidence interval falls entirely below the.05 cut-off for a good fit. (MacCullum, Browne, and Suguwara, 1996). The other fit indices for Model 4 were: χ 2 = , df = 4954, p <.0001; Akaike (AIC) = ; CFI = 0.839; SRMR = Although the model fit was improved in Model 4 over Model 3, no theoretical basis was found for any of the modifications made. Therefore it was decided that Model 3 was more informative and useful, as well as parsimonious, and Model 4 was rejected. Research Questions & Hypotheses This study posed three research questions, and posited a hypothesis for each of them. The first research question asked how family differentiation (cohesion and enmeshment) would relate to ego identity status. The corresponding hypothesis predicted that family differentiation would explain a significant amount of variance in ego identity status. This hypothesis was partly supported: the results of Model 3 indicate a positive direct effect of cohesion on commitment (0.175, S.E. = 0.037, p <.0001). However, there was no significant effect of either family differentiation variable on exploration; nor was there any significant effect of enmeshment on either identity formation variable. The second research question asked how family differentiation would relate to psychological well-being (anxiety, depressive symptoms, and life satisfaction). The corresponding hypothesis predicted that family differentiation would affect psychological wellbeing both directly and indirectly via ego identity variables. This hypothesis was also partly supported: the results indicate the predicted direct effects of cohesion on the psychological outcomes: depressive symptoms (-0.139, S.E. = 0,023, p <.001); anxiety (-0.151, S.E. = 0.036, p <.001); and life satisfaction (0.533, S.E. = 0.061, p <.001). Further, the results of Model 3 indicate the predicted indirect effects of cohesion on each of the psychological outcomes via commitment: depressive symptoms (-0.022, S.E. = 0.008, p =.006); anxiety (-0.032, S.E. = 0.014, p = 0.022); and life satisfaction (0.091, S.E. = 0.024, p <.001). However, the predicted indirect effects of enmeshment on the psychological variables were not observed, nor were the predicted direct effects exploration on the psychological variables observed. 61

75 The final research question asked whether there would be differences between the ethnoracial groups studied. The study hypothesized that, for Hispanic participants, higher levels of enmeshment were predicted to be less associated with diminished psychological well-being. Similarly, for participants who identify as Hispanic (compared to those who identify as non- Hispanic whites), higher levels of exploration were predicted to be less associated with increased psychological well-being (anxiety, depressive symptoms, and life satisfaction). Thus, the third hypotheses was not supported in that there were no significant differences found between ethnoracial groups. Mean Differences by Gender, College Major, and Data Collection Site Analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to examine mean differences in each of the latent variables (cohesion, enmeshment, commitment, exploration, depressive symptoms, anxiety, and life satisfaction) by gender and college major for the full sample, and by data collection site within each ethnoracial group. Differences statistically significant at the.05 level are reported in this section. Two variables differed significantly by gender: commitment (F = 5.8, 562, p =.02) and depressive symptoms (F = 3.82, 562, p =.05). Women reported mean commitment of 4.18, slightly greater than men s mean commitment of Women reported mean depressive symptoms of 1.75, slightly greater than men s mean depressive symptoms of Two variables differed significantly by category of college major: commitment (F = 3.34, 562, p <.01) and life satisfaction (F = 2.57, 562, p =.01). Psychology majors reported the highest mean level of commitment (4.2), followed by humanities and arts majors (4.19) and professional majors (4.19). Undeclared majors reported the lowest levels of commitment (3.6). Humanities and arts majors reported the highest levels of life satisfaction (5.13), followed by non-psychology social science majors (5.12), and professional majors (5.06). The lowest levels of life satisfaction were reported by students with multiple majors (3.85). For non-hispanic white participants, two variables differed significantly by data collection site: exploration (F = 8.59, 232, p <.01) and anxiety (F = 4.09, 232, p =.04). Among this ethnoracial group, FIU students reported higher levels of exploration (4.31) than FSU students (3.96). On the other hand, FSU students reported higher levels of anxiety (1.93) than FIU students (1.68). For Hispanic participants, no variables differed significantly by data collection site. 62

76 CHAPTER FIVE DISCUSSION The purpose of this study was to apply a two-dimensional model of family differentiation to understanding the relational underpinnings of ego identity development. The study also examined the impact of both family differentiation and ego identity development on psychological well-being of older adolescent and young adult Hispanic and non-hispanic white people in the U.S. This chapter discusses the findings of this study in relation to its theoretical frameworks, previous research on this topic, and implications for clinical practice. Finally, this chapter will present limitations of the study and discuss future directions for research. Review of Notable Findings The third model of the structural equation analysis explained a significant portion of the variance in four of the five endogenous variables (Table 3). This was true for both the Hispanic and the non-hispanic white subsamples. For the Hispanic subsample, the portions of variance explained were: commitment, 12.7%; satisfaction, 30.3%; depressive symptoms, 19.9%; and anxiety, 14.7%. For the non-hispanic white subsample, the portions of variance explained were: commitment, 11.5%; life satisfaction, 34.2%; depressive symptoms, 18.9%; anxiety, 10.8%. The largest portion of variance explained in both ethnoracial groups was for life satisfaction 30.3% for the Hispanic subsample; 34.2% for the non-hispanic subsample. Exploration was the only endogenous variable for which no significant portion of variance was explained by the model. These large portions of variance explained in variables of such practical importance as life satisfaction, depressive symptoms, and anxiety underscore the value of the model. The largest standardized effects in the model were the direct effects of commitment on life satisfaction and cohesion on life satisfaction. Theoretical Implications of Findings This study builds upon Freud s (1933) proposal that ego identity development was the product of relational dynamics in the family of origin, and also upon Marcia s (1989) call for study of the impact of relational dynamics on ego identity development. There have been some efforts to explore the link between these relational dynamics and Marcia s ego identity statuses (e.g., Adams et al., 1987; Arseth et al., 2009; Campbell et al., 1984; Faber et al., 2003; Jackson et al. 1990; Marcia, 1966; Mullis et al., 2003; and Watson & Protinsky, 1988). However, this study 63

77 is the first effort to explain the variance in ego identity variables using the two-dimensional model of family differentiation. This study is also the first to compare the nature and function of family differentiation processes among Hispanic-identified and white non-hispanic participants in the U.S. Ethnoracial Differences Manzi et al (2006) reported that enmeshment was predictive of anxiety and depressive symptoms for British participants, but not predictive of psychological well-being for Italian participants. The researchers argued that these differences were attributable to cultural differences. Specifically, they asserted that British youth are socialized to place greater value on individual autonomy than Italian youth, making enmeshment, or limited individual autonomy, more problematic for British youth. This study subsequently predicted that, in these respects, non-hispanic white youth would resemble British youth, while Hispanic-American youth would resemble Italian youth. However, the results of this study revealed that enmeshment had no significant impact on psychological well-being for either of these two U.S. ethnoracial groups. If Manzi et al. (2006) are correct in arguing that a culture s level of individualism determines whether enmeshment will be harmful to psychological well-being, then the results of this study, contrasted with those of Manzi et al. (2006) suggest that the culture of non-hispanic white people in the U.S. is at present less individualistic than British culture. This statement is subject to several caveats. First, there may be factors other individualism that determine the relationship between enmeshment and psychological well-being. Second, it is not clear in the Manzi et al. (2006) study what percentage of their participants would have identified as white, or what cultural groups may have been represented in their sample. Third, non-hispanic white people in the U.S. are themselves a diverse group: they include many groups (such as Italian- Americans) who, based on their cultural heritage, may have less individualistic attitudes than people in the U.S. of Anglo heritage, and may therefore experience less adverse consequences from enmeshment. Further, there may be relevant cultural differences by region within the United States, or relevant socio-economic differences that were not captured in this study. This research does not include data on participants cultural heritage beyond race and ethnicity (with the latter being limited to Hispanic vs. non-hispanic), nor on participants regional origin or regional cultural influences. Finally, as a heterogenous society, the dominant culture of the U.S. 64

78 may be strongly influenced by its British Colonial history, but that clearly does not imply that the multiple cultures that contribute to the culture of majority are without influence. Hispanic-identified people in the U.S. are a culturally diverse group. They include people of dozens of national origins; various levels of acculturation; speakers of English, Spanish, and Portuguese; recent immigrants and those whose families have lived in the United States for generations. A large majority of Hispanic-identified people in the U.S. (69%) endorse the view that U.S. Hispanics have many different cultures over the view that U.S. Hispanics share a common culture. (Taylor, Lopez, Martínez, & Velasco, 2012). The present study did not ask participants to identify their national ancestry, although it is reasonable to assume that Hispanic participants in the present study were probably predominantly of Cuban ancestry: the participants in this study are exclusively from two universities in Florida, yet this study compares Hispanic-identified participants of any race with White, non-hispanic-identified participants. The Hispanic-identified participants in this study therefore are not necessarily representative of the Hispanic population of the United States. Whereas people of Cuban ancestry are only 3.5% of the Hispanic population nationwide, they are 46.2% of the total population in Miami-Dade County, where FIU is located. This means that Cuban-Americans are highly overrepresented among Hispanic-Americans in Miami-Dade County, making it possible they are overrepresented among the participants in the present study. In contrast, nearly two thirds (63%) of Hispanic Americans in the United States are of Mexican ancestry (Ennis, Ríos-Vargas, & Albert, 2011). Cuban-Americans in Miami-Dade County may be more likely to see themselves as the culture of reference than Hispanic-Americans elsewhere. Hispanic-Americans in Miami-Dade may be less likely to encounter routine discrimination, since they are more likely to regularly interact with persons that to a large extent share are their own ethnicity and culture. The everyday experience of these Hispanic-identified people in the U.S. may be different in the following ways: 1) They may live in communities where they are considered a minority group; 2) They may often face discrimination; and 3) They may feel more targeted by anti-immigrant sentiment in the U.S. and policies to combat illegal immigration when compared with people in the U.S. of Cuban immigrants. These differing experiences may foster different attitudes among Cuban-Americans and Mexican-Americans. 65

79 Further, a large majority (85%) of the Hispanic participants in this study identified as white, compared to just over half (53%) of Hispanic Census respondents nationwide (Humes et al., 2011). This suggests that the Hispanic participants in the present study may see their ethnic and cultural identity in a way that is not representative of Hispanics nationwide, and that may be more consistent with the cultural norms associated with white people in the U.S. in some important ways. Further, the literature review of this study revealed that the data from other various other studies reveals that the predictive value of enmeshment may be culturally bound, and specifically beneficial or less detrimental to cultures that are not strongly influenced by Western, Anglo, or ultimately British Colonial norms. For example, in the United States, Watson & Protinsky (1988) found that enmeshment predicted identity achievement as well as identity foreclosure, or high commitment statuses, among African-Americans. It is possible that enmeshment may be beneficial to psychological well-being among some Hispanic-Americans (such as Mexican- Americans) more than others. Additionally, whether or not members of a given demographic see themselves as a minority may be a relevant factor. Implications for the Role of Family Differentiation in Ego Identity Theory Previous research has linked identity achievement to psychological well-being (Arseth et al., 2009; Hardy & Kisling, 2006). Identity scholars (e.g., Arseth et al., 2009) have frequently stated or suggested that identity foreclosure is a less desirable outcome than identity achievement. In contrast to this, the results of this study indicate that commitment, which can include identity foreclosure, has a large, beneficial impact on psychological outcomes. Higher levels of commitment were associated with reduced anxiety and depressive symptoms and increased life satisfaction. Model 3, which tested the substantive hypotheses of the study, found significant direct effects of commitment on each of the psychological outcomes including depressive symptoms, anxiety and life satisfaction. Results show that the largest direct effect of commitment was on life satisfaction followed by depressive symptoms and anxiety. This suggests that commitment to ego identity roles is a major determinant of whether older adolescent and young adults are satisfied with their lives. Since the relevant structural paths were held equal ethnoracial groups, this finding is equally applicable to both Hispanic and non-hispanic white participants in the study. 66

80 In contrast, there was no link between exploration and psychological well-being. None of the direct paths from exploration to psychological well-being were significant, nor were there significant indirect effects via exploration. It may be that, at least for some cultural groups, commitment is the key process that makes identity achievement beneficial to psychological wellbeing and that many or all of the same benefits can be obtained from identity foreclosure (commitment without exploration). Consistent with the present results, Crocetti et al. (2009), in a large study of Dutch adolescents, found that whereas commitment was negatively related to anxiety, in-depth exploration and reconsideration of commitment were positively related to adolescent anxiety. These findings were consistent across gender, age, and ethnic sub-samples (p. 841). Effects of family differentiation on psychological well-being via commitment and exploration Scholars have provided both theoretical (e.g., Minuchin, 1974; Olson, 1982; Scabini, 1985) and empirical (e.g., Barber and Buehler; Campbell et al., 1984; Manzi et al., 2006; and Watson & Protinsky, 1988) support for the idea that family cohesion enhances psychological well-being. However, no previous studies have examined the possible role of commitment or exploration in this relationship. The present study supports the idea that cohesion has beneficial effects on psychological outcomes, in part indirectly via commitment. The results indicated the predicted indirect effects of cohesion on the psychological outcomes via commitment for depressive symptoms, anxiety and life satisfaction. In contrast, the present study found no indirect effects of cohesion on psychological well-being via exploration. Effect of cohesion on commitment. Scholars have long maintained that ego identity development was profoundly shaped by the dynamics of the family of origin (Freud, 1933; Marcia, 1989). Campbell et al. (1984) found that adolescents with high commitment identity statuses (identity achieved or foreclosed) had more affectionate relationships with their parents than adolescents in the moratorium or diffusion statuses. Similarly, Watson and Protinsky (1988) found that higher levels of family cohesion were associated with the identity achievement and foreclosure statuses. However, no study has previously directly examined the relationship between cohesion and commitment. The present study predicted that higher levels of cohesion would be associated with higher levels of commitment and this prediction was supported. The standardized path 67

81 coefficient from cohesion to commitment was significant and suggests that family cohesion is one of the main determinants of ego identity commitment. Moreover, the model explained 11.5% of the variance in cohesion. Theorists have argued that a cohesive family environment gives adolescents and young adults the stability they need to commit to their identity choices. The present results provide empirical support for that idea for both ethnoracial groups examined. Effect of cohesion on exploration. Watson and Protinsky (1988) determined that identity achievement (which involves high exploration as well as high commitment) was associated with higher levels of cohesion. However, no previous study had directly explored the possible link between cohesion and exploration. The present study hypothesized that higher levels of cohesion would be associated with higher levels of exploration. However, the results did not bear this out in that the path from cohesion to exploration was non-significant. Thus, although an emotionally supportive family of origin encourages firm decisions regarding identity choices, it does not appear to have any bearing on whether adolescents examine their identity choices carefully. This was true for both Hispanic and non-hispanic participants, though this path was allowed to vary across ethnoracial groups. Effect of enmeshment on commitment. Watson and Protinsky (1988) found that high enmeshment levels were associated with the identity achievement and identity foreclosure statuses; the common element of these statuses is a high level of commitment. In keeping with this finding, the present study hypothesized that high levels of enmeshment would be associated with high levels of commitment. However, this was not found to be the case in that the path from enmeshment to commitment was non-significant. Effect of enmeshment on exploration. Enmeshment restricts the autonomy of adolescents and young adults; therefore it is expected to limit opportunities for exploration. Campbell et al. (1984) found that adolescents in high-exploration statuses (identity-achieved or moratorium) saw themselves as more independent from their parents compared to their foreclosed or diffused counterparts. Therefore, the present study hypothesized that higher levels of enmeshment would be associated with lower levels of exploration for non-hispanic white participants. However, for Hispanics, the effect of enmeshment on exploration was predicted to be less negative, because enmeshment was expected to be less distinct from cohesion consistent with an oblique model of family differentiation (Manzi et al., 2006). This prediction was not 68

82 supported in that paths from enmeshment to exploration were non-significant for both ethnoracial groups. Direct Effects of Family Differentiation on Psychological Well-Being Cohesion was predicted to have beneficial effects on each of the three psychological well-being outcomes (anxiety, depressive symptoms, and life satisfaction), across ethnoracial groups. Family cohesion was expected to provide a sense of stability that enhances adaptive functioning in general, which may be manifest in a wide range of psychological outcome variables (e.g., Minuchin, 1974; Olson, 1982; Scabini, 1985). Empirical findings have supported this (e.g., Barber and Buehler; Campbell et al., 1984; Manzi et al., 2006; and Watson & Protinsky, 1988). The present results are consistent with past findings in this regard. The results yielded the predicted direct effects of cohesion on the psychological outcomes for depressive symptoms, anxiety and life satisfaction. The largest impact of cohesion was on life satisfaction indicating that an increase of one standard deviation in cohesion is associated with an increase in life satisfaction of nearly one half standard deviation. The standardized path coefficients of cohesion on depressive symptoms and anxiety indicated that an increase of one standard deviation in cohesion is associated with reductions of more than one third of a standard deviation in depressive symptoms and nearly one quarter standard deviation in anxiety. These are very large effects, and suggest that family cohesion is a major determinant of psychological well-being among older adolescents and young adults, independent of its impact on commitment. For white non-hispanic participants, enmeshment was predicted to have a detrimental effect on each of the psychological well-being outcomes: anxiety, depressive symptoms, and life satisfaction. These predictions have theoretical support (e.g., Minuchin, 1974; Olson, 1982; Scabini, 1985) and empirical support (e.g., Barber & Buehler; Campbell et al., 1984; Manzi, et al., 2006; Watson & Protinsky, 1988). However, for Hispanic participants, enmeshment was expected to have a less detrimental effect, meaning a smaller detrimental effect, no effect, or a beneficial effect, compared to white non-hispanic participants. Again, this was because, for Hispanic participants, it was expected that enmeshment would be less distinct from cohesion, consistent with an oblique model of family differentiation (Manzi et al., 2006). However, this was not found to be the case: enmeshment had no effect on psychological well-being for either ethnoracial group. 69

83 There may be two reasons that the predicted ethnoracial differences were not observed. First, the participants in this study were not necessarily representative of the Hispanic population of the United States. Hispanic-identified persons arguably occupy a cultural majority status in Miami-Dade County, where FIU is located, and the majority of the FIU student body, they may not be subject to the same sociocultural dynamics as are Hispanics in other parts of the United States. Second, from a co-constructionist perspective (e.g., Kurtines, 1999) as well as in a postmulticulturalist context (Vertovec, 2010), the increasing percentage of Hispanics in the United States population may be influencing the norms of the broader culture, reducing differences between white and Hispanic perspectives. Relational Clinical Implications of Theoretical and Empirical Findings There is strong and recent evidence in the literature that identity achievement predicts positive outcomes (e.g., Arseth et al., 2009; Crocetti, et. al, 2009; Hardy & Kisling, 2006). A prediction to this effect in an empirical study would be consistent with the theoretically inherent tendency to presume that the therapeutic fostering of and emphasis on identity achievement is a valuable goal, and these predictions are borne out in the literature. However, research also supports the therapeutic value of fostering family cohesion (e.g., Mullis et al., 2003; Protinsky & Shuts, 1990). Further, recent findings support the value of fostering ego identity commitment, including both identity foreclosure and identity achievement (Arseth et al., 2009; Crocetti et al., 2009; and Mullis et al., 2003), as opposed to simply fostering identity exploration, including only identity moratorium and identity achievement. The results of this study are in line with these trends in the literature. Further, this study underscores the importance of cohesion in predicting both commitment and the psychological well-being of older adolescents and young adults. Marcia (1989) encouraged researchers to explore the complex factors that may ultimately explain the Marcian identity statuses, and imagined that a successful identity-rooted intervention would likely offer a clear rationale of the predictors for the statuses themselves, as opposed to just sorting and attempting to understand clients according to the larger commitment and exploration conceptual components. This study's contributions to the understanding of this process could be of direct use to a relationally trained clinician with training in a framework informed by family systems theory or an understanding of family differentiation. Moreover, this study's findings might be of use in informing a relationally trained scholar-practitioner in 70

84 answering Marcia's (1989) call to develop an identity-rooted intervention informed by the relevant underlying relational processes. The results of this study support the notion that family differentiation is best conceived of as two dimensions. The results further suggest that facilitating the dimension of family cohesion in particular may be extremely valuable in relational interventions across cultures. These findings could contribute to future efforts to develop a manualized, evidence-based approach to training relational clinicians. This possibility need not be limited to theories that rely heavily on an understanding of family differentiation: an empirically-based understanding of which relational dynamics are predictive of psychological well-being outcomes would arguably add value to the education of any relational clinician in training. This holds especially true given the apparent cultural literacy value of training relational clinicians to foster family cohesion across cultures. Limitations of the Research Measurement and Comparability of Family Differentiation across the Literature The assumption of the two-dimensional model of family differentiation in this study is based on a critical review of the literature as well as explicit empirical evidence (Barber & Buehler, 1996; Manzi et al., 2006). However, the use of the one-dimensional model of family differentiation in relevant earlier studies is not always explicit or at least is not measured in a uniform way, because the two-dimensional model was not identified until just before the turn of the millennium (Barber & Buehler, 1996; Manzi et al., 2006). This study's assumption of the two-dimensional model could be further supported by an empirical review of all the measures used in earlier studies that implicitly or more directly measure what Manzi et al. (2006) described as the one-dimensional model of family differentiation. Such a study might feature an exploratory factor analysis with the goal of determining whether pooled measure items from relevant studies were, in fact, loading onto and therefore measuring cognate concepts. This would make any endeavor to compare studies that implied or assumed a one-dimensional model with studies that imply or assume a two-dimensional model much more straightforward. However, at present, no such study has been conducted. Limitations of Sample Exclusion of non-students. The sample from this study is comprised of older adolescents and young adults who were years of age and is intended per the theoretical 71

85 contributions of Marcia (1989) and Erikson (1959) to capture participants in a theoretically grounded stage and state of intrapsychic destructuring. The participants' status as students similarly allows for life stage comparability to data from student study participants in other sociohistorical settings (e.g., Manzi, 2006) per the family life course development framework. However, although this study may be comparable to the participants in many studies of students within a similar age range, it does not address the possible differences that might be found in a population of that is inclusive of similarly aged non-student, even if they were still going through a theoretically relevant and marked period of intrapsychic destructuring. This distinction is important because the identity development process of students is a unique experience in part due to the culture and values of an educational environment (e.g., Montgomery & Côtè, 2003) and cannot necessarily be considered comparable to the processes of similarly aged non-students. This limitation becomes even more noteworthy when considered in the context of the possibilities for using research relevant to the ego identity process to develop interventions intended to combat marginalization and oppression, as marginalized and oppressed persons cannot be assumed to have access to higher education. Restriction of age range. The restriction of age of the study participants is a limitation in that it prevents generalization to other age groups. However, the age range of the study was selected for theoretical reasons, as discussed earlier. It would be fruitful to examine identity development across the lifespan, and to empirically challenge the notion of stagewise progression. Regional bias. Participants in this study are exclusively from two public universities in Florida, yet this study compares Hispanic-identified participants of any race with white, non- Hispanic-identified participants. The Hispanic participants in the present study were not representative of the Hispanic population of the United States. Whereas people of Cuban ancestry are only 3.5% of the Hispanic population nationwide, they are 46.2% of the total population in Miami-Dade County, where FIU is located (USCB, 2010). This means that Cuban- Americans are highly overrepresented among Hispanic-Americans in Miami-Dade County, and probably highly overrepresented among the participants in the present study. Generalization to the broader Hispanic population of the United States would require a sample representative of that population. 72

86 Model Fit RMSEA was the primary model fit statistic examined for this study. RMSEA values suggested fair to good fit for all models examined, based on the guidelines provided by MacCallum, Browne, and Sugawara (1996). However, Comparative Fit Index (CFI) values did not reach the.95 level recommended by Hu and Bentler (1999) to indicate good fit. Future research should consider models that include additional variables to reduce specification error and improve model fit. Mediation in the Structural Equation Models This study examines the effect of family differentiation (cohesion and enmeshment) on psychological well-being both directly and indirectly via ego identity variables (commitment and exploration). This raises the question of whether the relationship between family differentiation and psychological well-being is mediated by the ego identity variables. According to the seminal work of Baron and Kenny (1986), a series of three regression analyses may be used to test for mediation; four criteria must be met to establish a mediational effect. First, when the mediator (e.g., commitment) is regressed on the independent variable (e.g., cohesion), the independent variable must be found to have an effect on the mediator. Second, when the dependent variable (e.g., life satisfaction) is regressed on the independent variable, the independent variable must be found to have an effect on the dependent variable. Third, when the dependent variable is regressed on both the independent variable and the mediator, the mediator must have an effect on the dependent variable. Fourth, the inclusion of the mediator in the regression equation must reduce the effect of the independent variable on the dependent variable. In order to claim full mediation, this effect must be completely eliminated by the inclusion of the mediator. Baron and Kenny s (1986) regression procedure was not applied in the present study to assess potential mediational effects. This is a limitation of the present study, since Baron and Kenny s procedure is widely accepted among scholars. However, Brown (1997) argues that structural equation modeling (SEM) may be used in lieu of Baron and Kenny s procedure. In the SEM approach to mediation, Baron and Kenny s first two criteria are met, respectively, by 1) a significant path coefficient from an exogenous variable (e.g. cohesion) to a mediator (e.g., commitment); and 2) a significant path coefficient from the exogenous variable to an endogenous variable (e.g., life satisfaction). Baron and Kenny s third and fourth criteria are 73

87 implicitly met by the presence of significant specific indirect effects in the structural equation model (Brown, 1997). In this study, these criteria for mediation are met for the effects of cohesion on depressive symptoms, anxiety, and life satisfaction, via commitment. Specific indirect effects are reported in Table 2. According to Brown (1997) these effects indicate the magnitude of the mediational effects in the model. However, the application of Baron and Kenny s (1986) procedure would provide greater rigor and more persuasive evidence of mediational effects. Future Research Future Study 1: Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) This study relates the two-dimensional model of family differentiation to the Marcian ego identity paradigm. The results challenge long-standing assumptions within the fields of ego identity theory and family relations theory, raising many questions of theoretical and practical interest. This study assumes an oblique two-dimensional model of family differentiation (cohesion and enmeshment are allowed to co-vary), building on the theoretical and empirical work of Manzi et al. (2006). Those researchers used confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) to compare one-dimensional, orthogonal, and oblique models of family differentiation for British and Italian youth. Future Study 1 would do the same for Hispanic-American and non-hispanic white youth, using the data already collected for the present study. This could provide further testing of the two-dimensional model of family differentiation. For each ethnoracial group, one-dimensional, orthogonal two-dimensional, and oblique two-dimensional models of family differentiation would be considered. In all models, factor loadings and error variances would be estimated for the family differentiation scales (cohesion and enmeshment). The one-dimensional model of family differentiation assumes that cohesion and enmeshment form a single dimension. This assumption would be reflected by setting the correlation between these variables equal to 1. The orthogonal model assumes that cohesion and enmeshment are two uncorrelated dimensions; therefore the correlation between them would be set equal to 0. The oblique model assumes that cohesion and enmeshment are correlated, but not perfectly, and therefore the correlation between them would be allowed to vary freely. For each ethnoracial group separately, the three CFA models described above would be compared to select the best model based on fit and parsimony, using the test of close fit (MacCallum, Brown, and Sugawara, 1996). 74

88 Future Study 2: The Role of Gender in Ego Identity Development This study focuses on race and ethnicity, with only minimal attention to the issue of gender. The second proposed future study would use the data from the present study to explore the role of gender in ego identity development. Some theorists have argued that women may be more likely to work toward a resolution of the Eriksonian identity vs. role confusion crisis only after they have resolved the intimacy vs. isolation crisis, reversing the order that is expected of men (Campbell et al., 1984; Grotevant, 1983; Schiedel & Marcia, 1985; Mullis et al., 2003). Others have suggested that women may address both crises concurrently (Archer & Waterman, 1994; Lacombe & Gay, 1998). Future Study 2 would use the data from the present study to calculate separate scores for the interpersonal and ideological domains, corresponding to the identity vs. role confusion and intimacy vs. isolation crises, respectively. The study would use analysis of variance (ANOVA) to test whether 1) exploration would be higher for the interpersonal domain for women for the younger age group; and 2) commitment would be lower for the interpersonal domain for women for the younger age group. Future Study 3: Replication with Nationally Representative Sample of Hispanic Participants As discussed earlier, Cuban-Americans may be overrepresented among the Hispanic participants in the present study, relative to Cuban-Americans in the general population of the United States. Hispanic Americans may vary in their patterns of family differentiation and ego identity development due to cultural differences associated with national origin. Of particular interest are Mexican-Americans, since they represent 63% of the Hispanic population in the United States (USCB, 2010). Future Study 3 would replicate the methodology of the present study with a sample representative of the Hispanic-identified population of the United States, which would include an intentionally representative proportion of Mexican-American participants. Participants could be most easily recruited from a university located in the southwestern United States, or an area of the country that has a large Mexican-American population. Summary and Conclusions This study is the first scholarly attempt to specifically assume and test the impact of a two-dimensional model of family differentiation in relation to the Marcian identity statuses. The 75

89 results strongly suggest that family cohesion is a major relational dynamic underlying the identity development process, and that it is both directly predictive of psychological well-being and indirectly predictive of psychological well-being via commitment. This study answers the call of Schwartz (2005) in that it carefully takes the role of ethnoracial identity into account as a part of an effort to understand ego identity in a broader theoretical context. This analysis found no difference in the two ethnoracial groups studied, and the different outcomes hypothesized for the two different ethnoracial groups studied were not borne out in the data. However, the lack of support for these hypothesized relationships may be telling still. Due to the possible relevance of the underrepresentation of Mexican-Americans in the present study, it is reasonable to plan for furthering this line of research by repeating a similar study with a population more representative of the total Hispanic-identified population of the U.S. The USCB is currently considering changes to how Hispanic-identified people in the U.S. are prompted to designate their ethnic and racial identities. This is based in part on their finding that Mexican-Americans specifically are responsible for shifts in how Hispanics in the U.S. selfidentify (Krogstad & Cohn, 2014). It is established that people in the contemporary U.S. who identify as partly Hispanic or Hispanic are likely to go to a greater effort than their non-hispanic counterparts in considering their ethnocultural identity (e.g., Juang & Syed, 2010; Schwartz et al., 2009; Syed & Azimitia, 2008). These people may further struggle with the decision of whether or not it is relevant for them to take on a Hispanic identity at all (e.g., Syed & Azimitia, 2008). Currently, the sole ethnicity measured by the USCB requires respondents to identify as either Hispanic or non- Hispanic. It has been reported that changes to the 2020 Census may involve collapsing this sole ethnicity into one question that captures this self-identification alongside the designated race categories (Krogstad & Cohn, 2014). This may ultimately influence nationwide perceptions in the U.S. about the meaning of self-identifying as Hispanic. Therefore, the period between the time of publication of this study and the 2020 Census may represent a unique time period for ego identity scholars to gather data and study Hispanicidentified people in the U.S. and relevant differences between Hispanic-identified people in the U.S. of varying backgrounds. Further, this period of time may also be an unusual opportunity for researchers to examine the role and function of the ethnoracial domain of ego identity overall, 76

90 and in a way that is potentially generalizable across eras and cultures given the lens of Family Life Course Development theory. This study has contributed important information about the relational dynamic underlying the identity development process. Further, by offering data that can be compared with data from subsequent studies of a Hispanic-identified U.S. population in flux, the present study will contribute to the growing body of identity scholarship that has been carried out in service of furthering theoretical knowledge in the context of a broader academic understanding of crosscultural relations. It is clear that identity scholars are still in a position to understand and foster healthy ego identity development, even in our globally connected, post-multiculturalist world. However, it is also clear that the benefits of this potential can only be realized when identity scholars recognize the bidirectional nature of influence inherent in interventions designed to foster this healthy development, and when those same interventions are rooted in empirical data that, ideally, represents the real world of adolescents and young adults in all its complexity. 77

91 APPENDIX A INFORMED CONSENT FOR FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY 78

92 APPENDIX B INFORMED CONSENT FOR FLORIDA INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY 79

93 80

94 APPENDIX C PARTICIPANT PACKET 81

95 82

96 83

97 84

98 85

99 86

100 87

101 88

102 APPENDIX D FACTOR LOADING ESTIMATES FOR MODEL 3: HYPOTHESIZED MODEL Table 5 Measurement Items for Cohesion and Enmeshment Cohesion 1. Family members really helped and supported one another. 2. There was a feeling of togetherness in or family. 3. Our family didn t do things together.* 4. We really got along well with each other. 5. Family members seemed to avoid contact with each other when at home.* Enmeshment 1. Family members found it hard to get away from one another. 2. It was difficult for family members to take time away from the family. 3. Family members were pressured to spend most free time together. 4. Family member felt guilty if they wanted to spend some time alone. 5. It seemed like there was never any place to be alone in our house. *Reverse-scored. 89

103 Table 6 Measurement Items for Commitment Commitment 1. I have definitely decided on the occupation I want to pursue. 2. I don t expect to change my political principles and ideals. 3. I have considered adopting different kinds of religious beliefs.* 4. I am very confident about what kinds of friends are best for me. 5. I will always vote for the same political party. 6. I have firmly held views concerning my role in the family. 7. My values are likely to change in the future.* 8. I am not sure about what type of dating relationship is best for me.* 9. Regarding religion, my beliefs are likely to change in the near future.* 10. I have definite views regarding the ways in which men and women should behave. 11. I think what I look for in a friend could change in the future.* 12. I am unlikely to alter my vocational goals. 13. My ideas about men s and women s roles will never change. 14. I am not sure that the values I hold are right for me.* 15. The extent to which I value my family is likely to change in the future.* 16. My beliefs about dating are firmly held. *Reverse-scored. 90

104 Table 7 Measurement Items for Exploration Exploration 1. There has never been a need to question my values.* 2. My ideas about men s and women s roles have changed as I got older. 3. I have engaged in several discussions concerning behaviors regarding dating relationships. 4. I have considered different political views thoughtfully. 5. I have never questioned my views concerning what kind of friend is best for me.* 6. When I talk to people about religion, I make sure to voice my opinion. 7. I have not felt the need to reflect on the importance I place on my family.* 8. I have tried to learn about different occupational fields to find the best one for me. 9. I have undergone several experiences that made me change my views on men s and women s roles. 10. I have consistently re-examined many different values in order to find the ones which are best for me. 11. I have questioned what kind of date is right for me. 12. I have evaluated many ways in which I fit into my family structure. 13. I have never questioned my political beliefs.* 14. I have many experiences that have led me to review the qualities which I would like my friends to have. 15. I have discussed religious matters with a number of people who believe differently than I do. 16. I have never questioned my occupational aspirations.* *Reverse-scored. 91

105 Table 8 Measurement Items for Depressive Symptoms Depressive Symptoms 1. I was bothered by things that usually don t bother me. 2. I did not feel like eating; my appetite was poor. 3. I felt that I could not shake off the blues even with help from my family or friends. 4. I felt that I was just as good as other people.* 5. I felt depressed. 6. I felt that everything I did was an effort. 7. I felt hopeful about the future.* 8. I thought my life had been a failure. 9. I felt fearful. 10. My sleep was restless. 11. I was happy.* 12. I talked less than usual. 13. I felt lonely. 14. People were unfriendly. 15. I enjoyed life.* 16. I had crying spells. 17. I felt sad. 18. I felt that people dislike me. 19. I could not get going. *Reverse-scored. 92

106 Table 9 Measurement Items for Life Satisfaction and Anxiety Life Satisfaction 1. In most ways, my life is close to ideal. 2. The conditions of my life are excellent. 3. I am satisfied with my life. 4. So far, I have gotten the important things I want in life. 5. If I could live my life over, I would change almost nothing. Anxiety 1. I feel calm.* 2. I am tense. 3. I feel upset. 4. I am relaxed.* 5. I feel content.* 6. I am worried. *Reverse-scored. 93

107 Table 10 Cohesion and Enmeshment Factor Loading Estimates for Model 3: Hypothesized Model. Cohesion Estimate S.E. Est./S.E. p Item 1* Item Item Item Item Enmeshment Item 1* Item Item Item Item *Factor loading fixed at 1. 94

108 Table 11 Commitment Factor Loading Estimates for Model 3: Hypothesized Model. Estimate S.E. Est./S.E. p Commitment Item 1* Item Item Item Item Item Item Item Item Item Item Item Item Item Item Item *Factor loading fixed at 1. 95

109 Table 12 Exploration Factor Loading Estimates for Model 3: Hypothesized Model. Estimate S.E. Est./S.E. p Exploration Item 1* Item Item Item Item Item Item Item Item Item Item Item Item Item Item Item *Factor loading fixed at 1. 96

110 Table 13 Depression Factor Loading Estimates for Model 3: Hypothesized Model. Estimate S.E. Est./S.E. p Depression Item 1* Item Item Item Item Item Item Item Item Item Item Item Item Item Item Item Item Item Item *Factor loading fixed at 1. 97

111 Table 14 Life Satisfaction and Anxiety Factor Loading Estimates for Model 3: Hypothesized Model. Estimate S.E. Est./S.E. p Satisfaction Item Item Item Item Item Anxiety Item Item Item Item Item Item *Factor loading fixed at 1. 98

112 APPENDIX E FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY INSTITUTIONAL REVIEW BOARD HUMAN SUBJECTS APPROVAL LETTER 99

113 APPENDIX F FLORIDA INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY INSTITUTIONAL REVIEW BOARD HUMAN SUBJECTS APPROVAL LETTER 100