ANALYSIS OF (MAL)ADAPTIVE FORMS OF YOUTH IDENTITY DEVELOPMENT USING THE AGONISTIC SELF MODEL

Abstract

Today, the most influential in identity research is the two-cycle model, as an elaboration of Erikson’s initial model that includes the processes of exploration and commitment. The identified dimensions were used to derive more or less adaptive identity statuses. The goal of our research was to examine similarities and differences in the processes of identity construction between those who belong to adaptive and maladaptive statuses. In order to achieve this, we used the Model of Agonistic Self, according to which the sense of self is understood as the result of an order of voices, some of which represent important ideological stances and personal values, while some have the function of evaluators. Some ideologues are dominant, while others are suppressed as voices of resistance. Based on the application of the Dimensions of Identity Development Scale on a sample of 823 high school and college students (Mage = 18.34), those who achieved extreme values on at least three dimensions were selected for participation in the qualitative study (N = 13). We applied a deductive analysis to the data collected by the Interview for the Agonistic Self using a theoretical model of the agonistic self. Then we created individual reports based on it. A second interview was conducted, aimed at ensuring participant validation and supplementing individual reports. Finally, a cross-case analysis was conducted to observe the similarities and differences in the dynamics of the agonistic self of the participants. We found that in the majority of participants with adaptive forms of identity development, there is a stable dominance of the main ideologue and his coalition of voices. In some of them, there are many conflicts between powerful ideologues, and the main ideologist often respects opposing perspectives. In others, there is no conflict, while numerous opponents are permanently suppressed. In most of those with maladaptive profiles, there is a dominance of undermining evaluators and a conflict between evaluators and ideologues over influence on the main ideologue. Successful identity development requires the predominance of beliefs and values on which life goals are based over self-criticism and self-evaluation. The existence of a “non-democratic” adaptive profile suggests that a diversity of values and a democratic relationship between them are desirable, but do not appear to be necessary for a healthy sense of self.Knjiga rezimea: XXXI međunarodni naučni skup Empirijska istraživanja u psihologiji 28–30. mart 202