Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com

Personality and Individual Dierences 44 (2008) 645655

www.elsevier.com/locate/paid

Identity formation: The role of identity processing style

and cognitive processes
Michael D. Berzonsky *

Department of Psychology, State University of New York at Cortland, Cortland, NY 13045, United States

Received 17 May 2007; received in revised form 20 September 2007; accepted 27 September 2007
Available online 19 November 2007

Abstract

The role that rational and automatic cognitive processes and identity processing styles play in accounting
for variation on measures of identity formation was investigated. Results indicated that relationships
between rational processing and identity commitments and identity achievement were mediated by an infor-
mational identity style. Automatic/intuitive processing was associated with identity achievement and a col-
lective sense of identity. The former relationship was mediated by an informational style; the latter was
partially mediated by a normative identity style. Findings are considered in terms of a social-cognitive
model of identity formation and maintenance.
 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Identity style; Rational/analytical processing; Automatic processing; Identity achievement; Collective ide-
ntity

1. Introduction

Erikson (1968), Piaget (Inhelder & Piaget, 1958), and others have postulated that cognitive
processes play a role in identity formation. Although eorts to demonstrate linkages between
formal operational reasoning and identity formation have yielded mixed results (Boyes &

*
Tel.: +1 607 753 4221; fax: +1 607 753 5738.
E-mail address: berzonskym@cortland.edu

0191-8869/$ - see front matter  2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.paid.2007.09.024
646 M.D. Berzonsky / Personality and Individual Dierences 44 (2008) 645655

Chandler, 1992), reliable dierences in the social-cognitive styles used to process self-relevant
information and negotiate identity issues have been found (Berzonsky, 2004). Identity style
refers to reported preferences in the social-cognitive strategies used to engage or to avoid
the tasks of constructing and maintaining a sense of identity. Three identity processing styles
have been identied: Informational, normative, and diuse-avoidant (Berzonsky, 1990). Indi-
viduals with an informational style eortfully seek out, process, and evaluate self-relevant
information. They are skeptical about self-views, interested in learning new things about
themselves, and motivated by perceived discrepancies between personal ideals or standards
and informed feedback (Higgins, 1987). Normative individuals more automatically internalize
and conform to the standards and expectations of signicant others. Discrepancies between
information about how they are and their normative standards evoke feelings of guilt and
concern about avoiding failure (Higgins, 1987). Their primary aim is to defend and maintain
existing self-views. A diuse-avoidant identity style is associated with procrastination and at-
tempts to evade identity conicts and decisional situations as long as possible (Berzonsky,
2004).
Evidence suggests that by late adolescence most normal individuals have developed the cogni-
tive ability to utilize the processing strategies associated with all three styles (Berzonsky & Ferrari,
1996; Berzonsky & Kuk, 2005). Individual dierences in reported styles during late adolescence
and adulthood are postulated to reect relative stable individual preferences rather than develop-
mental dierences in social-cognitive competence (Berzonsky, 1990). The present study sought to
investigate the role that general cognitive processes and identity styles play in accounting for var-
iation on measures of identity processes.

1.1. Identity processing style and identity formation

For more than four decades Marcias (1966) identity status paradigm has been utilized in
most investigations of Eriksonian identity formation (Berzonsky & Adams, 1999). Drawing
on Eriksons (1968) theory, Marcia distinguished four identity statuses on the basis of levels
of self-exploration and commitment: (1) identity achievement (high commitment following a
period of self-exploration); (2) identity foreclosure (high commitment adopted automatically
from others with limited self-exploration); (3) identity moratorium (low commitment, ongoing
self-exploration); and (4) identity diusion (low commitment, limited self-exploration). Numer-
ous investigations have examined the role that identity processing styles may play in forming
commitments and a sense of identity (Berzonsky, 2003, 2004). A normative processing style is
associated with identity foreclosure, an informational style is positively correlated with identity
achievement and moratorium, and a diuse-avoidant style is associated with identity diusion
(Berzonsky & Neimeyer, 1994; Krettenauer, 2005). Identity processing styles are also dieren-
tially associated with the types of self-elements within which ones identity is grounded. Indi-
viduals with high normative scores emphasize collective self-attributes (e.g., family and
religion), those with high informational scores highlight personal self-elements (e.g., my
ideas and my dreams), and those with high diuse-avoidant scores focus on social self-
componentse.g., popularity and impressions made on others (Berzonsky & Adams,
1999; Dollinger, Dollinger, & Centeno, 2005). Linkages between identity style and reasoning
processes have also been investigated.
 M.D. Berzonsky / Personality and Individual Dierences 44 (2008) 645655 647

1.2. Identity style and reasoning processes

An informational style is associated with problem-focused coping (Berzonsky, 1992a; Soenens,

Duriez, & Goossens, 2005), cognitive motivation (Berzonsky, 1990), and openness to alternative
ideas (Berzonsky, 1990; Duriez, Soenens, & Beyers, 2004). A normative style is associated nega-
tively with openness to alternative values and actions but positively with a need for cognitive clo-
sure (Berzonsky, 1990; Duriez et al., 2004; Soenens, Duriez et al., 2005). A diuse-avoidant style is
associated with emotion-focused avoidant coping (Berzonsky, 1992a; Soenens, Duriez et al., 2005)
and maladaptive decisional strategies including pre-decisional procrastination and avoidance and
post-decisional rationalization and excuse making (Berzonsky & Ferrari, 1996).
The purpose of the present investigation was to (1) examine the extent to which rational/ana-
lytical and intuitive/automatic reasoning processes accounted for dierences in identity style; and
(2) determine the role that reasoning processes and identity styles played in accounting for vari-
ation in measures of identity formation. Given the hypothesized role that cognitive processes play
in identity formation (Erikson, 1968; Inhelder & Piaget, 1958), I sought to determine whether rela-
tionships between cognitive processes and measures of identity would at least partially be medi-
ated by dierences in identity processing style.

1.3. A dual processing approach

The study was framed in terms of Epsteins (1990) distinction between rational/analytic and
intuitive/experiential information processing systems. Epsteins (1990; Epstein, Pacini, Denes-
Raj, and Heier, 1996) cognitive-experiential self-theory postulates two parallel information pro-
cessing systems (see also Klaczynski, 2004). One is a rational system that processes symbolic,
decontextualized information in an intentional, logical, and eortful manner. It is a reason-based
system that relies on logic and evidence to justify informed actions. The experience-based, intui-
tive cognitive system processes concrete, emotionally laden, contextualized information in a rela-
tively automatic, eortless, and global fashion. In most life situations, the automaticity associated
with the intuitive system makes it the dominant or default system (Epstein, 1990). Intuitive pro-
cessing is ecient and economical but prone to cognitive distortion and bias. The rational system
requires more mental eort but is relatively less prone to bias and subjective distortion (Epstein,
1990). Both rational and intuitive processes are postulated to play a role in self-construction and
adaptive behaviors and people can shift between them (Berzonsky, 2004; Epstein, Pacini, Denes-
Raj, & Heier, 1996). However, individual dierences in the use of the two cognitive systems have
been found (see Epstein et al., 1996).

1.4. The present study

Based on the views of Epstein et al. (1996) and Berzonsky (2004) that rational and intuitive
processing both play a role in self-construction, positive associations between an informational
style and both rational and intuitive/experiential processing were predicted. However, because
individuals with an informational style are more likely to engage in active self-exploration than
their normative or diuse-avoidant counterparts (Berzonsky, 2004), it was hypothesized that
the relationship between informational scores and rational processing would be stronger than that
648 M.D. Berzonsky / Personality and Individual Dierences 44 (2008) 645655

between informational scores and intuitive processing. Because a normative style involves a rela-
tively automatic internalization of the expectations and values of signicant others (Berzonsky,
1990), a positive link between intuitive processes and a normative style was predicted. Finally,
the tendency for individuals with a diuse-avoidant style to avoid self-exploration and behave
in a situation-specic fashion (Berzonsky, 1990; Berzonsky & Ferrari, 1996), lead to the hypoth-
esis that although diuse-avoidance may be positively associated with relatively eortless intuitive
processing it would be negatively associated with more deliberative rational processing.
The study also attempted to evaluate the role that identity style and rational and intuitive rea-
soning processes played in identity formation. Klaczynski, Fauth, and Swanger (1998) found that
rational processing was associated with higher levels of ideological identity achievement and lower
levels of identity foreclosure and diusion and that intuitive processing was related to higher levels
of interpersonal diusion (see also, Klaczynski, 2004). However, these investigators only studied
49 adolescents and did not control for covariation between the identity status measures, which
may have inated some of the relationships. The present study sought to replicate aspects of
Klaczynski et al. with a larger sample and to extend them by determining whether rational and
intuitive reasoning processes and identity styles independently contributed to variation in identity
formation.
Inasmuch as identity commitments may result from a mentally eortful process of self-explor-
atory or a more automatic process of foreclosed identication (Berzonsky & Adams, 1999; Mar-
cia, 1966), it was predicted that both rational and intuitive processing would be positively
correlated with identity commitment. Based on the ndings of Berzonsky (1990, 2003), it was pre-
dicted that identity commitments would be positively related to the informational and normative
styles and negatively related to diuse-avoidance. Because identity achievement involves the mak-
ing of personal commitments following a period of deliberate self-exploration (Marcia, 1966), it
was predicted that both an informational style and rational processing would be positively asso-
ciated with identity achievement. In contrast, since a group-based collective sense of identity tends
to be adopted in a more passive automatic manner (Berzonsky, 1990; Marcia, 1966), it was pre-
dicted that both a normative style and intuitive processing would be positively linked with a col-
lective sense of identity. Inasmuch as identity styles are considered to reect social-cognitive
processes involved in the processing of self-relevant information, forming commitments, and con-
structing a sense of identity (Berzonsky, 1990, 2004), it was hypothesized that relationships be-
tween general rational and intuitive reasoning processes and measures of identity formation
would at least in part be mediated by identity styles. Finally, because some gender (Berzonsky,
1992a; Soenens, Berzonsky, Vansteenkiste, Beyers, & Goossens, 2005) and age (Berzonsky & Kin-
ney, in press) dierences in identity style scores have been reported, eects associated with gender
and age were included as control variables in the analyses.

2. Method

2.1. Participants

The participants were 238 students enrolled in a community college in upstate New York. They
ranged from 18 to 24 years of age (Mean = 20.2 years); 155 (65%) were female, 83 (35%) were
 M.D. Berzonsky / Personality and Individual Dierences 44 (2008) 645655 649

male. The participants were solicited from psychology classes and received course credit for
participating.

2.2. Measures

2.2.1. Identity style

Identity processing styles were assessed with the Identity Style Inventory (ISI-3: Berzonsky,
1992b). On a 1 (not at all like me) to 5 (very much like me) Likert scale, students rated the
extent to which they considered 40 statements to be self-descriptive. The ISI-3 contains three
continuous style scales: (1) Diuse-avoidant-style scale (10 items: e.g., Im not really thinking
about my future now; its still a long way o): a = .76; (2) Normative-style scale (nine items:
e.g., I prefer to deal with situations where I can rely on social norms and standards):
a = .71; and (3) The informational-style scale (11 items: e.g., Ive spent a great deal of time
thinking seriously about what I should do with my life): a = .68. Testretest reliabilities (Ber-
zonsky, 2003) over a two-week interval were found to be: informational (.87), normative (.87),
and diuse-avoidant (.83). Convergent validity and psychometric data are provided in Berzon-
sky (1990, 2003).

2.2.2. Rational and intuitive cognitive processing

The Faith in Intuition scale from the Rational Versus Experiential Inventory (RVEI; Epstein
et al., 1996) was used to assess intuitive/automatic cognitive processing. Epstein et al. found that
intuitive processing scores were associated with emotion-based reasoning such as naive optimism,
superstition, and stereotypic thinking: (12 items: e.g., I believe in trusting my hunches): a = .84.
Following Epstein et al. (1996), rational/analytic processing was assessed by the need for cogni-
tion scale (Cacioppo, Petty, & Kao, 1984), which assesses the extent to which individuals are moti-
vated to engage in deliberate, eortful information processing (18 items: I would prefer complex
problems to simple ones): a = .87. Reliability and validity data are provided in Cacioppo and
Petty (1982) and Cacioppo et al. (1984).

2.2.3. Identity formation

Identity commitment was assessed by a commitment scale included in Berzonskys (1992b)
Identity Style Inventory (10 items: e.g., I know what I want to do with my future):
a = .71. Its testretest reliability over a two-week period is .89 (Berzonsky, 2003). Validity
data relevant to the commitment scale is provided by Berzonsky (1990, 2003). Two addi-
tional measures of identity formation were also administered. One was the achievement iden-
tity status scale from the Objective Measure of Ego Identity Status (Bennion & Adams,
1986): (eight items: e.g., A persons faith is unique to each individual. Ive considered
and reconsidered it myself and know what I can believe): a = .70. Psychometric data are
summarized in Adams (1999). The second was a measure of collective identity developed
by Luhtanen and Crocker (1992): (four items: e.g., The social groups I belong to are an
important reection of who I am): a = .80. The scale has been found to correlate positively
with endorsement of group norms and values and with other measures of collective identity
(Luhtanen & Crocker, 1992).
650 M.D. Berzonsky / Personality and Individual Dierences 44 (2008) 645655

3. Results

3.1. Identity style and cognitive processing

Although an informational style was positively correlated with both rational and intuitive
processing, as predicted the former correlation was stronger (r = .52) than the latter (r = .31),
t (235) = 2.097, p < .01. Also as hypothesized, a normative style was positively associated
with intuitive processing and diuse-avoidance was negatively associated with rational pro-
cessing. However, the predicted positive correlation between diuse-avoidance and intuitive
processing was not signicant (Table 1). Because the style measures were intercorrelated,
three hierarchical regression analyses were performed to determine the extent to which the
processing measures accounted for unique variation in identity style scores. In these analyses,
presented in Table 2, each style variable served as the dependent variable. Age and gender
and the two style scores not being regressed were entered on the rst step as control vari-
ables. The two information processing variables were then entered on step two.

3.1.1. Informational style

The results on step 1 indicated that informational scores were positively correlated with age
(Table 2). Both cognitive processing variables entered on step 2 made unique positive contribu-
tions to variation in informational scores. The cognitive variables accounted for an additional
19% of the variation in informational scores beyond that explained by the control variables (total
adjusted R2 = .41).

3.1.2. Normative style

The results from step 1 indicated that older participants had lower normative scores (Table 2).
As hypothesized, normative scores were uniquely associated with intuitive processing ( = .18,
p < .01). However, the processing variables only explained an additional 3% of the variation in
normative scores (total adjusted R2 = .18).

Table 1
Bivariate correlations between the identity style and cognitive variables
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
1. Informational style
2. Normative style .33**
3. Diuse-avoidant style .17** .00
4. Rational processing .52** .10 .41**
5. Intuitive processing .31** .24** .11 .05
6. Commitment .44** .42** .36** .36** .12
7. Identity achievement .38** .23** .13* .23** .23** .51**
8. Collective identity .04 .25** .04 .02 .15* .18** .11
*
p < .05.
**
p < .01.
 M.D. Berzonsky / Personality and Individual Dierences 44 (2008) 645655 651

3.1.3. Diuse-avoidant style

The ndings on step 1 indicated that male participants had higher diuse-avoidant scores than
their female counterparts. Although the eect of age was also signicant on step 1, its contribution
did not remain signicant on step 2 when rational processing was entered (diuse-avoidant age
partial r with rational processing controlled = .09 ns). As shown in Table 2, diuse-avoidance was
negatively associated with rational processing ( = .41, p < .01). Also, when the eects of the
other variables in the model were controlled, as predicted, the diuse-avoidant style was positively
associated with intuitive processing ( = .14, p < .05). The cognitive variables explained an addi-
tional 15% of the variation in diuse-avoidance (total adjusted R2 = .20).

3.2. Identity style, cognitive processing, and identity formation

A series of hierarchical regression analyses was conducted to determine the extent to which style
and cognitive processing uniquely contributed to dierences along the identity dimensions. In
these analyses identity commitment, achievement, and collective identity served as dependent
measures. Age and gender were entered on step 1 as control variables. The processing variables
were entered on step 2; the identity style variables on step 3.

3.2.1. Identity commitment1

Step 1 indicated that female and older participants held stronger identity commitments than
their male and younger counterparts (Table 3). (However the eect of age did not remain signif-
icant on step 2 when the eect of rational processing was controlled.) The processing variables on
step 2 accounted for an additional 14% of the variation in commitment with rational processing
making a unique contribution. The style variables on step 3 explained an additional 20% of the
variance, with all three styles making unique contributions. Consistent with the mediational
hypothesis, the standardized beta coecient for rational processing was reduced from step 2 to
step 3. Sobel tests indicated that indirect relationships between rational processing and commit-
ment mediated by an informational (z = 2.02, p < .05) style and a diuse-avoidant (z = 3.20,
p < .01) style were signicant (total adjusted R2 = .38).

3.2.2. Identity achievement

Female and older participants had higher identity achievement scores than their male and
younger counterparts (Table 3). The processing variables entered on step 2 accounted for an addi-
tional 6% of the dierences in identity achievement, with both rational ( = .20, p < .01) and intu-
itive ( = .17, p < .05) processing making unique contributions. The style variables entered on step

1
An anonymous reviewer suggested the possibility that an informational style and identity achievement and a
normative style and collective identity, respectively, reect the same latent variables. To examine this, three parcels were
randomly generated for each of the identity style and achievement variables. Conrmatory factor analysis with the four
sets of parcels and the four collective-identity items revealed that a ve-factor model provided a good t to the data
(CFI = .96, RMESA = .04). A three-factor model with the informational and achievement parcels loading on a single
factor, the normative parcels and collective identity items loading on one factor, and the diuse-avoidant parcels
loading on a third factor provided a signicantly worse t (CFI = .75, RMESA = .11): DX2(7) = 24.32, p < .001.
Consistent with the conceptualization of the scales, the ndings suggest that they assess dierent latent variables.
652 M.D. Berzonsky / Personality and Individual Dierences 44 (2008) 645655

Table 2
Hierarchical regression of identity processing styles on control and cognitive variables
Predictor variables b
Informational style Normative style Diuse-avoidant style
Step 1 Step 2 Step 1 Step 2 Step 1 Step 2
Gender .07 .08 .01 .01 .14* .17*
Age .29** .17* .24** .24** .14* .09
Informational style .41** .38** .11 .06
Normative style .39** .27** .01 .04
Diuse-avoidant
Style .08 .05 .01 .04
Rational processing .43** .05 .41**
Intuitive processing .19** .16* .14*
DR2 .23** .19** .17** .03* .06* .15**
Adjusted R2 .41** .18** .20**
Gender dummy coded: Male = 1, Female = 2.
*
p < .05.
**
p < .01.

Table 3
Hierarchical regression of identity measures on control, identity style and cognitive variables
Predictor variables b
Identity commitment Identity achievement Collective identity
Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 1 Step 2 Step 3
* * * ** ** ** * *
Gender .17 .17 .12 .23 .22 .20 .16 .14 .15*
Age .16* .06 .10 .21** .15* .16* .07 .09 .03
Rational processing .37** .19* .20** .09 .00 .04
Intuitive processing .09 .00 .17* .08 .19** .14*
Informational style .14* .18* .10
Normative style .38** .16* .24**
Diuse-avoidant style .22** .01 .06
DR2 .06** .14** .20** .11** .06** .06** .03* .04** .05**
Adjusted R2 .19** .38** .16** .21** .05* .09**
Gender dummy coded: Male = 1, Female = 2.
*
p < .05.
**
p < .01.

3 explained an additional 6% of the dierences in achievement scores: both the informational

( = .18, p < .05) and normative ( = .16, p < .05) styles were unique predictors. Consistent with
the mediational hypothesis, neither processing variable remained signicant on step 3. Sobel tests
indicated that indirect relationships between identity achievement and rational (z= 2.24, p < .05)
and intuitive (z = 1.96, p < .05) processing mediated by an informational style were signicant,
but the indirect relationship between achievement and intuitive processing via a normative style
was not (z = 1.77, ns). Total adjusted R2 for the model was .21
 M.D. Berzonsky / Personality and Individual Dierences 44 (2008) 645655 653

3.2.3. Collective identity

Female participants had higher collective identity scores than male participants (Table 3). The
processing variables accounted for an additional 4% of the variance in collective identity scores
with only intuitive processing making a signicant unique contribution ( = .19, p < .01). The
style variables explained an additional 5% of the variance: only the normative style was a unique
predictor ( = .24, p < .01). Although a signicant indirect path from intuitive processing to col-
lective identity through a normative style (z = 2.05, p < .05) was found on step 3, the standardized
beta coecient for intuitive processing was only reduced about 26% (total adjusted R2 = .09).

4. Discussion

Consistent with previous research (Berzonsky, 1990; Berzonsky & Ferrari, 1996) an informa-
tional style was positively associated with rational processing. Intuitive processing also indepen-
dently contributed to informational scores, suggesting that individuals with an informational
identity style are adept within both reasoning systems. It appears that individuals with high infor-
mational scores deal with identity issues and personal problems by relying on relatively automatic
as well as mentally eortful reasoning (Berzonsky, 2004).
A normative style was positively associated with intuitive processing. This is consistent with the
view that a normative approach to identity formation involves the relatively automatic internal-
ization and adoption of values, standards, and regulatory mechanisms endorsed by signicant
others and referent groups (Berzonsky, 1990; Soenens, Duriez et al., 2005). Diuse-avoidance
was negatively associated with rational processing but positively correlated with intuitive process-
ing, which is consistent with ndings that diuse-avoiders operate in a predominantly emotion-fo-
cused manner with limited concern about rational considerations and long-term logical
implications (Berzonsky, 1990, 2004).
Consistent with Klaczynski et al. (1998) rational processing was positively associated with iden-
tity achievement. However, contrary to Klaczynski et al. automatic/intuitive processing also un-
iquely accounted for variation in identity achievement, at least before the eect of identity
processing style was controlled. The contribution of intuitive processing indicates that identity
formation is not an exclusively conscious and rational process (Berzonsky, 2004; Klaczynski,
2004). The present ndings further suggest that relationships between these dual reasoning pro-
cesses and identity formation may, at least in part, be mediated by identity processing style. First,
an informational identity style fully mediated relationships between identity achievement scores
and rational and intuitive processing. Evidence for partial mediation was obtained for identity
commitment, with both informational and diuse-avoidant styles. Although a signicant direct
relationship from rational processing to identity commitments remained after the style variables
were entered into the model, the magnitude of the beta coecient was reduced about 50%. Spe-
cically, high levels of rational processing were associated with high informational scores and low
diuse-avoidant scores, both of which, in turn, were associated with high levels of commitment.
A direct positive relationship was also found between identity achievement and a normative
style. Although this relationship appears counterintuitive, it is consistent with some previous
research (Berzonsky, 1990; Krettenauer, 2005). One possibility is that the relationship reects
the commitment component of achievement. Alternatively, once values, standards, behavioral
654 M.D. Berzonsky / Personality and Individual Dierences 44 (2008) 645655

patterns, and the like have been actively explored, processed, and internalized, i.e., achieved, it
may become inecient to continually reconsider and rethink them. A tendency may develop to
operate in a more normative fashion, leading to a biased, post-commitment view that this is
how one should believe, think, and act (see e.g., Blank, Musch, & Pohl, 2007). Longitudinal data
are needed to evaluate this possibility.
Some other possible limitations need to be considered. First, cognitive processing strategies
were assessed via self-reports. Although convergence has been found between responses on these
self-report measures and performance on actual reasoning tasks (e.g., Cacioppo & Petty, 1982;
Epstein et al., 1996), it would be useful to replicate the ndings using direct assessments of the
information processing strategies and reasoning abilities of the participants. Also, the sample
was relatively homogenous and selective, which may restrict the generalizability of the ndings.
Finally, although the study was framed in terms of a causal inuence of cognitive processes
and the mediational role of identity processing style, the data were obtained concurrently and
inferences about the causal direction of these relationships were based on conceptual rather than
empirical considerations. Obtaining longitudinal data and evaluating cross-lagged paths between
the variables would provide an empirical basis for attempting to evaluate some possible alterna-
tive explanations of these relationships.
Consistent with Berzonsky (1992a) and Soenens, Berzonsky et al. (2005) male participants
scored higher on diuse-avoidance than their female counterparts. One possibility is that this nd-
ing reects dierences in sex-role socialization processes with male children generally being pro-
vided more freedom and less supervision than their female counterparts. Female participants also
scored higher than their male counterparts on all three identity processes: commitment, collective
identity, and identity achievement. Again, dierences in sex-role socialization processes provide a
possible explanation. The ndings with identity achievement may not be reliable because few gen-
der dierences in identity status have been reported (Kroger, 1997), and traditional sex-role social-
ization practices would seem to be more likely to promote achievement for male late adolescents.
Older participants were found to have higher informational and achievement scores, and lower
normative scores than their younger counterparts. Although these ndings are consistent with
the possibility of development changes in identity, longitudinal data to rule out other plausible
explanations including cohort eects or the selective nature of the sample of older participants.
Taken together, the ndings lend credibility to the supposition that identity styles play a role in
the processing of self-relevant information in particular rather than information processing in
general (Berzonsky, 1990). Further they underscore the role that rational and automatic social-
cognitive reasoning processes play in identity formation (Berzonsky, 1990, 2004).

References

Adams, G. R. (1999). The objective measure of ego identity status: A manual on theory and test construction. Ontario,
Canada: University of Guelph.
Bennion, L., & Adams, G. R. (1986). A revision of the extended version of the objective measure of ego identity status:
An identity instrument for use with late adolescents. Journal of Adolescent Research, 1, 183198.
Berzonsky, M. D. (1990). Self-construction over the life-span: A process perspective on identity formation. In G. J.
Neimeyer & R. A. Neimeyer (Eds.). Advances in personal construct psychology (vol. 1, pp. 155186). Greenwich, CT:
JAI Press.
 M.D. Berzonsky / Personality and Individual Dierences 44 (2008) 645655 655

Berzonsky, M. D. (1992a). Identity style and coping strategies. Journal of Personality, 60, 771788.
Berzonsky, M. D. (1992b). Identity style inventory (ISI3): Revised Version. Unpublished measure, Department of
Psychology, State University of New York, Cortland, NY 13045.
Berzonsky, M. D. (2003). Identity style and well-being: Does commitment matter? Identity: An International Journal of
Theory and Research, 3, 131142.
Berzonsky, M. D. (2004). Identity processing style, self-construction, and personal epistemic assumptions: A social-
cognitive perspective. European Journal of Developmental Psychology, 1, 303315.
Berzonsky, M. D., & Adams, G. R. (1999). The identity status paradigm: Still useful after thirty-ve years.
Developmental Review, 19, 557590.
Berzonsky, M. D., & Ferrari, J. R. (1996). Identity orientation and decisional strategies. Personality and Individual
Dierences, 20, 597606.
Berzonsky, M. D., & Kinney, A. (in press). Identity processing style and defense mechanisms. Polish Psychology Bulletin.
Berzonsky, M. D., & Kuk, L. (2005). Identity style, psychosocial maturity, and academic performance. Personality and
Individual Dierences, 39, 235247.
Berzonsky, M. D., & Neimeyer, G. J. (1994). Ego identity status and identity processing orientation: The moderating
role of commitment. Journal of Research in Personality, 28, 425435.
Blank, H., Musch, J., & Pohl, R. F. (2007). Hindsight bias: On being wise after the event. Social Cognition, 25, 19.
Boyes, M. C., & Chandler, M. (1992). Cognitive development, epistemic doubt, and identity formation during
adolescence. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 21, 277304.
Cacioppo, J. T., & Petty, R. E. (1982). The need for cognition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42,
116131.
Cacioppo, J. T., Petty, R. E., & Kao, C. (1984). The ecient assessment of need for cognition. Journal of Personality
Assessment, 48, 306307.
Dollinger, S. J., Dollinger, S. M. C., & Centeno, L. (2005). Identity and creativity. Identity: An International Journal of
Theory and Research, 5, 315330.
Duriez, B., Soenens, B., & Beyers, W. (2004). Religiosity, personality, and identity styles: An integrative study among
late adolescents in Flanders (Belgium). Journal of Personality, 72, 877910.
Epstein, S. (1990). Cognitive-experiential theory. In L. Previn (Ed.), Handbook of personality theory and research
(pp. 165192). New York: Guilford Press.
Epstein, S., Pacini, R., Denes-Raj, V., & Heier, H. (1996). Individual dierences in intuitive-experiential and analytical
rational thinking. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 390405.
Erikson, E. (1968). Identity: Youth and crisis. New York: Norton.
Higgins, E. T. (1987). Self-discrepancy: A theory relating self and aect. Psychological Review, 94, 319340.
Inhelder, B., & Piaget, J. (1958). The growth of logical thinking from childhood to adolescence. New York: Basic Books.
Klaczynski, P. A. (2004). A dual-process model of adolescent development: Implications for decision making,
reasoning, and identity. In Robert V. Kail (Ed.). Advances in Child Development and Behavior (Vol. 32, pp. 73123).
New York: Elsevier.
Klaczynski, P. A., Fauth, J. M., & Swanger, A. (1998). Adolescent identity: Rational vs. experiential processing, formal
operations, and critical thinking beliefs. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 27, 185207.
Krettenauer, T. (2005). The role of epistemic cognition in adolescent identity formation: Further evidence. Journal of
Youth and Adolescence, 34, 185198.
Kroger, J. (1997). Gender and identity: The intersection of structure, content and context. Sex Roles, 36, 747770.
Luhtanen, R., & Crocker, J. (1992). A collective self-esteem scale: Self-evaluation of ones social identity. Personality
and Social Psychology Bulletin, 18, 302318.
Marcia, J. E. (1966). Development and validation of ego identity status. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 3,
551558.
Soenens, B., Berzonsky, M. D., Vansteenkiste, M., Beyers, W., & Goossens, L. (2005). Identity styles and causality
orientations: In search of the motivational underpinnings of the identity exploration process. European Journal of
Personality, 19, 427442.
Soenens, B., Duriez, B., & Goossens, L. (2005). Socialpsychological proles of identity styles: Attitudinal and social-
cognitive correlates in late adolescence. Journal of Adolescence, 28, 107125.