Motive Congruence and Interpersonal Identity Status

Motive Congruence and Interpersonal Identity Status Jan Hofer, Holger Busch, Athanasios Chasiotis, and Florian Kiessling University of Osnabrück, Germany ABSTRACT This article examines the relationship between interpersonal ego identity formation and congruence of self-attributed and implicit affiliation motives. A TAT-type picture-story test, the Personality Research Form, and the Extended Objective Measure of Ego Identity Status were administered to 177 participants to assess data on affiliation motivation and interpersonal identity formation. According to a scoring system developed by Winter, the picture stories were coded for need for Affiliation. Analyses revealed that motive congruence is significantly associated with participants’ level of identity achievement and identity foreclosure in the interpersonal domain. Such a relationship could not be identified for identity diffusion and moratorium. There has been a long debate in research on motivation among proponents of traditional, implicit, and more cognitively oriented approaches concerning the adequate assessment of motives. This argument might have been based on the fact that, in general, no relationship between implicit and explicit (self-attributed) motive measures could be established in empirical research on motivation We would like to thank Daniel Russell and the anonymous reviewers for their helpful and detailed comments on an earlier version of the manuscript. Finally, we very much appreciate the statistical comments on regression analysis provided by Thomas Staufenbiehl. Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Jan Hofer, Crosscultural Life-span Psychology Research group, University of Osnabrück, Department of Human Sciences, Seminarstr. 20, D-49069 Osnabrück, Germany. E-mail: Jan. [email protected] Journal of Personality 74:2, April 2006 r 2006, Copyright the Authors Journal compilation r 2006, Blackwell Publishing, Inc. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-6494.2006.00383.x 512 Hofer et al. (e.g., King, 1995; McClelland, Atkinson, Clark, & Lowell, 1953). Much of this argument and the consequent critical attention of implicit methods of measurement (e.g., Campbell & Fiske, 1959; Entwisle, 1972), however, may have been related to the mistake in calling two distinct motive measures by the same name (McClelland, Koestner, & Weinberger, 1989; Schultheiss & Brunstein, 2005). Research on motivation yielded substantial evidence supporting the assumption that there are two separate motivational systems that develop relatively independent of each other (see McClelland et al., 1989). Investigation of the factors underlying the interplay of implicit and explicit motives has only just begun. Nonetheless, recent studies have shown that individuals differ in congruence of implicit and explicit motives (e.g., Brunstein, 2001; Thrash & Elliot, 2002). Therefore, Thrash and Elliot (2002) suggested that research should continue to identify variables or integrative processes that may be associated with an alignment of the two types of motives. In this article, we examine whether an individual’s interpersonal identity development is associated with a congruence of implicit and explicit affiliation motives. Two Distinct Motivational Systems According to McClelland et al. (1989; Weinberger & McClelland, 1990), implicit and explicit motives are acquired at different times in ontogeny and may be related to different kinds of information processing (Schultheiss, 2001). Implicit motives represent highly generalized preferences derived from emotional experiences between the individual and his or her environment during early, preverbal childhood (McClelland, 1987). In contrast, the explicit system of motivation embodies cognitive schemas such as values and goals that are dependent on the representational capacities acquired during the development of language-mediated cognitive structures (e.g., selfconcept; Weinberger & McClelland, 1990). Although the two types of motives are effective in generating behavior and directing it towards the pursuit of specific goals (e.g., Cantor, 1994; McClelland, 1987), they are linked to different types of behavior (deCharms, Morrison, Reitman, & McClelland, 1955; McClelland, 1980). Implicit motives that are responsive to natural incentives in the environment have long-term effects on ‘‘operant’’ behavioral trends over time (e.g., McAdams & Vaillant, 1982; McClelland & Pilon, 1983). Motive Congruence and Interpersonal Identity 513 In contrast, self-attributed motives provoke respondent behavior to social incentives, particularly in situations in which people cognitively decide on a course of action (e.g., Ajzen & Fishbein, 1970; Patten & White, 1977). Self-attributed motives are defined as conscious entities (Emmons & Kaiser, 1996): People are able to reflect consciously on their motivations and attributions. Thus, they are best assessed with direct self-report questionnaires (Biernat, 1989; McClelland et al., 1989). By comparison, implicit motives, that are introspectively less accessible, but clearly express themselves in individuals’ fantasies, are best measured by fantasy-based methods (Biernat, 1989; Weinberger & McClelland, 1990). Picture-story tests, based on the Thematic Apperception Test, originally introduced by Murray (1943), have been routinely used to assess implicit motives (e.g., Atkinson & Litwin, 1960; McAdams & Vaillant, 1982; McClelland & Pilon, 1983; Peterson & Stewart, 1993; Winter, 1973). Congruence Between Implicit and Self-Attributed Motives Referring to divergent findings on the relationship of the two types of motives, Emmons (1997) considered the identification of factors that influence the degree of congruence between implicit and selfattributed motives to be a main challenge that should be addressed in future research. Thrash and Elliot (2002) named three factors that could affect findings on correspondence of motives: substance of motive constructs (e.g., motive domains), methodological issues (e.g., comparability of methods), and moderator variables such as individual differences and contextual variables. Concerning the latter, Thrash and Elliot (2002) showed for the motivational domain of achievement that individuals’ degree of motive congruence is associated with their degree of self-determination. The suggestion that it is valuable to include personality characteristics when studying human motivation was also supported by research conducted by Brunstein (2001) that provided evidence that the congruence of selfattributed and implicit motives is mediated by self-regulation processes (see also Kuhl & Beckmann, 1994). Moreover, motive congruence also seems to be related to emotional well-being (Brunstein, Maier, & Schultheiss, 1999; Brunstein, Schultheiss, & Grässmann, 1998) and life satisfaction (Hofer & Chasiotis, 2003). Ryan, Deci, and Grolnick (1995) argued that individuals may perceive motive-congruent goals to be self-generated and fully integrated 514 Hofer et al. strivings that promote the satisfaction of needs. In contrast, a strong commitment to explicit motives that may be at odds with one’s implicit motivational orientation could inhibit the satisfaction of implicit motives and ultimately result in emotional distress (Winter, 1996). Miron and McClelland (1979) have already suggested that systematic experience based on self-examination may facilitate an alignment between the two types of motives (see also Bucci, 1997; McClelland et al., 1989; Schultheiss & Brunstein, 1999, 2002). Brunstein et al. (1999) assumed that congruence between an individual’s implicit and self-attributed motives is not preprogrammed ontogenetically but instead is something that might be achieved during the course of individual development. One could presume that the formation of a stable and coherent self-identity might be associated with an alignment of implicit needs and self-attributed motives, values, and life goals. Development of Ego Identity Based on Erikson’s psychosocial theory (1950, 1959, 1968), the concept of ego identity was further elaborated and empirically substantiated by numerous studies in recent decades (see Adams, 1999). Erikson (1968) defined identity as a sense of sameness and continuity both within oneself and of one’s meaning for significant others, the latter being what Marcia (1993a) called the relational roots of identity. Among several approaches to operationalizing identity formation for measurement (e.g., Constantinople, 1969; Rasmussen, 1964), Marcia’s identity status paradigm (1966, 1980) became widely accepted and proved to be very fruitful in research (see Schwartz, 2001; Waterman, 1988). Marcia (1980), who interpreted identity as a selfconstructed, dynamic organization of drives, abilities, beliefs, and individual history, postulated two principal psychological dimensions or processes in identity formation: exploration/crisis and commitment. The former refers to the search for a complete sense of self and is characterized by an examination of and experimentation with different directions and beliefs (Marcia, 1994). Commitment, on the other hand, determines the degree of personal investment in the chosen alternatives and depends on the defined and stable adherence to goals, values, and beliefs. Based on these two psychological dimensions, four types of identity statuses are identified: achievement, moratorium, foreclosure, and diffusion (Marcia, 1980). Identity Motive Congruence and Interpersonal Identity 515 achievement is characterized by a meaningful commitment to personal values and goals after having experienced a period of exploration/crisis. Moratorium identity is the state of active exploration with commitment to values and goals not having yet been reached. Foreclosure identity is defined by a strong commitment to values and life goals; however, commitment is not a consequence of exploration/crisis but rather an adoption of values and life goals from parents and other significant persons. Commitments are not tested for individual fit (Adams, 1999). Finally, identity diffusion is characterized by a relative absence of exploration and commitment. Research on ego identity statuses within the domains of ideological, occupational, and interpersonal values mainly relies on two different types of methods, semistructured interviews (observer based; Cramer, 2000), originally introduced by Marcia (1966) but constantly elaborated and revised (e.g., Grotevant & Cooper, 1981; Marcia & Archer, 1993), and self-report questionnaires (e.g., Bennion & Adams, 1986; Melgosa, 1987; Phinney, 1992). Adams (1999) presumed that the interview technique should be applied particularly when idiographic, in-depth information on individuals’ identity development was required for data analysis. In contrast, self-report methods allow meaningful comparisons among participants based on self-evaluations against standards presented by a uniform set of items (Kroger, 1993). Within the framework of Marcia’s concept of ego identity development, hundreds of studies were conducted in recent decades. Among major topics in research on identity (e.g., developmental aspects, gender-related issues, family and contextual correlates; for reviews see Adams, 1999; Marcia, Waterman, Matteson, Archer, & Orlofsky, 1993; Schwartz, 2001), studies on the relationship between ego identity and personality characteristics produced particularly interesting findings related to the problem at hand. For example, participants labeled with an achieved identity status commonly showed a high degree of self-esteem and autonomy, were less susceptible to social pressure, were characterized by an informationprocessing style that was information oriented and self-exploring, and possessed well-integrated identity structures (Berzonsky, 1989, 1992; Marcia, 1993b; Markstrom-Adams & Adams, 1995; Matteson, 1974). Like individuals with an achieved identity status, participants in the moratorium status were found to be describable by an information-oriented identity style and a cognitive style that was reflective 516 Hofer et al. rather than impulsive; the two groups, however, differed on the commitment dimension, with moratorium individuals showing none (Berzonsky, 1992; Shain & Farber, 1989). In contrast, foreclosure identity status was commonly associated with stereotypical social thinking, a reliance on the family of origin in making life decisions, and a normative identity style that was related to a collective selfdefinition (Berzonsky, 1994; Matteson, 1974; Waterman & Goldman, 1976). More mixed results were obtained for identity diffusion. However, subjects characterized by identity diffusion showed a lower tendency to cope directly with personal problems and identity issues, possessed fragmented self-theories, and typically used a diffuse/ avoidant identity style (Berzonsky, 1990; Berzonsky, Rice, & Niemeyer, 1990; Grotevant & Adams, 1984). To summarize, studies on the relationship between implicit and explicit motives provided evidence that individuals differ in their alignment of the two types of motives. Motive congruence seems to be related to an individual’s ability to gain access to self-representations (e.g., implicit needs). Furthermore, findings from research on identity formation point to pronounced differences between identity statuses on a number of personality variables, reflecting differences in the internalization of self-regulatory processes and introspectiveness (Hofer, Chasiotis, Kiebling, & Busch, in press; Marcia, 1993b). Above all, individuals characterized by an achieved identity status are describable by high levels of self-examination and a personally defined identity. Therefore, we suggest that their explicit motives, which are considered to constitute an important identity element, may be more attuned to the needs of the self instead of being purely adopted from significant social partners. Consequently, we assume that higher levels of an achieved interpersonal identity are positively related to a synchronization of implicit and explicit affiliation motives. In contrast, we assume that a pronounced interpersonal foreclosure status may be associated with an incongruence of the two types of motives because individuals rely on significant others when working on identity issues. Thus, their explicit affiliation motives may be adopted from significant others rather than being scrutinized for personal fit and tuned to implicit needs. No clear predictions can be made for interpersonal identity moratorium and diffusion, respectively, because these statuses, even if differing concerning the involvement in identity issues, are characterized by a lack of firm commitment to explicit motives such as values and goals. However, Motive Congruence and Interpersonal Identity 517 we expect it to be unlikely that motive congruence does occur in tandem with pronounced levels of the two statuses. METHOD Participants The total study sample consisted of 181 individuals; four participants, however, were excluded from analysis because they did not provide complete information on motives and/or identity development. The remaining 133 female and 44 male subjects were recruited among students in the final year at local secondary schools (N 5 58) and among university students (N 5 119). Among students of psychology, only freshmen were accepted as participants of the study (N 5 69). The participants ranged in age from 17 to 43 at the time of the data collection (M 5 22.46; SD 5 5.32). Most of the subjects (N 5 162; 91.3%) were between 18 and 29. Female and male participants did not differ significantly in age. The majority of the participants were unmarried (N 5 164). Measurements Students were invited to participate in a study on the relationship of imagination and personality characteristics. Prior to administration of measurement, students were informed that their participation in the study was voluntary and that all given information would remain anonymous and confidential. Measurements were administered in group settings. First, a TAT-type picture-story test was administered, followed by questionnaires on explicit motives and identity status. Finally, participants provided information on sociodemographic variables. The session ended at this point, and participants were debriefed. Implicit motives. Data on the implicit affiliation-intimacy motive were assessed by the use of verbal cues, which represent a valid alternative for picture cues to elicit thematic apperception stories (Murstein, 1965; Smith, Feld, & Franz, 1992) and were used in a number of studies on implicit motives (e.g., Orlofsky, 1977; Peterson & Stewart, 1993). Four verbal cues were presented to each subject in the following order: a person looking into a microscope; a young person talking about something important with an older person; at the end of the day, a person going back to the office; a person sitting in a chair with a smile on the face. The study 518 Hofer et al. participants were instructed according to established guidelines for thematic apperception measurement (see Smith et al., 1992). Verbal cues were presented at the top of each page, and the participants were given 5 minutes to compose a story for each cue. The content of the stories was coded for the affiliation-intimacy motive that they reflected according to the well-established manual for scoring motive imagery in running text developed by Winter (1991a, 1991b; e.g., Brunstein et al., 1998; King, 1995; Peterson & Stewart, 1993). This system combines the affiliation motive and the intimacy motive into a single image category because of their theoretical and empirical overlap. Therefore, in the following the notation n Affiliation will be used to refer to the combined affiliationintimacy motive. This combined motive reflects both a concern for warm, close relations with others, and a concern for establishing, maintaining, or restoring a positive affective relationship with another person or a group of people (Heyns, Veroff, & Atkinson, 1958; McAdams, 1992). n Affiliation is coded for any response indicating the establishment, maintenance, or restoration of friendly relationships expressed by positive feelings towards others, regret about the disruption of a relationship, activities of affiliation, or friendly nurturing acts. The stories were coded independently by two trained assistants who achieved percentage agreements of 85% or better in their responses to training material prescored by experts (Winter, 1991a). Percentage agreement between coders was .93 for n Affiliation.1 Scoring disagreements were resolved by discussion. Following scoring rules (for details, see Winter, 1991), a number of affiliation imagery was identified for each single story and summed to determine the participant’s final score. Among the relevant study sample (N 5 177), the number of words for the four stories ranged from 129 to 563 (M 5 346.32; SD 5 79.20). The score for the strength of the motive is expressed as motive images per 1,000 words because of a significant correlation between protocol length and the number of affiliation motive images across the four stories (r 5 .34) (see Winter, 1991a). Explicit motives. Participants’ explicit affiliation motivation was assessed by using the affiliation scale of the German version of the Personality Research Form (Stumpf, Angleitner, Wieck, Jackson, & Beloch-Till, 1985). The development of the Personality Research Form (PRF; Jackson, 1984) was based to a large extent on Murray’s theory of personality. The PRF is currently one of the most widely used questionnaires to assess 1. Percentage agreement between scorers across all four stories was conservatively estimated by the index of concordance: 2  number of agreements between scorers/(scorer A’s scores1scorer B’s scores) (see Martin & Bateson, 1993; Winter, 1991a). Motive Congruence and Interpersonal Identity 519 self-attributed motives in research on personality. According to Stumpf et al. (1985), the scales of the German PRF have a high factorial validity, satisfying internal consistency, and acceptable retest reliability. The explicit affiliation motive is assessed by 16 items in a true-false format. Identity status. The revised Extended Objective Measure of Ego Identity Status (EOM-EIS; Bennion & Adams, 1986) was applied in a German version (Kapfhammer, 1995) to measure identity status. Validation studies of the questionnaire included samples of individuals ranging from 14 to 56 years of age (see Adams, 1999). The questionnaire is widely used in research on individual differences in identity development and trajectories of identity development of adolescent and adult individuals (e.g., Clancy & Dollinger, 1993; Lewis, 2003; Nelson, Hughes, Handal, Katz, & Searight, 1993). The EOM-EIS consists of 64 items in which half of the items focus on the interpersonal (i.e., friendship, dating, sex roles, and recreation) and the other half cover the ideological (i.e., occupation, politics, religion, and philosophical lifestyle) identity domain. Participants respond to the items on a 6-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly agree) to 6 (strongly disagree). As affiliation motivation centers, above all, around relationships with other persons or groups and seems in substance closely related to interpersonal identity issues, we did not focus on the ideological identity domain in this article. A single identity status or a transition identity status category can be assigned to an individual by applying cut-off points (see Adams, 1999). However, the continuous measures of the EOM-EIS may indicate not only the identity status of a given individual but also ‘‘how much of each status is manifested in a given individual’’ (Schwartz & Dunham, 2000, p. 150). Lewis (2003) argued that it might be useful to use continuous measures of identity status rather than identity status categories because some studies indicate that the four identity statuses do not show a clean factor structure (e.g., Bennion & Adams, 1986). Furthermore, the use of cut-off points seems to be somewhat arbitrary (see Adams, 1999; Jones, Akers, & White, 1994) and entails difficulties in assigning pure identity statuses to individuals (e.g., a high number of individuals in transition categories or in ‘‘low profile moratorium’’). In contrast, continuous measures allow individuals to vary in each of the identity statuses and may help obtain deeper insight into identity development (Lewis, 2003; Waterman, 1993). Schwartz and Dunham (2000) emphasized the methodological advantage of continuous measures because they allowed statistical analyses with greater power. In addition, it is possible to correlate them with other variables from other constructs. Therefore, this study predominantly used continuous measures of ego identity for analyses. 520 Hofer et al. RESULTS The presentation of the results is subdivided into three sections. The first section briefly reviews the quality of both scales and the data obtained from the German student sample. The second section summarizes the general statistics and examines differences related to gender and educational status as well as age-related effects. Additionally, the correlation between the explicit and implicit motives is presented. The final section presents the linear regression analyses used to explore the main issue of this article: the relationship of affiliation motives’ congruence and an individual’s interpersonal ego identity development. Reliability and Normal Distribution of Measurements To render the presentation of the findings more convenient, the interpersonal identity scores were recoded (e.g., 6 to 1, 5 to 2, and so on), that is, the higher the score, the more pronounced a given identity status is. The four interpersonal scales of the EOM-EIS showed satisfying to high internal consistencies (Nunnally, 1978) and were located in the range usually found in other studies with somewhat lower consistency values for moratorium and diffusion scales (e.g., Adams, 1999; Bennion & Adams, 1986). Cronbach’s Alphas were .76 for identity achievement, .63 for identity moratorium, .81 for identity foreclosure, and .64 for identity diffusion, respectively. The affiliation scale of the PRF (.72) also showed a reasonable internal consistency (Kruder-Richardson 20). As expected, internal consistency of thematic apperception measurement was rather low for n Affiliation, showing a value of .34. Even if the validity of projective measurements was repeatedly questioned as a consequence of the low reliability of these measures (e.g., Entwisle, 1972), advocates of thematic apperception measurements, such as Atkinson, Bongort, and Price (1977; Karon, 1981), commented that basic principles of the classical test theory might not be adequate for projective measurements. Furthermore, the Thematic Apperception Test is a good example of a valid test without showing a high internal consistency because a considerable number of studies have confirmed the validity of thematic apperception measures (e.g., McAdams & Vaillant, 1982; see also Meyer et al., 2001). 521 Motive Congruence and Interpersonal Identity Table 1 Descriptive Statistics Based on Raw Data and Correlations of Explicit Affiliation Motivation, Need for Affiliation, and Interpersonal Ego Identity Statuses (N 5177) Measurement 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 n Affiliation PRF Affiliation1 Achievement1 Moratorium Foreclosure1 Diffusion1 1 2 — .08 .09 .16n .01 .01 — .19n .07 .00 .10 3 4 5 — .34nn — .15n .23nn — .28nn .18n .22nn 6 M 7.53 11.92 34.49 22.76 14.33 — 17.40 SD 4.84 2.92 5.90 5.69 5.29 5.22 p o .05. nnp o .01. Note. 1 5 Distributions of raw data deviate from normality. n A screening of the data for normality indicated that most of the obtained variables (see Table 1) were not normally distributed (skewness) and thus would violate assumptions of inferential statistics (Bradley, 1982). Therefore, variables were transformed according to guidelines recommended by Tabachnik and Fidell (1996) considering the extent to which they deviate from normal and the direction of the deviation by the use of square root and log transformation, respectively. Accordingly, square root transformation was applied for n Affiliation (moderate positive skewness) and log transformation for identity foreclosure and identity diffusion (substantial positive skewness), respectively. Negative skewed variables were reflected and then transformed by using the appropriate strategy for positive skewness, that is, square root transformation for identity achievement and log transformation for PRF affiliation.2 2. Since the distribution of n Affiliation contained values of zero, a constant of value 1 was added to each score to avoid taking the square root of zero (see Tabachnick & Fidell, 1996). Reflected negatively skewed variables were reflected again after transformation. The transformation of variables that were not normally distributed did not affect results of analyses. 522 Hofer et al. General Statistics, Mean Differences, and Correlations Between Measurements Table 1 presents descriptive raw data as well as correlations between measurements of interpersonal identity statuses, explicit affiliation motivation, and need for affiliation (N 5 177). Similar to other studies (e.g., Lewis, 2003; see also Adams, 1999), participants attained the highest mean score for identity achievement status versus the other three statuses. Analyses revealed significant negative correlations between interpersonal identity achievement and the remaining three identity statuses; that is, the higher individuals scored for interpersonal identity achievement, the lower levels they reported for moratorium, foreclosure, and diffusion. Moreover, identity moratorium, foreclosure, and diffusion showed significant positive correlations among each other. We also found a significant positive correlation between participants’ strength of explicit affiliation motivation and their level of interpersonal identity achievement and a significant negative correlation between students’ implicit need for affiliation and their level of identity moratorium. As commonly reported in research, no significant correlation between self-attributed affiliation motivation and n Affiliation was found. To examine whether the extent of a given identity status differs between university students and students at secondary schools or between female and male participants, four analyses of variance were computed with the two factors educational status and gender. Additionally, participants’ age was entered as a covariate to control for age-related effects on identity statuses. Analyses revealed neither significant main effects of educational status and gender nor significant effects of the interaction term on the four interpersonal identity statuses. However, the value of three identity statuses was significantly associated with age: identity achievement (F 5 4.28; po.05), identity moratorium (F 5 12.78; po.001), and identity foreclosure (F 5 10.76; po.01). A higher age was significantly correlated with a more pronounced identity achievement status (r 5 .22; po.01) and a less pronounced identity moratorium (r 5 .22; po.01) and identity foreclosure (r 5 .27; po.001), respectively. No age-related effect was found for identity diffusion. We also examined by analysis of variance whether participants’ educational level, gender, and age was linked to the strengths of implicit and explicit affiliation motives. Here, no significant effects were found. Motive Congruence and Interpersonal Identity 523 Interpersonal Ego Identity Status and Motive Congruence We applied hierarchical regression analyses (simultaneous entry method) to examine whether a participant’s interpersonal identity development is significantly associated with congruence of affiliation motives. Selected predictor variables were converted to z-scores. The motive interaction coefficient (product term) was calculated with z-standardized motive indicators (see Friedrich, 1982). A separate analysis was computed for each interpersonal identity status. We entered the remaining three identity statuses into the first block because of significant correlations between identity measurements. Additionally, participants’ age was incorporated to form the set of first order predictors (Block 1) since age was significantly correlated with the value of three interpersonal identity statuses. Next, measurements of affiliation motivation were entered as predictor variables (Block 2). And finally, after controlling for the underlying variables, motive interaction coefficients (higher-order term: explicit affiliation motivation n n Affiliation) were entered into the model (Block 3). In the regression model for interpersonal identity diffusion (F 5 5.19; po.01; R2 5 .11), only two of the first-order predictors were significantly associated with participants’ level of diffusion: the level of identity achievement (b 5 .21; po.01) and the level of identity foreclosure (b 5 .16; po.05) significantly explained variance of identity diffusion. Additional variance was explained neither by single-motive indicators nor by the motive interaction coefficient. Similarly, in the regression model for interpersonal identity moratorium (F 5 9.26; po.001; R2 5 .17), only the level of identity achievement (b 5 .28; po.001) and the level of identity foreclosure (b 5 .16; po.05) showed significant associations with levels of moratorium. Again, no additional variance was explained by single-motive indicators and by the motive interaction coefficient, respectively. In Table 2, the results for interpersonal identity achievement are presented. Considering the first set of predictor variables for interpersonal identity achievement, participants’ age and levels of identity diffusion and moratorium accounted for a significant portion of variance in the regression analysis. That is, a higher age and less pronounced identity diffusion and moratorium were significantly associated with a greater level of identity achievement. Additional variance was explained by motive measurements in Block 2 (R2 change 5 .04; po.05). Whereas a more pronounced self-attributed 524 Hofer et al. Table 2 Interpersonal Identity Achievement: Influence of Age, Remaining Identity Statuses, Motives, and Motive Congruence Outcome: Level of interpersonal identity status Block Predictor Variables Identity status Achievement p o .05. n nn 1 age foreclosure diffusion moratorium 2 age foreclosure diffusion moratorium explicit Affiliation n Affiliation 3 age foreclosure diffusion moratorium explicit Affiliation n Affiliation n Affiliation n explicit Affiliation p o .01. b .16n .07 .20nn .28nnn .21nn .08 .18n .25nn .19nn .06 .23nn .11 .19nn .25nn .20nn .12 .20nn Unadjusted (F-value) R2 .18nnn (9.36) .22nnn (7.99) .25nnn (8.31) p o .001. nnn affiliation motive was significantly associated with a greater level of identity achievement, no significant association between identity achievement and the strength of the implicit affiliation motive was obtained. By including the motive interaction coefficient in Block 3, significantly more variance in the level of identity achievement was explained (R2 change 5 .03; po.01). Significant associations were also found in the regression analysis for interpersonal identity foreclosure (see Table 3). Whereas participants’ age and levels of identity diffusion and moratorium were significantly associated with the extent of identity foreclosure, such that a lower age and higher levels of diffusion and moratorium were 525 Motive Congruence and Interpersonal Identity Table 3 Interpersonal Identity Foreclosure: Influence of Age, Remaining Identity Statuses, Motives, and Motive Congruence Outcome: Level of interpersonal identity status Identity status Block Foreclosure 1 age achievement diffusion moratorium age achievement diffusion moratorium explicit Affiliation n Affiliation age achievement diffusion moratorium explicit Affiliation n Affiliation n Affiliation n explicit Affiliation 2 3 n p o .05. p o .01. nn Predictor Variables b .23nn .07 .16n .17n .25nn .09 .15n .17n .05 .02 .27nn .13 .17n .17n .06 .07 .17n Unadjusted (F-value) R2 .13nnn (6.50) .13nnn (4.40) .16nnn (4.64) p o .001. nnn correlated with a higher level of identity foreclosure, entering explicit and implicit motives in Block 2 did not explain any additional variance. However, the motive interaction term explained additional variance in Block 3 (R2 change 5 .03; po.05).3 Following the procedure suggested by Aiken and West (1991), interpersonal status scores for identity achievement and identity foreclosure were calculated at the mean value and at values one 3. We computed identical regression analyses with measurements of ideological identity statuses as dependent variables. However, none of the motive predictor variables could significantly explain variance in the ideological identity domain. 526 Hofer et al. standard deviation below and above the mean, respectively, for predictor variables in the significant interaction term to clarify the exact nature of the interaction. The relationship of individuals’ level of interpersonal identity achievement and their reported strengths of explicit and implicit motives is presented in Figure 1. Simple slope tests revealed that slopes corresponding to a medium (t 5 2.77; po.01) and to a high implicit affiliation motive (t 5 3.90; po.001), respectively, differed significantly from zero (see Cohen, Cohen, West, & Aiken, 2003; O’Connor, 1998). Individuals characterized by a high implicit affiliation motive showed higher levels of interpersonal identity achievement the more their reported explicit affiliation motivation was aligned to implicit needs. Similarly, participants with a moderate implicit affiliation motive obtained a higher degree of identity achievement the higher they scored on explicit affiliation motivation. In contrast, no differences in identity achievement were found for individuals with a low need for affiliation. 0.6 Interpersonal Identity Achievement 0.4 0.2 1 SD above mean (nAFF) 0 mean (nAFF) 1 SD below mean (nAFF) –0.2 –0.4 –0.6 –1 SD Mean + 1 SD Affiliation (PRF) Figure 1 Level of interpersonal identity achievement and its relationship to the association of explicit and implicit affiliation motivation. 527 Motive Congruence and Interpersonal Identity 0.6 Interpersonal Identity Foreclosure 0.4 0.2 1 SD above mean (nAFF) mean (nAFF) 0 1 SD below mean (nAFF) – 0.2 – 0.4 – 0.6 – 1 SD Mean + 1 SD Affiliation (PRF) Figure 2 Level of interpersonal identity foreclosure and its relationship to the association of explicit and implicit affiliation motivation. Figure 2 illustrates the relationship between explicit and implicit motives and an individual’s level of interpersonal identity foreclosure. Simple slope tests indicated that only the slope associated with a high implicit need for affiliation (t 5 2.24; po.05) differed significantly from zero. Motive-congruent participants with a strong implicit need for affiliation showed a noticeably lower level of interpersonal identity foreclosure than motive-incongruent participants. Even if the slopes for participants, either characterized by a low implicit affiliation motive or a moderate implicit need for affiliation, pointed to expected directions, no significant differences from zero were obtained. Finally, we were interested in whether we could identify similar connections between motive congruence and identity for categorical measures of identity status. According to the scoring rules for pure identity status types proposed by Adams (1999),4 we calculated 4. According to Adams (1999), participants scoring one standard deviation or higher above the mean on a given subscale are categorized for that identity status if all remaining scores fall below their corresponding cut-off points. 528 Hofer et al. cut-off points for our sample to allocate identity statuses to participants. As reported in other studies (e.g., Grotevant & Adams, 1984; Jones et al., 1994), a pure interpersonal identity status could only be assigned to a relatively small percentage of participants (N 5 68; 38.4% of the sample). Twenty-three participants were categorized as identity achievement, 18 as moratorium, 12 as foreclosure, and 15 as diffusion. We calculated correlations between implicit and explicit measurements of affiliation motivation for each of the pure identity statuses. We found that the two measures were uncorrelated among participants assigned to identity diffusion (r 5 .04) and to identity moratorium (r 5 .00), respectively. However, explicit and implicit motives showed a significant negative correlation among identity foreclosures (r 5 .79; po.01) and a significant positive correlation among identity achievers (r 5 .48; po.05). We tested whether correlations significantly differed from one another by employing Fisher r-to-z transformation. Using a one-tailed p-value, we found that the correlation of explicit and implicit motives is significantly smaller among foreclosure participants than among participants characterized by identity achievement (z 5 3.97; po.01), identity moratorium (z 5 2.54; po.01), and identity diffusion (z 5 2.52; po.01), respectively. Furthermore, identity achievers show a marginally significant higher correlation among motive measurements than did students assigned to identity diffusion (z 5 1.32; po.10) and identity moratorium (z 5 1.53; po.10), respectively. A significantly different correlation of explicit and implicit motives was not found between diffusion and moratorium. DISCUSSION Motives and Identity Formation The aim of this study was to examine the relationship between interpersonal identity formation and congruence between implicit and self-attributed affiliation motives. As we were interested in motive congruence and identity formation, which in late adolescence represents a main issue in an individual’s development, we were collecting data from individuals ranging from 17 to 43 years of age. Given that our sample consisted of secondary school students and university students, it was initially tested whether the two subgroups differed Motive Congruence and Interpersonal Identity 529 on measures employed in the study. No significant differences were found, however. Our findings that older participants showed higher levels of identity achievement and lower levels of identity moratorium match with the idea that identity development is typically considered to be a main issue in adolescence (Erikson, 1968) that usually is resolved in the early twenties (for a recent meta-analysis on age and identity statuses, see Meeus, Iedema, Helsen, & Vollebergh, 1999). Consistent with findings reported in research on motivation (e.g., Brunstein et al., 1999; King, 1995), no significant correlations between implicit and explicit affiliation motives were found in the total sample. However, we verified for categorical measures (pure identity statuses) that interpersonal identity achievers showed more congruent affiliation motives than the three remaining identity statuses. Although explicit and implicit affiliation motives did not correlate among individuals characterized by pure identity diffusion and moratorium, the two types of motives were clearly conflictive among identity foreclosures but were reasonably synchronized among identity achievers. This last finding indicates that pure interpersonal identity achievers showed a higher degree of integration in given aspects of personality, namely an alignment of implicit and explicit motives, than participants characterized by identity foreclosure, diffusion, or moratorium. In further regression analyses we showed that the strength of the implicit affiliation motive is not associated with continuous measures of the four interpersonal identity statuses. Similar results were found for self-attributed affiliation motivation and interpersonal identity moratorium, foreclosure, and diffusion. In contrast, self-attributed affiliation motivation was, in general, positively related to an achieved interpersonal identity. This relationship of explicit motivation and identity achievement was qualified by a significant motive interaction coefficient for interpersonal identity achievement. In line with our assumption, participants characterized by a pronounced implicit need for affiliation (medium and high levels of n Affiliation) scored higher on identity achievement when reported self-attributed motives were congruent with their implicit need for affiliation. We also found that motive congruence was associated with lower scores on identity foreclosure for individuals with a high need for affiliation. Regardless of the reported strength of explicit motives, no significant differences in identity achievement were found for individuals with a low implicit need for affiliation. This finding 530 Hofer et al. may indicate that even if explicit affiliation motives were reported in varying degrees, the interpersonal domain may be of minor importance in identity formation when a strong implicit need for affiliation is lacking. The commitment to explicit affiliation motives could be based on an adoption of values and goals of significant persons and/ or groups. Our finding that participants with a low need for affiliation scored slightly higher on interpersonal identity foreclosure the stronger their explicit motives were may point to such a conclusion. In order to maintain connectedness with others, individuals may report pronounced explicit affiliation motives that do not correspond to implicit motive but, instead, are socially valued (see Ryan et al., 1995). Brunstein et al. (1999) assumed that the two types of motives might be aligned in an individual’s development. Thus, we suggest that the search for a sense of sameness and continuity that is necessarily accompanied by an intense examination of divergent life goals, values, or attitudes (Marcia, 1994) provides an opportunity to test explicit motives for congruence with clearly pronounced implicit needs. According to Deci and Ryan (1985; see also Sheldon & Elliot, 1999), the self seeks integration of intrapsychic entities (e.g., needs) and external pushes (e.g., parental norms). As individuals differ in their degree of self-determination, they also differ in their extent of integration and motive congruence (Thrash & Elliot, 2002; see also Higgins, 1987; Langens, 2001). The important role of self-regulatory modes of volition (dispositions of action control) in the alignment of motives was also reported by Brunstein (2001; see also Kuhl, 2001). Consequently, the degree of motive congruence may be regarded as an indication of the action of self-regulatory and integrative processes (Ryan & Deci, 2003; Thrash & Elliot, 2002). In the field of research on identity formation, Adams and Marshall (1996) refer to self-awareness, self-focusing, and self-consciousness due to incongruent thoughts, feelings, or behaviors as primary mechanisms that stimulate transformation in identity. Berzonsky (1989, 1992) showed that individuals categorized as identity achievement (and moratorium) are characterized by an informational and self-exploring style. Such a style embraces an active search for, and use of, self-relevant information as the self searches for acceptable and employable values and goals. However, identity status literature suggests that individuals differ in their awareness of incongruities (Adams & Marshall, 1996). Berzonsky (1992) showed that foreclos- Motive Congruence and Interpersonal Identity 531 ure identity was related to a normative identity style characterized by a concern to conform to expectations of significant others and by a conservation of existing self-constructions that might be at odds with an evaluation of commitments to explicit motives for individual fit (see also Adams, 1999). Hence, individuals are less likely to explore options and are more likely to identify with and imitate others. Self-examination is also considered a precondition for the alignment of implicit and explicit motives (e.g., Schultheiss & Brunstein, 1999, 2002; see also Miron & McClelland, 1979). Thus, introspectiveness and self-regulatory processes may be viewed as an individual’s capacities for developing a personally defined identity that concurs with an alignment of implicit and self-attributed motives. However, our findings indicate that the linkage between self-regulation processes and identity formation is influenced by the given strength of the implicit need for affiliation. Thus, self-regulation as an executive function of the self that filters information, selects a response from numerous options, and is responsible for response enactment (Baumeister & Vohs, 2003) may be of particular relevance when strong implicit needs assign personal importance to a given identity domain. Research provided extensive evidence that self-attributed motives differ in their fit with an individual’s self-concept, ranging from highly valued self-generated goals to purely adopted social norms and obligations (e.g., Deci & Ryan, 1985; Kuhl, 2001). Furthermore, commitment and attainment to motive-congruent goals was associated with enhanced well-being (Brunstein et al., 1999; Hofer & Chasiotis, 2003; Sheldon & Elliot, 1999). Therefore, pursuance of and commitment to need-congruent explicit motives may be related to emotionally rewarding consequences for individuals with a pronounced need for affiliation during identity formation. In contrast, engagement in affiliative concerns of participants with a low need for affiliation might be based on an adoption of values and goals from significant social partners in a given sociocultural setting. Thus, they are less likely to experience enhanced emotional well-being by the commitment to explicit affiliation motives. Additionally, they are less likely to perceive incongruities between the two types of affiliation motives. Hence, a linkage between interpersonal identity achievement and motive congruence may be less likely to be found in participants with a low implicit affiliation motive. A strong explicit affiliation motivation may be associated with emotional distress, however, if it conflicts with the satisfaction of an 532 Hofer et al. individual’s pronounced implicit needs (e.g., need for achievement; Winter, 1996) that may occur in tandem with deficits in the development of a meaningful identity in the ideological domain. According to Isen (2003), positive affect is a source of human strength that fosters flexible cognitive processing that in turn ‘‘enables people to do what needs to be done’’ (p. 180). A linkage between identity formation and psychological well-being was also postulated by Marcia (1989a) in assuming identity achievement to be the healthiest status because it implies an adequate adaptation to the environmental context (see also Meeus et al., 1999). Our findings suggest that this notion may be enhanced by including an adaptation to intrapsychic needs. Whereas we could identify relationships between motive congruence and identity statuses that are characterized by a firm commitment to explicit goals, values, and attitudes, we could not verify any significant association between affiliation motivation and interpersonal identity moratorium and diffusion, respectively, which are lacking a distinct and firm adherence to explicit motives (Marcia, 1994). Neither the strength of the two types of motives nor their degree of alignment seemed to be related to the level of an individual’s identity moratorium and identity diffusion. These results indicate that the four scales of the EOM-EIS, even if correlated with one another, reflect different components of an individual’s identity development. For example, although higher identity achievement scores were associated with lower reported levels of identity moratorium and diffusion, low scores on moratorium and diffusion did not entail commitment to (selfcongruent) explicit motives. Generally, it is assumed that the level of identity moratorium reflects to what extent an individual is actively involved in the search for a coherent, flexible self (see Ryan & Lynch, 2004). Because the moratorium status is characterized by exploration and an information-oriented, reflective cognitive style (Berzonsky, 1992; Marcia, 1980), one could assume that this search might eventually result in a firm commitment to identity-relevant domains accompanied by a congruence of motives. The finding that a higher need for affiliation is associated with lower scores for interpersonal identity moratorium (simple correlation) may indicate that a pronounced implicit need assigns importance to the given identity domain and promotes the resolution of interpersonal identity issues. Motive Congruence and Interpersonal Identity 533 However, no such prediction can be made for identity diffusion status. Whereas Berzonsky, Nurmi, Kinney, and Tammi (1999) stated that identity diffusion individuals display an unwillingness to deal directly with identity issues, Marcia (1989b) postulated a rethinking of the concept of identity diffusion. He argued that the status identity diffusion may better be viewed as a conglomerate of different types of identity diffusion. He identified at least four different types of identity diffusion: disturbed, carefree, culturally adaptive, and developmental diffusion. Our result that participants’ age showed no relationship to the level of identity diffusion may support the idea of different facets of diffusion. Although one could expect age-related effects for developmental diffusion, it is at least questionable whether an age-related decrease should be assumed for the other three types. As modern societies urge individuals to react flexibly to changing trends and to function smoothly in various settings, Waterman (1999) argued, identity diffusion may become the dominant identity status. Thus, an individual’s level of identity diffusion may reflect a varying need to adapt to divergent sociocultural contexts relatively independent of an individual’s implicit motives. Limitations and Future Perspectives The above-mentioned problem related to different types of identity diffusion leads to the limitations of the study. It might be useful to break down identity diffusion in subcategories to examine in-depth its relationship with explicit and implicit motivation. Future studies could also focus on the ideological identity domain, although the link between agency motives (achievement and power) and a combined ideological domain seems to be less straightforward than that between affiliation motivation and interpersonal identity. While our results are based on cross-sectional data, a longitudinal approach would be preferable in order to examine the dynamic nature of self/ identity and developmental pathways of the relationship of identity formation and the alignment of explicit with implicit motives. In this context, the assessment of identity styles (Berzonsky, 1994) and selfregulatory skills that are related to an individual’s capacity to regulate positive and negative affect (Kuhl, 2001) seem to be promising. Generally, consideration of emotions in this type of study seems to be desirable because self-evaluations that tap an individual’s basic concerns doubtlessly are connected with emotions (Kunnen, Bosma, Van 534 Hofer et al. Halen, & Van der Meulen, 2001). A close linkage between affect and cognitive and motivational processes is also emphasized by Isen (2003) and could be a fruitful approach for studies on self-organization. It is assumed that adolescence marks the beginning of a period in ontogenesis that embraces the chance to integrate divergent aspects of the self into a personally defined identity. In this article we presented evidence that motivational processes and cognitive evaluations are intertwined in self-organization. We found evidence that an alignment of affiliation motives, considered to reflect an individual’s self-regulation capacities, is significantly associated with different facets of an individual’s search for congruent and purposeful interpersonal identity. Depending on the strength of the implicit motive, congruence of different aspects of the self, that is, the alignment of explicit and implicit affiliation motives, seems to be linked to a personal sense of a coherent self. However, differences in identity formation provide evidence that individuals differ in their awareness of incongruities between the self as known and the self that could be (Adams & Marshall, 1996). Whereas some individuals actively explore different identity options as a result of distress associated with incongruities, other individuals show less self-awareness and are more likely to imitate others regardless of personal needs. Thus, a further investigation of factors underlying the integration of different aspects of the self is needed. REFERENCES Adams, G. R. (1999). The objective measure of ego identity status: A manual on theory and test construction. Guelph, Ontario: Department of Family Relations and Applied Nutrition, University of Guelph. Adams, G. R., & Marshall, S. K. (1996). A developmental social psychology of identity: Understanding the person-in-context. Journal of Adolescence, 19, 429–442. Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1970). The prediction of behavior from attitudinal and normative variables. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 6, 466–487. Atkinson, J. W., & Litwin, G. H. (1960). Achievement motive and test anxiety conceived as motive to approach success and motive to avoid failure. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 60, 52–63. Atkinson, J. W., Bongort, K., & Price, L. (1977). Explorations using computer simulation to comprehend thematic apperceptive measurement of motivation. Motivation and Emotion, 1, 1–27. Motive Congruence and Interpersonal Identity 535 Baumeister, R. F., & Vohs, K. D. (2003). Self-regulation and the executive function of the self. In M. R. Leary & J. P. Tangney, Handbook of self and identity (pp. 197–217). New York: Guilford Press. 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, 183–198. Berzonsky, M. D. (1989). The self as a theorist: Individual differences in identity formation. International Journal of Construct Psychology, 2, 363–376. Berzonsky, M. D. (1990). Self-construction over the life-span: A process perspective on identity formation. In G. J. Niemeyer & R. A. Niemeyer (Eds.), Advances in personal construct theory (Vol. 1, pp. 155–186). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. Berzonsky, M. D. (1992). Identity style and coping strategies. Journal of Personality, 60, 771–788. Berzonsky, M. D. (1994). Self-identity: The relationship between process and content. Journal of Research in Personality, 28, 453–460. Berzonsky, M. D., Nurmi, J.-E., Kinney, A., & Tammi, K. (1999). Identity processing style and cognitive attributional strategies: Similarities and difference across different contexts. European Journal of Personality, 13, 105–120. Berzonsky, M. D., Rice, K. G., & Niemeyer, G. J. (1990). Identity status and selfconstruct systems: Process x Structure interactions. Journal of Adolescence, 13, 251–263. Biernat, M. (1989). Motives and values to achieve: Different constructs with different effects. Journal of Personality, 57, 69–95. Bradley, J. V. (1982). Distribution-free statistical tests. Englewood Cliffs: PrenticeHall. Brunstein, J. C. (2001). Persönliche Ziele und Handlungs- versus Lageorientierung. Wer bindet sich an realistische und bedürfniskongruente Ziele? (Personal goals and action versus state orientation: Who builds a commitment to realistic and need-congruent goals?). Zeitschrift für Differentielle und Diagnostische Psychologie, 22, 1–12. Brunstein, J. C., Maier, G. W., & Schultheiss, O. C. (1999). Motivation und Persönlichkeit: Von der Analyse von Teilsystemen zur Analyse ihrer Interaktion (Motivation and personality: From the analysis of partial systems to the analysis of their interaction). In M. Jerusalem & R. Pekrun, Emotion, Motivation und Leistung (pp. 147–167). Göttingen: Hogrefe. Brunstein, J. C., Schultheiss, O. C., & Grässmann, R. (1998). Personal goals and emotional well-being: The moderating role of motive dispositions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 494–508. Bucci, W. (1997). Psychoanalysis and cognitive science: A multiple code theory. New York: Guilford Press. Campbell, D. T., & Fiske, D. W. (1959). Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. Psychological Bulletin, 56, 81–105. Cantor, N. (1994). Life task problem solving: Situational affordances and personal needs. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 20, 235–243. 536 Hofer et al. Clancy, S. M., & Dollinger, S. J. (1993). Identity, self, and personality. I. Identity status and the Five-Factor Model of personality. Journal of Research in Adolescence, 3, 227–245. Cohen, J., Cohen, P., West, S. G., & Aiken, L. S. (2003). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Constantinople, A. (1969). An Eriksonian measure of personality development in college students. Developmental Psychology, 1, 357–372. Cramer, P. (2000). Development of identity: Gender makes a difference. Journal of Research in Personality, 34, 42–72. deCharms, R., Morrison, H. W., Reitman, W. R., & McClelland, D. C. (1955). Behavioral correlates of directly and indirectly measured achievement motivation. In D. C. McClelland (Ed.), Studies in motivation (pp. 414–423). New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. New York: Plenum Press. Emmons, R. A. (1997). Motives and life goals. In R. Hogan, J. Johnson, & S. Briggs (Eds.), Handbook of personality psychology (pp. 485–512). San Diego, CA: Academic Press. Emmons, R. A., & Kaiser, H. A. (1996). Goal orientation and emotional wellbeing: Linking goals and affect through the self. In L. L. Martin & A. Tesser (Eds.), Striving and feeling: Interactions among goals, affect, and self-regulation (pp. 79–98). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Entwisle, D. R. (1972). To dispel fantasies about fantasy-based measures of achievement motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 77, 377–391. Erikson, E. H. (1950). Childhood and society. New York: Norton. Erikson, E. H. (1959). Identity and the life cycle: Selected papers by Erik H. Erikson. Psychological Issues, 1, 1–171. Erikson, E. H. (1968). Identity: Youth and crisis. New York: Norton. Friedrich, R. J. (1982). In defense of multiplicative terms in multiple regression equations. American Journal of Political Science, 26, 797–833. Grotevant, H. D., & Adams, G. R. (1984). Development of an objective measure to assess ego identity in adolescence: Validation and replication. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 13, 419–438. Grotevant, H. D., & Cooper, C. (1981). Assessing adolescent identity in the areas of occupation, religion, politics, friendship, dating, and sex roles: Manual for administration and coding of the interview. JSAS Catalog of Selected Documents in Psychology, 11, 52, (Ms. No. 2295). Heyns, R. W., Veroff, J., & Atkinson, J. W. (1958). A scoring manual for the affiliation motive. In J. W. Atkinson (Ed.), Motives in fantasy, action and society (pp. 205–218). Princeton, NJ: Van Nostrand. Higgins, E. T. (1987). Self-discrepancy: A theory relating self and affect. Psychological Review, 94, 319–340. Hofer, J., & Chasiotis, A. (2003). Congruence of life goals and implicit motives as predictors of life satisfaction: Cross-cultural implications of a study of Zambian male adolescents. Motivation and Emotion, 27, 251–272. Motive Congruence and Interpersonal Identity 537 Hofer, J., Chasiotis, A., Kiebling, F., & Busch, H. (in press). Quality of familial relations in childhood and ego identity formation: The moderating influence of dispositions of action control. Identity: An International Journal of Theory and Research. Isen, A. M. (2003). Positive affect as a source of human strength. In L. G. Aspinwall & U. M. Staudinger (Eds.), A psychology of human strengths: Fundamental questions and future directions for a positive psychology (pp. 179–195). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Jackson, D. N. (1984). Manual for the Personality Research Form. Port Huron, MI: Research Psychologists Press. Jones, R. M., Akers, J. F., & White, J. M. (1994). Revised classification criteria for the Extended Objective Measure of Ego Identity Status (EOMEIS). Journal of Adolescence, 17, 533–549. Kapfhammer, H. P. (1995). Psychosoziale Entwicklung im jungen Erwachsenenalter (Psychosocial development in young adulthood) Berlin: Springer. Karon, B. P. (1981). The Thematic Apperception Test (TAT). In A. I. Rabin (Ed.), Assessment with projective techniques: A concise introduction (pp. 85– 120). New York: Springer. King, L. A. (1995). Wishes, motives, goals, and personal memories: Relations of measures on human motivation. Journal of Personality, 63, 985–1007. Kroger, J. (1993). Ego Identity: An overview. In J. Kroger (Ed.), Discussions on ego identity (pp. 1–20). Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Kuhl, J. (2001). Motivation und Persönlichkeit. Interaktionen psychischer Systeme (Motivation and personality. Interactions of psychological systems). Göttingen: Hogrefe. Kuhl, J., & Beckmann, J. (Eds.) (1994). Volition and personality: Action versus state orientation. Seattle: Hogrefe & Huber. Kunnen, E. S., Bosma, H. A., Van Halen, C. P. M., & Van der Meulen, M. (2001). Introduction. In H. A. Bosma & E. S. Kunnen (Eds.), Identity and emotion: Development through self-organization (pp. 1–9). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Langens, T. A. (2001). Predicting behavior change in Indian businessmen from a combination of need for achievement and self-discrepancy. Journal of Research in Personality, 35, 339–352. Lewis, H. L. (2003). Differences in ego identity among college students across age, ethnicity, and gender. Identity: An International Journal of Theory and Research, 3, 159–189. Marcia, J. E. (1966). Development and validation of ego identity status. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 3, 551–558. Marcia, J. E. (1980). Identity in adolescence. In J. Adelson (Ed.), Handbook of adolescent psychology (pp. 159–187). New York: Wiley. Marcia, J. E. (1989a). Identity and intervention. Journal of Adolescence, 12, 215– 223. Marcia, J. E. (1989b). Identity diffusion differentiated. In M. A. Luszcz & T. Nettelbeck (Eds.), Psychological development: Perspectives across the life-span (pp. 289–294). Amsterdam: Elsevier. 538 Hofer et al. Marcia, J. E. (1993a). The relational roots of identity. In J. Kroger (Ed.), Discussions on ego identity (pp. 101–120). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Marcia, J. E. (1993b). The status of the statuses: Research review. In J. E. Marcia, A. S. Waterman, D. R. Matteson, S. L. Archer, & J. L. Orlofsky (Eds.), Ego identity: A handbook for psychosocial research (pp. 22–41). New York: Springer. Marcia, J. E. (1994). The empirical study of ego identity. In H. A. Bosma, T. L. G. Graafsma, H. D. Grotevant, & D. J. De Levita (Eds.), Identity and development: An interdisciplinary approach (pp. 67–79). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Marcia, J. E., & Archer, S. L. (1993). The identity status interview: Late adolescent college form. In J. E. Marcia, A. S. Waterman, D. R. Matteson, S. L. Archer, & J. L. Orlofsky (Eds.), Ego identity: A handbook for psychosocial research (pp. 318–333). New York: Springer. Marcia, J. E., Waterman, A. S., Matteson, D. R., Archer, S. L., & Orlofsky, J. L. (Eds.) (1993). Ego identity: A handbook for psychosocial research. New York: Springer. Markstrom-Adams, C., & Adams, G. R. (1995). Gender, ethnic group, and grade differences in psychosocial functioning during middle adolescence? Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 24, 397–417. Martin, P., & Bateson, P. (1993). Measuring behavior: An introductory guide. New York: Cambridge University Press. Matteson, D. R. (1974). Alienation versus exploration and commitment: Personality and family correlaries of adolescent identity statuses. Report for the Project for Youth Research, Copenhagen Royal Danish School of Educational Studies. McAdams, D. P. (1992). The intimacy motive. In C. P. Smith (Ed.), Motivation and personality: Handbook of thematic content analysis (pp. 224–228). New York: Cambridge University Press. McAdams, D. P., & Vaillant, G.E (1982). Intimacy, motivation and psycho-social adjustment: A longitudinal study. Journal of Personality Assessment, 46, 586– 593. McClelland, D. C. (1980). Motive dispositions: The merits of operant and respondent measures. In L. Wheeler (Ed.), Review of personality and social psychology (Vol. 1, pp. 10–41). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. McClelland, D. C. (1987). Human motivation. New York: Cambridge University Press. McClelland, D. C., Atkinson, J. W., Clark, R. A., & Lowell, E. L. (1953). The achievement motive. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts. McClelland, D. C., Koestner, R., & Weinberger, J. (1989). How do self-attributed and implicit motives differ? Psychological Review, 96, 690–702. McClelland, D. C., & Pilon, D. A. (1983). Sources of adult motives in patterns of parent behavior in early childhood. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44, 564–574. Meeus, W., Iedema, J., Helsen, M., & Vollebergh, W. (1999). Patterns of adolescent development: Review of literature and longitudinal analysis. Developmental Review, 19, 419–461. Motive Congruence and Interpersonal Identity 539 Melgosa, J. (1987). Development and validation of the occupational identity scale. Journal of Adolescence, 10, 385–397. Meyer, J. M., Finn, S. E., Eyde, L. D., Kay, G. G., Moreland, K. L., & Dies, R. R., et al. (2001). Psychological testing and psychological assessment: A review of evidence and issues. American Psychologist, 56, 128–165. Miron, D., & McClelland, D. C. (1979). The impact of achievement motivation training on small business performance. California Management Review, 21, 13–28. Murray, H. A. (1943). Thematic Apperception Test Manual. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Murstein, B. I. (1965). The stimulus. In B. I. Murstein (Ed.), Handbook of projective techniques (pp. 509–546). New York: Basic Books. Nelson, W. L., Hughes, H. M., Handal, P., Katz, B., & Searight, H. R. (1993). The relationship of family structure and family conflict to adjustment in young adult college students. Adolescence, 28, 29–40. Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw-Hill. O’Connor, B. P. (1998). SIMPLE: All-in-one programs for exploring interactions in moderated multiple regression. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 58, 833–837. Orlofsky, J. L. (1977). Identity formation, Achievement, and fear of success in college men and women. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 7, 49–62. Patten, R. L., & White, L. A. (1977). Independent effects of achievement motivation and overt attribution on achievement behavior. Motivation and Emotion, 1, 39–59. Peterson, B. E., & Stewart, A. J. (1993). Generativity and social motives in young adults. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 186–198. Phinney, J. S. (1992). The multigroup ethnic identity measure: A new scale for use with diverse groups. Journal of Adolescent Research, 7, 156–176. Rasmussen, J. (1964). Relationship of ego identity to psychosocial effectiveness. Psychological Reports, 15, 815–825. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2003). On assimilating identities to the self: A selfdetermination theory perspective on internalization and integrity within cultures. In M. R. Leary & J. P. Tangney (Eds.), Handbook of self and identity (pp. 255–273). New York: Guilford Press. Ryan, R. M., Deci, E. L., & Grolnick, W. S. (1995). Autonomy, relatedness, and the self: Their relation to development and psychopathology. In D. Cicchetti & D. J. Cohen (Eds.), Developmental psychopathology: Vol. 1. Theory and methods (pp. 618–655). New York: John Wiley & Sons. Ryan, R. M., & Lynch, F. L. (2004, July). Variability of self-concept across personal relationships: The role of culture, autonomy-support, and authenticity. Paper presented at the Third International Biennial SELF Research Conference: Self-Concept, Motivation, and Identity, Berlin. Schultheiss, O. C. (2001). An information processing account of implicit motive arousal. In M. L. Maehr & P. R. Pintrich (Eds.), Advances in motivation and achievement: Vol. 12. New directions in measures and methods (pp. 1–41). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. 540 Hofer et al. Schultheiss, O. C., & Brunstein, J. C. (1999). Goal imagery: Bridging the gap between implicit motives and explicit goals. Journal of Personality, 67, 1–38. Schultheiss, O. C., & Brunstein, J. C. (2002). Inhibited power motivation and persuasive communication: A lens model analysis. Journal of Personality, 70, 553–582. Schultheiss, O. C., & Brunstein, J. C. (2005). An implicit perspective on competence. In A. J. Elliot & C S. Dweck (Eds.), Handbook of competence and motivation (pp. 31–51). New York: Guilford. Schwartz, S. J. (2001). The evolution of Eriksonian and neo-Eriksonian identity theory and research: A review and integration. Identity: An International Journal of Theory and Research, 1, 7–58. Schwartz, S. J., & Dunham, R. M. (2000). Identity status formulae: Generating continuous measures of the identity status from measures of exploration and commitment. Adolescence, 35, 147–165. Shain, L., & Farber, B. A. (1989). Female identity development and self-reflection in late adolescence. Adolescence, 24, 381–392. Sheldon, K. M., & Elliot, A. J. (1999). Goal striving, need satisfaction, and longitudinal well-being: The self-concordance model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76, 482–497. Smith, C. P., Feld, S. C., & Franz, C. E. (1992). Methodological considerations: Steps in research employing content analysis systems. In C. P. Smith (Ed.), Motivation and personality: Handbook of thematic content analysis (pp. 515– 536). New York: Cambridge University Press. Stumpf, H., Angleitner, A., Wieck, T., Jackson, D. N., & Beloch-Till, H. (1985). Deutsche Personality Research Form (PRF) (German Personality Research Form). Göttingen, Germany: Hogrefe. Tabachnik, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (1996). Using multivariate statistics. New York: Harper Collins. Thrash, T. M., & Elliot, A. J. (2002). Implicit and self-attributed achievement motives: Concordance and predictive validity. Journal of Personality, 70, 729– 755. Waterman, A. S. (1988). Identity status theory and Erikson’s theory: Communalities and differences. Developmental Review, 8, 185–208. Waterman, A. S. (1993). Developmental perspectives on identity formation: From adolescence to adulthood. In J. E. Marcia, A. S. Waterman, D. R. Matteson, S. L. Archer, & J. L. Orlofsky (Eds.), Ego identity: A handbook for psychosocial research (pp. 42–68). New York: Springer. Waterman, A. S. (1999). Identity, the identity statuses, and identity status development: A contemporary statement. Developmental Review, 19, 591–621. Waterman, A. S., & Goldman, J. A. (1976). A longitudinal study of ego identity development at a liberal arts college. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 5, 361– 369. Weinberger, J., & McClelland, D. C. (1990). Cognitive versus traditional motivational models. Irreconcilable or complementary? In E. T. Higgins & R. M. Sorrentino (Eds.), Handbook of motivation and cognition: Vol. 2. Foundations of social behavior (pp. 562–597). New York: Guilford Press. Winter, D. G. (1973). The power motive. New York: Free Press. Motive Congruence and Interpersonal Identity 541 Winter, D. G. (1991a). Manual for scoring motive imagery in running text. University of Michigan. Winter, D. G. (1991b). Measuring personality at a distance: Development of an integrated system for scoring motives in verbal running text. In A. J. Stewart, J. M. Healy Jr., & D. J. Ozer (Eds.), Perspectives in personality: Approaches to understanding lives (pp. 59–89). London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers. Winter, D. G. (1996). Personality: Analysis and interpretation of lives. New York: McGraw-Hill. 542