An abundance of research has been conducted on identityformation during adolescence, however, very little is bwwn about the processes that actually drive identity development. Furthermore, limited attention has been paid to the active influence of relationships with parents and peers on identity. Recentl, control theory has-been recognized as a useful framewor*from which to examine the microprocesses involved in identityformation. The purpose of this article is to describe identity development from this microprocess perspective and to extend the Grotevant model of identity formation processes. When applied to identity, control theory brings attennon to such intrapersonal factors as identity standards and self-perceptions, and such interpersonal factors as reflected appraisals and social behaviors as major contrbutors to the process of identity development. Implicationsfor using identty control theory to elaborate the identity statuses, to understand reciprocal identity influences in interpersonal relationships, and to drive methodologies used to exanune identity processes, are offered.

No abstract

Adolescent-focused marriage education is a relatively uncharted research area. Using a quasi-experimental design, this study examined the effectiveness of an adapted version of the curriculum entitled, Love U2: Increasing Your Relationship Smarts with an economically, geographically, and racially diverse sample of 340 high school students. Findings suggest that participants showed increases in 5 dimensions of their relationship knowledge, including their ability to identify unhealthy relationship patterns. Participants also had more realistic beliefs about relationships/marriages and reported lower levels of verbal aggression use at postprogram compared to controls. Moreover, these findings existed across race, household income, and family structure type, with all participating students benefiting in similar ways. Implications for future programming and research are discussed.

The theories of John Bowlby and Erik Erikson reveal parallels that, together, offer opportunities to examine attachment‐linked working models (secure base representations) as contexts of identity formation. Although the theories are grounded in fundamentally different assumptions, each offers concepts that can enrich the application of the other. One's attachment history serves as a foundation for identity formation. We argue that identity formation is less an individual accomplishment than a co‐construction of an individual with significant others. Hence, attachment histories affect not only one's approach to identity formation but also one's contributions to the identity formation of others. Our review promotes theory building that bridges Bowlby and Erikson and offers new hypotheses.

No abstract