Factor analytic structure and stability of the Separation-Individuation Test of Adolescence

Abstract

a trait related to hypnotic susceptibility. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 83, 248-277. Changing attitudes withLevel of identification as a predictor of attitude change. Simula-"identification theory." Simulation and Games, 17, [25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34][35][36][37][38][39][40][41][42][43] 18,[471][472][473][474][475][476][477][478][479][480][481][482][483][484][485][486][487]

Separation-individuation and identity development in at-risk youth

“……”

“……”

Separation-individuation and identity development in at-risk youth

“……”

“……”

The imaginary audience and the personal fable in relation to the separation-individuation process during adolescence

“…The internal consistency of the Greek version of the SITA was satisfactory: Cronbach's alpha = .82 -.71 for engulfment anxiety, .80 for practicingmirroring, .62 for dependency denial, .69 for separation anxiety, .73 for teacher enmeshment, .64 for peer enmeshment, .67 for nurturance seeking, .62 for healthy separation, and .72 for rejection expectancy. (The reliability and validity of the original scale were documented in several studies: Holmbeck & McClanahan, 1994;Kroger & Green, 1994;Levine, 1994;McClanahan & Holmbeck, 1992). The lie subscale did not correlate significantly with any of the SITA subscales (correlations ranged from ±.02 to ±.13).…”

Too close for comfort: Inadequate boundaries with parents and individuation in late adolescent girls.

“…On all scales besides Healthy Separation, higher scores denote problems in separation and individuation. These scales have previously been used in several studies in the United States and Israel and generally have good psychometric properties and construct validity (Kroger & Green, 1994; Levine & Saintonge, 1993).…”

“…In a community sample of adolescents, role reversal, as assessed concurrently, was associated with some positive outcomes, such as higher empathy, and was not associated with adjustment problems at school (Herer & Mayseless, 2000). Finally, retrospective accounts of role reversal proved to be associated with choice of a helping profession, such as social work, and in general with behaving as a caretaker in relationships with adults, although it is not clear whether such outcomes should be considered positive or negative (Lackie, 1983;Sessions, 1987;Valleau, Bergner, & Horton, 1995;Wells, Glickauf-Hughes, & Jones, 1999).…”

Separation-individuation and identity development in at-risk youth

“……”

“……”

The imaginary audience and the personal fable in relation to the separation-individuation process during adolescence

“…The internal consistency of the Greek version of the SITA was satisfactory: Cronbach's alpha = .82 -.71 for engulfment anxiety, .80 for practicingmirroring, .62 for dependency denial, .69 for separation anxiety, .73 for teacher enmeshment, .64 for peer enmeshment, .67 for nurturance seeking, .62 for healthy separation, and .72 for rejection expectancy. (The reliability and validity of the original scale were documented in several studies: Holmbeck & McClanahan, 1994;Kroger & Green, 1994;Levine, 1994;McClanahan & Holmbeck, 1992). The lie subscale did not correlate significantly with any of the SITA subscales (correlations ranged from ±.02 to ±.13).…”

Too close for comfort: Inadequate boundaries with parents and individuation in late adolescent girls.

“…On all scales besides Healthy Separation, higher scores denote problems in separation and individuation. These scales have previously been used in several studies in the United States and Israel and generally have good psychometric properties and construct validity (Kroger & Green, 1994; Levine & Saintonge, 1993).…”

“…In a community sample of adolescents, role reversal, as assessed concurrently, was associated with some positive outcomes, such as higher empathy, and was not associated with adjustment problems at school (Herer & Mayseless, 2000). Finally, retrospective accounts of role reversal proved to be associated with choice of a helping profession, such as social work, and in general with behaving as a caretaker in relationships with adults, although it is not clear whether such outcomes should be considered positive or negative (Lackie, 1983;Sessions, 1987;Valleau, Bergner, & Horton, 1995;Wells, Glickauf-Hughes, & Jones, 1999).…”

Separation-individuation and identity development in at-risk youth

“……”

“……”

The imaginary audience and the personal fable in relation to the separation-individuation process during adolescence

“…The internal consistency of the Greek version of the SITA was satisfactory: Cronbach's alpha = .82 -.71 for engulfment anxiety, .80 for practicingmirroring, .62 for dependency denial, .69 for separation anxiety, .73 for teacher enmeshment, .64 for peer enmeshment, .67 for nurturance seeking, .62 for healthy separation, and .72 for rejection expectancy. (The reliability and validity of the original scale were documented in several studies: Holmbeck & McClanahan, 1994;Kroger & Green, 1994;Levine, 1994;McClanahan & Holmbeck, 1992). The lie subscale did not correlate significantly with any of the SITA subscales (correlations ranged from ±.02 to ±.13).…”

Too close for comfort: Inadequate boundaries with parents and individuation in late adolescent girls.

“…On all scales besides Healthy Separation, higher scores denote problems in separation and individuation. These scales have previously been used in several studies in the United States and Israel and generally have good psychometric properties and construct validity (Kroger & Green, 1994; Levine & Saintonge, 1993).…”

“…In a community sample of adolescents, role reversal, as assessed concurrently, was associated with some positive outcomes, such as higher empathy, and was not associated with adjustment problems at school (Herer & Mayseless, 2000). Finally, retrospective accounts of role reversal proved to be associated with choice of a helping profession, such as social work, and in general with behaving as a caretaker in relationships with adults, although it is not clear whether such outcomes should be considered positive or negative (Lackie, 1983;Sessions, 1987;Valleau, Bergner, & Horton, 1995;Wells, Glickauf-Hughes, & Jones, 1999).…”