Reconstructing Adulthood: Revising the Markers of Adulthood Scale for Increased Ecological Validity

Abstract

Young adults endorse more individualistic and internal adulthood milestones compared to prior generations. Arnett (1994) introduced the Markers of Adulthood (MoA) scale to capture this shift in the transition to adulthood using 38 markers associated with becoming an adult, including marriage, having children, and living independently. These items were based on psychological, anthropological, and sociological determinations concerning adulthood, and were arranged into subscales based on their theoretical association rather than statistical analysis. Since the scale was introduced, researchers have addressed crucial questions about the validity of the MoA scale’s milestones. A recurring theme was identifying items that could be sorted into reliable subscales. We examined a collection of original items and included new ones, such as “have a professional social media account” and “recognize personal capabilities and shortcomings” to configure a revised MoA model. A total of 861 participants in seven national locations responded to a demographic survey, the Inventory of the Dimensions of Emerging Adulthood (IDEA; Reifman, et al., 2007), and a collection of MoA items. We conducted a principal component analysis to identify 22 items and four factors (role transitions, independence, legality markers, and relative maturity) which represented 55% of the total variance in the dataset. All factors except legality markers were identified by prior researchers. While four factors demonstrated the best fit for subscale configurations, the revised MoA was considered most reliable when used in its entirety. Our examination ends with a discussion of future directions for configuring items which may produce reliable subscales.

Conceptions of Adulthood Among Chinese Emerging Adults

“…The revised 43-item MoA was based on the original form proposed by Arnett (2001;. As suggested, the MoA may need novel items according to the local culture (Norman et al, 2021). As a result, several modi cations were made to take the Chinese cultural context into account.…”

Perceptions of Adulthood and Mental Health

“…The SPI score is calculated using the formula [SPI = (Occupation score * 7) + (Education score * 4)], where lower scores indicate a higher social position. According to the scoring range provided by Hollingshead and Redlich [39], the distribution of social positions within the present sample is as follows: upper (< 17) includes 973 participants (54.9%), upper-middle (17)(18)(19)(20)(21)(22)(23)(24)(25)(26)(27)(28)(29)(30)(31) includes 434 participants (24.5%), middle (32)(33)(34)(35)(36)(37)(38)(39)(40)(41)(42)(43)(44)(45)(46)(47) includes 215 participants (12.1%), low-middle (48)(49)(50)(51)(52)(53)(54)(55)(56)(57)(58)(59)(60)(61)(62)…”

“…Two distinct tools were employed to evaluate perceptions of adulthood: the Revised Markers of Adulthood scale [20] and the five-item measure of subjective adult status devised by Wright & Von Stumm [24]. These instruments are key to deciphering the contemporary transition into adulthood and individuals' personal sentiments regarding their status as adults.…”

“…Markers of Adulthood [20]. The original Markers of Adulthood scale (MoA) [19] underwent refinement by Norman and associates [20], providing a more detailed perspective on adulthood.…”

“…Markers of Adulthood [20]. The original Markers of Adulthood scale (MoA) [19] underwent refinement by Norman and associates [20], providing a more detailed perspective on adulthood. This revised scale enables participants to evaluate the significance and their accomplishment of particular markers of adulthood, covering aspects like independence, legal benchmarks, role transitions, and relative maturity.…”