The function of wisdom dimensions in ego‐identity development among Chinese university students

Abstract

This study investigates the relationship between wisdom and ego-identity among university students in China. Using Marcia's ego-identity statuses and Ardelt's wisdom dimensions as the theoretical and conceptual framework, the study investigates 356 university students in China. After exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses, four factors from wisdom and five factors from ego-identity were retrieved. A structural equation model was then conducted to analyse the relationships. The findings were: (1) among wisdom dimensions, cognitive, and reflective wisdom, especially perspective-taking best predicted achievement, (2) all three dimensions of wisdom predicted moratorium, but reflective wisdom was the most pronounced predictor, (3) all three dimensions of wisdom predicted diffusion, but resentment items from reflective wisdom were the most pronounced predictors, and (4) gender was a significant predictor of ego-identity achievement and diffusion. These findings suggest that efforts to build reflective wisdom might contribute to healthier ego-identity formation.

Development and validation of a brief self-assessed wisdom scale

“…Second, while some studies have attempted to validate the wisdom scales with a CFA, the adopted cut-off criteria were far below the current standards, and the scales also suffer from problems like a lack of internal reliability [2,5,12,21,22]. To solve the above problems, many wisdom scales have been revised, validated and adapted into different languages or developed into shortened versions for ease of use [12,[17][18][19][23][24][25][26]. Yet, there is paucity of study examined the dimensionality and validity of SAWS with the latest psychometric tools which warrant our attention.…”

Thin-Slice Measurement of Wisdom

“… Bang and Zhou (2014) argued that prototypical Chinese wisdom was generally congruent with that in Ardelt’s wisdom model, and conducted a survey among Chinese young adults using Ardelt’s three-dimensional wisdom scale. However, factor analysis failed to identify the three dimensional model proposed by Ardelt, and instead found a 4-dimensional structure involving “non-dualistic thinking,” “perspective-taking,” “non-resentment,” and “empathy.” In fact, our previous survey with 97 Chinese adults (46 males, aged from 18 to 23 years, M = 19.71, SD = 1.19 years) also failed to identify the three dimensional model proposed by Ardelt, the model in the 12-Item Abbreviated Three-Dimensional Wisdom Scale ( Thomas et al, 2015 ), or the four-factor structure proposed by Bang and Zhou (2014) (For the details of our survey, see the Supplementary Tables.).…”

Development and Validation of a Brief Self-Assessed Wisdom Scale

“…Throughout At this point in my life it is easy for me to laugh at my mistakes. 25 Controversial works of art play an important and valuable role in society. 26 I went through many difficult changes throughout life.…”

“…Second, while some studies have attempted to validate the wisdom scales with a CFA, the adopted cut-off criteria were far below the current standards, and the scales also suffer from problems like a lack of internal reliability [2,5,12,21,22]. To solve the above problems, many wisdom scales have been revised, validated and adapted into different languages or developed into shortened versions for ease of use [12,[17][18][19][23][24][25][26]. Yet, there is paucity of study examined the dimensionality and validity of SAWS with the latest psychometric tools which warrant our attention.…”