Cella D F, DeWolfe A S, Fitzgibbon M
Department of Psychology and Social Sciences, Rush-Presbyterian-St. Luke's Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois 60612.
Adolescence. 1987 Winter;22(88):849-61.
Measures of identification with same-sex parent and decision-making style were administered to 30 male and 30 female late adolescents who had been classified by Marcia's (1964) criteria as either identity achieved, foreclosed, moratorium, or diffused. As predicted, male and female foreclosed subjects were more impulsive than were those in the other statuses, and male moratorium subjects were more reflective than others. However, female moratoriums were impulsive, and male and female diffused were reflective, findings which contradict theoretical expectation. Similarly, data on identification were mixed; female achieved subjects scored (as predicted) with higher identification than female moratorium or diffused subjects, while diffused males were highly identified with their fathers. One reason offered for the conflicting results is that identity formation is, as some have suggested, a different process for women than it is for men. Therefore, study of both genders with the same measures and hypotheses is not recommended.
对30名男性和30名女性青少年晚期个体进行了与同性父母的认同度及决策风格的测量。这些青少年根据玛西亚（1964年）的标准被归类为身份达成型、封闭型、延缓型或弥散型。正如所预测的那样，男性和女性封闭型个体比其他状态的个体更冲动，男性延缓型个体比其他个体更具反思性。然而，女性延缓型个体是冲动的，而男性和女性弥散型个体是具反思性的，这些发现与理论预期相矛盾。同样，关于认同的数据也不一致；女性身份达成型个体（如所预测的那样）比女性延缓型或弥散型个体的认同度更高，而弥散型男性与他们的父亲高度认同。对这些相互矛盾的结果给出的一个原因是，正如一些人所建议的，身份形成对女性来说是一个与男性不同的过程。因此，不建议用相同的测量方法和假设对两性进行研究。
