This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Berzonsky, M. D. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Identity Development, Control Theory, and Self-Regulation

An Individual Differences Perspective

State University of New York at Cortland

The Kerpelman, Pittman, and La,nke (1997) control model provides an excellent illustration of the potential contribution that research on social-cognitive processes can make to the literature on identity development. Their microprocess analysis offers a novel perspective within which research on identity formation can be conceptualized and conducted. I argue that a credible explanation of the development of autonomous self-regulated behavior needs to consider differences in the process by which identity standards are internalized and evaluated, and individual differences in how those standards are conserved and/or revised. Research on cognitive dissonance, identity style, and self-determined action is used to support this individual differences analysis.

Journal of Adolescent Research, Vol. 12, No. 3, 347-353 (1997)
DOI: 10.1177/0743554897123003


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				J. L. Kerpelman, J. F. Pittman, and L. K. Lamke Revisiting the Identity Control Theory Approach: A Rejoinder Journal of Adolescent Research, July 1, 1997; 12(3): 363 - 371. [Abstract]