Scholarly article on topic '2011Developing Academic Identity Statues Scale (AISS) and Studying its Construct Validity on Iranian Students'

2011Developing Academic Identity Statues Scale (AISS) and Studying its Construct Validity on Iranian Students Academic research paper on "Educational sciences"

Share paper
OECD Field of science
{"Ego Identity" / "Academic Identity" / validity / Reliablity / Students}

Abstract of research paper on Educational sciences, author of scientific article — Abbas Rahiminezhad, Hojjatolah Farahani, Habib Amani, Mohammad Javad Yazdani varzaneh, Parvaneh Haddadi, et al.

Abstract The aim of the present study was to develop a new scale named “Academic Identity Statues Scale”(AISS) for Iranian high school students. Using two criteria including exploration and commitment in the context of school students, 16 items were developed. The 16 items were added to Farsi form of Extended Objective of Measure Ego Identity Statues (EOM-EIS-2). 2202 High school students (mean age=15.75, SD=2.75) were selected randomly from Tehran, Iran. The participants were asked to complete the form. Of the 2022 participants about 50% of students (n=1079) were selected randomly for performing Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) and the remaining (n=1123) were selected for doing Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA). The results of the factor analysis provided an acceptable fit to the model. The indices of fitness on 4 factors showed fitness as X2/df=2.92., GFI=0.97, AGFI=0.96, RMSEA=0.04. For studying convergent and divergent validity, correlations between four academic identity statues and their similar concepts on ideological ego identity status (EOM-EIS-2) were calculated. Also Cronbach's alpha and test-retest coefficients revealed the acceptable reliability of the scale. The results indicated that AISS is a valid and reliable scale for assessing identity status in Iranian high school students.

Academic research paper on topic "2011Developing Academic Identity Statues Scale (AISS) and Studying its Construct Validity on Iranian Students"

Available online at

V ScienceDirect

Procedia Socia^d B ehavioralSciences lfi(2011)'^:38-742


Social and Behavioral Sciences


Develvpisg AcrCemli ICestity 0trtu)8 Sirl) (AISS) bsC Studying 1t8 CvS8tlUit VBaiClty VS IlBSlBS StuCest8

Abb(8 RrhimisezhrCB*, Hvjjrtvlrh FrrrhrsiB, Hrbib Amrsib, MvhrmmrC JrvrC YbzCbsI vrrzrsehb, Prrvrseh HrCCrCi1, SeCighe Zripvui1

aPh.D, in psychology, Psychology Department,University of Tehran, Tehran ,14155-6456, Iran.IR of M.A Students in Educational psychology,University of Tehran, Tehran ,14155-6456, Iran.IR of cM.A in General psychology, University of Tehran, Tehran ,14155-6456, Iran.IR of


The rim vf the pi)8)st 8tuCy wr8 tv Cevelvp r sew 8irl) srmeC "Academic ICestity Strtu)8 Sirl) "(AISS) fvi Iirsirs high 8ihvvl 8tuCest8. U8isg twv criteria isiluCisg explvrrtivs rsC cvmmitmest is the cvstext vf 8ihvvl 8tuCest8, 16 item8 were CevelvpeC. The 16 item8 were rCCeC tv Fri8i fvim vf ExtesCeC Objective vf M)B8ui) Egv ICestity Strtue8 (EOM-EIS-2). 2272 High 8ihvvl 8tuCest8 (mers rge=15.75, SD=2.75) were 8)l)it)C irsCvmly frvm Tehrrs, Iirs. The prrtitiprst8 were B8keC tv cvmplete the fvim. Of the 2722 prrtitiprst8 rbvut 57% vf 8tuCest8 (s=1779) were 8)l)lt)C rrsCvmly fvr perfvrmisg Explvrrtvry Frctvr Asrly8i8 (EFA) rsC the remrisisg (s=1123) were 8)l)it)C fvr Cvisg CvsfirmBtvry Fвltvr Asrly8i8 (CFA). The re8ult8 vf the fвltvr rsrly8i8 prvviCeC rs вll)ptвbl) fit tv the mvCel. The isCil)8 vf fitse88 vs 4 fBctvr8 8hvweC fitse88 B8 X2/Cf=2.92. , GFI=7.97, AGFI=7.96, RMSEA=7.74. Fvr 8tuCyisg cvsvergest rsC Civergest vrliCity, lvrr)lвtivs8 betwees fvur acrCem^ iCestity 8trtue8 rsC their 8imilrr lvsl)pt8 vs iCevlvgicrl egv iCestity 8trtu8 (EOM-EIS-2) were calculated Al8v CrvsbBch'8 rlphr rsC te8t-rete8t lv)ffili)st8 reverleC the вll)ptвbl) reliability vf the 8cb1). The re8ult8 isCicrteC that AISS i8 r vrliC rsC reliable 8cb1) fvr B88e88isg iCestity 8trtu8 is Irrsirs high 8chvvl 8tuCest8.

© 2711 Publi8heC by E18)v1)i LtC.

KeywvrC8: Egv ICestity; AlвCemil ICestity; vrliCity; Relirblity; StuCest8


The mris Cevelvpmestrl t(8k vf вCvle8lesle i8 e8trbli8hisg r cvherest 8es8e vf egv iCestity (Erik8vs, 1968). Is exprsCisg the thevry vf iCestity Cevelvpmest, Mania (1966) u8eC twv criteria iscluCisg explvrrtivs ( pre8esce vr вb8esle) rsC cvmmitmest B8 well B8 b cvmbise vf the8e twv lr1ter1в tv istrvCuce fvur iCestity 8trtu8 iscluCisg iCestity rchievemest, mvrrtvrium, fvrellv8ure rsC Ciffu8ivs. The vperrtivsrl Cefisitivs vf egv iCestity vf Mrrdr (1966) i8 well rccepteC by mrsy re8eвrlher8 is the fielC vf iCestity Cevelvpmest (SchwBrt8, 2771).The seeC fvr vbjective B88e88mest vf egv iCestity 8trtu8 cru8eC tv Cevelvp 8vme 8lвle8 fvr B88e88isg the ivs8truit. Fvr example, ACrm8 rsC Sher (1979) CevelvpeC r paper rsC pescil que8tivssrire crlleC Objective Mer8ure vf Egv ICestity Strtu8 (OM-EIS). Al8v r que8tivssrire crlleC EOM-EIS-2 wr8 CevelvpeC by ACrme8, Besivs rsC Hug (1987).Thi8 8lвle cvs8i8teC vf 1Cevlvg1lвl iCestity (iscluCe pvlitic8, purpv8e vf life rsC religivu8 i88ue8) rsC isterper8vsrl iCestity

* Cvrre8pvsCisg ruthvr. Tel.: ++98-21-61117497; frx: ++98-21-88281515. E-mail address: вrвhimi@ut.в

1877-0428 © 2011 Published by Elsevier Ltd. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.03.175

(include recreation, friends, sex roles as spouse and dating). In place of dating, Rahiminezhad (2006) has used a different analogy with respect to opposite sex pertaining to the Islamic culture of Iranian students.

Usually academic achievement can influence positively the future direction of life for students. The role of high school as contextual variable on identity formation has been considered by Lannegrand-Willems and Bosma (2006). There is a necessity to develop the ego identity to specific realm as academic identity. For example, recently Roeser and Lau (2002) mentioned that academic identity refers to academic behaviors, competency and self-efficacy. Was and Isakson (2008) proposed four academic identity status compatible with Marcia's categorization of ego identity. Considering the important role of investigation on academic identity in high school students, developing a scale for measurement of academic issues in framework of ego identity is our concern.

In this study, on the basis of Marcia's paradigm of ego identity status, a short scale (16 items) of academic identity is developed and is carried out on Iranian high school students. The main goals of this study include:

1- How many factors the academic identity status entails?

2- To what extent, our scale has similar factors to that of Marcia?

3- Do the academic identity statuses have enough evidence for convergent and divergent validity?

4- Does the new scale have an acceptable reliability?


1.2. Participants

In this study 2202 high school students were selected randomly from different districts of Tehran, the capital of Iran (mean age =15.75 & SD=2.75 years old).

2.2. Instruments

1.2.2. Farsi form of EOM-EIS-2: This tool has 64 items and was translated to Farsi by Rahiminezhad (2000) and carried out on college students, the validity and reliability of this scale were acceptable. In present study, the reliability of subscales is shown in table 4.

2.2.2. Academic Identity Status Scale: This instrument includes 16 items and is developed in this study. It include four academic identity status (i.e., achieved, moratorium, foreclosure and diffused in the content of academic issues).

3. Finding

1.3. Exploratory factor analysis: For finding the number of factors of AISS, exploratory factor analysis with principle component analysis was done. Using the criteria of eigenvalue more than one, and factor loading more than 0.40 yielded 4 factors. As shown in table 1 item 3 and item has cross load on two factors and item 6 did not meet the factor loading criteria. For the purpose of studying the amount of variance explained in this analysis, after omitting items 3 and 6 the EFA reanalyzed. .The table 2 shows important finding of this analysis. The total variance explained in the second factor analysis increase 5 %.

Table 1: Rotated factor matrix for all 16 items (n=1079)

Item number

16 12 10 2 6 14

Eigen value Variance explained

Moratorium 0.73 0.70 0.69 0.45

2.26 %14.18


0.43 0.68 0.68 0.64 0.55


2.04 %12.76

0.77 0.77 0.75

2.03 %12.69


0.70 0.69 0.64 0.48 1.87 %11.73

Total variance explained %14.18 %26.94 %39.63 %51.37

Note: factor loadings below 0.40 are omitted. KM0=0.80, Determinant=0.05, Bartlett test=2997.75, df=120, Sig=0.000

Table 2: Rotated factor matrix for 14 remaining items (n= 1079)

1 2 3 4

Item number Moratorium Achievement Foreclosure Diffusion

7 0.56

11 0.74

15 0.74

4 0.71

16 0.67

8 0.65

12 0.62

2 0.78

10 0.77

6 0.76

5 0.70

9 0.68

1 0.65

13 0.49

Eigen value 2.10 1.97 1.90 1.84

Variance explained %15.06 %14.07 %13.61 %13.16

Total variance explained %15.06 %29.13 %42.74 %55.91

Note: factor loadings below 0.40 are omitted. KMO=0.79, Determinant=0.07, Bartlett test=2729.91, df=91, Sig=0.000

2.3. Confirmatory factor analysis: confirmatory factor analysis on the remained half of the sample was don< Amos 18 Arbuckle(2009).As the indices of fitness is shown in the table 3, the 4 factor model(14 items) is well to the sample data.

Table3: Model fit indices for remaining half of sample:_


2.92 0.95 0.97 0.96 0.04

Note: (n=112~

3.3 Convergent and divergent validity: In order to determine the convergent and divergent validity of the AI the zero order correlations between the academic identity statuses and their similar identity statues (EOM-EIS-were calculated (Ozcinar, 2006; Ozdamli, 2009). The result is presented in table 4. The amount of correlations four academic identity statuses with their compatible concepts in ego identity statues is from 0.40 to 0.54 for ideological and from 0.26 to 0.56 for interpersonal identity status that are acceptable. Low correlation of non-compatible variables in two sets of identity tools show divergent validity of AISS.

Table 4: Descriptive statistics and correlations of ideological and inter-individual statuses to academic statuses

Academic statuses

Foreclosure Diffusion Moratorium Achievement

ID and IN statuses M SD a

ID Foreclosure 33.08 7.02 0.73 0.54** 0.31** 0.24** -0.01ns

ID Diffusion 30.78 5.96 0.53 0.06** 0.43** 0.22** -0.14**

ID Moratorium 21.75 5.57 0.53 0.11** 0.26** 0.40** -0.08**

ID Achievement 21.89 5.77 0.61 0.05* -0.18** -0.22** 0.54**

IN Foreclosure 33.23 7.31 0.76 0.56** 0.12** 0.14** 0.05*

IN Diffusion 28.44 5.54 0.49 0.14** 0.35** 0.19** -0.10**

IN Moratorium 24.83 6.24 0.60 0.15** 0.19** 0.26** 0.13**

IN Achievement 20.5 5.74 0.63 0.01ns -0.2ns -0.09** 0.41**

**: P<0.001, **:P<0.05, ns:P>0.05. ID: Ideological status. IN: inter-individual status

4.3. Reliability-Fox determining reliability, Cronbach's alpha and test-retest in a four weeks interval were used. Table 4 demonstrates these coefficients. These coefficients represent high reliability of the scale.

Table4: Descriptive statistics and reliability coefficients for academic statuses

Academic status N of items Min-Max M SD a Test-retest Foreclosure_3_3-18_12.59 3.60 0.70_0.59**




17.87 4.32 0.60 11.19 4.05 0.72 10.04 3.96 0.65

Note: **:P<0.01, N for descriptive statistics and Cronbach's alpha was 2202 and for test-retest sample was 222


In this study a new instrument in the field of ego identity is developed. Paralleled with the concepts of four ego identity status in Marcia's (1966) paradigm, we introduce four academic identity status on Iranian students population. The results of both EFA and CFA revealed suitable construct validity of the AISS. Convergent and divergent validity of the new scale were also satisfied. As the evidences of psychometrics indices of AISS in this research demonstrated, we conclude that AISS structure is compatible with Marcia's structure of ego identity status. The amount of reliability coefficients of our scale was high and suitable. These results indicate that AISS scale has acceptable validity and reliability in Iranian students and could be use in educational and investigational applications. This new scale is needed more research for predicting academic performance. For future research, studying correlation of AISS and other similar tools like Was'es and Isakson's (2008) academic identity instrument is recommended.

ACrm8, G. R., Bennivn, L.,&Huh, K. (1987). Objective Measure of Ego Identity Status: a Reference manual. Unpubli8heC mrm^cript, Utah Stat Univer8ity, Lvgrn

ACrm8, G. R., Sher, J. A. & Fitch, S. A. (1979). TvwrrC the Cevelvpment vf rn vbjective B88e88ment vf egv iCentity Strtu8. Journal of Youth am Adolescents, 8, 223-237.

Arbuckle, J.L. 2779.Amv8 18. CrrwfvrCville, FL: Amv8 Develvpment Cvipvrвtivn.

Erik8vn, E. H. (1968). Identity: Youth and crisis. New Yvrk: Nvrtvn.

LrnsegrBnC-Willem8, L. & Bv8mr, H. A.(2776). ICentity Develvpment in Cvntext: The Schvvl B8 rn Impvrtrnt Cvntext fvr ICentit Develvpment. ICentity, Journal of Theory and Research, 6(1), 85-113.

Mania, J. E. (1966). Develvpment rnC VrliCrtivn vf Egv-ICentity Strtu8. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 3, 551-558.

Ozcinrr, Z. (2776). Develvping r Scale vn the I^tmctivnal Cvmmuniiвtive Quвlifliвtivn vf Prrent8 With Teachere. Cypriot Journal t Educational Sciences, 1(1), 21-29.

OzCrmli, F. (2779). A cultural rCrptrtivn 8tuCy vf multimeCir cvur8e mrterirl8 forum tv Turki8h. World Journal on Educational Technology 1(1),37-45.

RrhiminezhrC, A (2777). The Develvpmental StuCy vf ICentity rnC it'8 Relrtivn8hip with Self-e8teem rnC State Anxiety rmvn StuCent8,UnpublishedDissertation, Tarbiat MvCan^ Univer8ity.

RrhiminezhrC, A(2776). The Factorial Structure of Ego Identity in Iranian High School Students. Paper pre8enteC in 26th Intemativnal Cvngres vf ApplieC P8ychvlvgy, Athen8, Greece.

Rve8er, R. W., & Lau, S. (2772). On AcrCem^ ICentity Fvrmativn in MiCCle Schwl Setting8 During Early ACvle8ienie. In T. M. Brinthaupt & R. P. Lipka (EC8.), Understanding Early Adolescent Self and Identity: Applications and Interventions (pp. 91-131). Albany: State Univer8it vf New Yvrk Pre88.

alhwвrt8, S.J. (2771). The Evvlutivn vf Erik8vnian anC Nev-El1k8vniвn ICentity Thevry anC Re8earch: a review anC Integrativn. Journal o Theory and Research, 1 (1), 7-58. 8tatu8. Jvurnal vf ACvle8ienie, 8, 223-237.

Wa8, C.A & I8aac8vn, R.M. (2778). The Develvpment vf a Mea8ure vf AlвCemil ICentity Statu8. Journal of Research in Education, 18, 94-175.



English translation of AISS ( Items) :

1-I Cvs't ksvw hvw 8tuCyisg impad;8 vs 8elulisg my future.

2-My parest8 ksvw be8t vs what fielC I 8hvulC 8tuCy asC I alksvwleCge their juCgmest.

3-I vftes try tv usCel8tasC hvw 8tuCyisg at 8lhvvl wvulC weight vs my future vnupativs

4-I know best what to study and I have determined this for myself after much examination.

5-I do not know and do not care why I should study.

6-If I take the [university] general entrance examination; I will choose my field in accordance with my parents' wishes.

7-I very much like to learn what field of study is the best fitted to my aptitude but it is still unclear for me.

8-I spent a lot of time concerning what field of study I should carry on, and I have finally come to a decision.

9-I have no interest in studying.

10-In selecting my high school major I always act in accordance to my parents' wishes

11-I often think about the field I should study but I'm still undecided.

12-Following my investigation and talking it over with various people, my study goal for future has become clear.

13-I have no other plans for my life just now. So I would go to school for the time being.

14-I will continue in a field of study identified by the school counsellor or my favourite teachers.

15-I believe all fields of studies can be interesting but I have not chosen my favourite field of study yet.

16-I spent much effort to identify my scholastic aptitude and now I know what field I should choose for my studies.

Farsi form of AISS (original form):

■ ^jl^ IjlAjl J^j iyfi j <<rlS' (_gl4^j 4^- J^ iyfi JJil^^i ^¡^S' jA jl jl^J^J^Jlj .2

■ ^jl^ (_£j^jIJ 4^- ^jjs aJJjl (J-*^1 '_J^ ^^ .3

■ ^la^T ^y&^L* jj ^IjJ ^[A^jjj jl lj ^j^jfi J J^^? Xlj ^Jb jA jl jlfr .4

■ ^JlJj 4^ (V^ J f^J^i J^ ^J^ .5

'_^IjuJIJ J&j Jjs oi*OJJ^ js .6

■ aJ^j ij-^jj ji JJ^1 J ' ^l^*^! ^l^-* t^^ .7

■ lj ^J>- aj ¡yA:> (_£l4^>j 4^ ^la^¡¿f JJ^ .8

■ ^jl^j 4j .9

■ jJlj J&j 4j jl ^^-J '_jI^SJI .10

■ j^A ^Jj J' (_£l4^>j 4^ 4^ i^ipl .11

4_t ^J^ iS^ji Jl^ J^ jJ^ .13

■ jj^1^!J^ijl^j^ [J jjl^-P 4^ J'^^* iya ■ 14

■ ^la^J^JV_JI^IJI J .^^V 4^1^I ^jjfi jj^A ^jfi 1^1 i_JW- JJ^I^J ^jf ^jfi j&j 4j .15

pJ^ ^l^lj! J ■ 4^>bl ^I^J lj ^I^^^J ¡¿f d^ljl J ^^»ll^j lj ^iJ^I^il IJ ^la^^^ ^^Ijj ¿f* .16