Berzonsky correlated identity status scores from the EOM-EIS with the Identity Style Inve ntory scales and found compatibility between the identity status and identity style constructs.
Explained variance obtained using the EOM-EIS was subtracted from that obtained using the EIPQ.
The effectiveness of the formulae was tested by means of comparing (a) the relationship of continuous measures of status on the EIPQ to Identity Style Inventory style measures with (b) the relationship of continuous measures of status on the EOM-EIS with Identity Style Inventory style measures.
Second, the diffusion measure created by the formulae was negatively correlated with the Identity Style Inventory informational style scale to a significantly greater extent than was the EOM-EIS diffusion scale.
An achieved identity status was not yet accomplished by the respondents, as measured by the EOM-EIS.
In contrast, this work utilized the EOM-EIS with longitudinal data.
Eriksonian-based identity development instruments, principally Marcia's (1980) interview format and the EOM-EIS (Grotevant and Adams, 1984), do not examine intimacy or relationship issues during the identity achievement versus diffusion stage.
Validity and reliability of the EOM-EIS for early adolescents.