Improving Quantitative Measurement of Identity Exploration and Commitment Processes: Recommendations for Using Existing Measures and Creating New Ones

In this commentary, we evaluate the theoretical and conceptual strengths and weaknesses of two widely used measures of identity exploration and commitment processes and provide recommendations for using them and improving upon them. Building on several other published critiques, our evaluation focuses on four attention points, including 1) Holistic measurement of cognitive, affective, and behavioral aspects of exploration and commitment processes; 2) Inclusion of salient identity domains; 3) Explicit attention to the role of time in identity processes; and 4) Consideration of the larger context in which identity processes take place. For each attention point, we connect the strengths and limitations of the current measures to theoretical perspectives, and then recommend strategies for researchers to decide when they might want to use these measures in their original forms, adapt them, or develop entirely (or substantially) new ones. These considerations include action points for scholars across career stages and roles (e.g. authors, reviewers) and are intended to provide a starting point for improving quantitative identity measurement by bringing it into closer alignment with theory and with best practices in measurement design and evaluation.