Ego development and individual differences in personality
Abstract
The relation between individual differences in personality and differences in developmental maturity was studied by relating observations of personality by multiple, independent judges to level of ego development. The personality characteristics of longitudinally followed Ss (104 at age 14; 98 at age 23) were evaluated by the California Adult Q-Set (CAQ); ego level was evaluated by the Washington University Sentence Completion Test of Ego Development (SCT). A priori personality dimensions--consisting of CAQ items for which a common developmental pathway was expected--were constructed and related to the SCT: (a) Ego-resiliency and interpersonal integrity were associated with increasing ego development, (b) conformity was associated with the Conformist level and, unexpectedly, to the Conscientious level, (c) need regulation was associated with the Conscientious level, and (d) self-ease and expressiveness-playfulness were not associated with ego level.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Ego-resilience distinguished conformist adolescents from more autonomous peers and identified adults at later identity stages; general intelligence did not account for these effects.
“In particular, adolescents at a conformist stage could be easily discriminated by those at more autonomous stages based on ego-resilience; adults at increasing stages of identity development could also be discerned by greater ego-resilience and none of these effects could be explained by general intelligence (Westenberg & Block, 1993).”
From Psychological flexibility as a fundamental aspect of health (2010) · cites this paper as Westenberg & Block, 1993
At ages 14 and 23, ego-resilience showed a strong link to more advanced identity development.
“For adolescents at age 14 and adults at age 23, ego-resilience was strongly associated with higher stages of identity development.”
From Psychological flexibility as a fundamental aspect of health (2010) · cites this paper as Westenberg & Block, 1993
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Psychological flexibility as a fundamental aspect of health
Kashdan, T. B., & Rottenberg, J. (2010) · Clinical Psychology Review · doi:10.1016/j.cpr.2010.03.001 · Cited by 3,054 · see citing works
“…stage could be easily discriminated by those at more autonomous stages based on ego-resilience; adults at increasing stages of identity development could also be discerned by greater ego-resilience and none of these effects could be explained by general intelligence (Westenberg & Block, 1993).”
Background
- Authors
- Westenburg, P. M., & Block, J.
- Venue
- Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
- Published
- 1993-10
- Volume
- 65
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 792-800
- ISSN
- 0022-3514 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-1315
- OpenAlex
- W2075649306
- Cited by
- 133
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 15 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 6
- FWCI
- 1.01
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institute of Mental Health (MH-16080, R01MH016080)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Ego Development and Educational Practices
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Traits and Psychology
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Psychological Testing and Assessment
- Keywords
- ego development, personality differences, developmental maturation, ego-resilience, conformity, expressiveness, playfulness, conscientiousness
- MeSH terms
- Adolescent, Ego, Female, Humans, Male, Personality Development
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
