James Marcia developed his theory of identity development by expanding Erikson’s stages of psychosocial development. While Erikson’s theory covered development throughout a lifetime, Marcia’s theory focused mainly on adolescent development. Adolescents in Erikson’s theory go through a phase of identity crisis, but Marcia believes adolescents do not go through a phase of identity resolution nor identity crisis. Instead the two main things that lead to identity development are crisis, which is anything that causes a person to reevaluate their choices and values, and commitment to new values. Marcia theorizes that each crisis leads to new commitments and therefore identity development. His theory was structured into 4 different aspects of identity development. These aspects are not considered stages, such as the stages in Erikson’s theory, because the theory is not sequential. The statuses are:

Identity Diffusion: This is the status where commitment has not been made and no steps have been taken to make a commitment. At this status the adolescent is still does not have the ability to make choices.

Identity Foreclosure: At this status adolescents have committed to some values and maybe even goals for the future, but they have not yet had an identity crisis. Conforming to the values and expectations of others is common and not many things have been explored yet.

Identity Moratorium: At this status adolescents are experiencing a crisis. They are also heavily exploring various aspects of their life and may be ready to make choices of their own but not yet commit to a sense of identity.

Identity Achievement: At this status the adolescent has made a commitment to a sense of identity after going through a crisis.

The main idea of Marcia’s theory is that the choices and experiences an individual has experienced influence their identity.

I believe Marcia’s theory is more accurate than Erikson’s because it is non-sequential and each status does not apply to a certain point in life like Erikson’s stages. While Marcia focused mainly on adolescents, it can be applied later on as well most likely for things such as midlife crises. It may be difficult though to establish which status a person is at and even after achieving an identity another crisis may occur and new commitments may be made. So the main question I am asking is do we ever fully have a sense of our identity?

Out of the four identity statuses, currently I feel like I’m at stage of identity foreclosure. While I have committed to a few values and future goals, they are heavily influenced by what my parents want and to a lesser extent what my peers around me may want. I still have much to explore before I commit to a certain role and adhere to a specific set of values.

James Marcia’s Theory of Identity Development

James Marcia is a Canadian psychologist who focused on adolescent development and devised four statuses regarding an adolescent’s quest for identity. In his theory, he claimed that the adolescent range isn’t “a state of identity resolution or confusion but the extent to which the individual has explored and committed to an identity.” An identity in this case could be something like a religious or political affiliation or a career path. He continued by describing the two parts of an adolescent’s identity: the crisis and the commitment. The crisis is where the adolescent’s values are under speculative examination, and the commitment is when the adolescent makes a decision to end the crisis by choosing a social or personal alignment.

Marcia’s four statuses are Identity Diffusion, Identity Foreclosure, Identity Moratorium, and Identity Achievement. Identity Diffusion is characterized by low commitment-low exploration and is a very basic stage in which there is no sense of having a choice. Identity Foreclosure is similar, denoted by high commitment-low exploration, and usually relies on some form of blind faith in a particular identity. Individuals in this category do not have crises. Identity Moratorium is the opposite, involving a low commitment and a high exploration. This status centers around crises. Individuals are prepared to make a decision, but they may not know which one to make. Lastly, Identity Achievement is when individuals become actualized in their choices, having a high commitment to them as the result of a crises.

Marcia and Me

I think Marcia’s model is pretty accurate simply because it’s relatable. I’ve been through these stages at varying points in my life, and I know several tweens and young teens who’re in the process of discovering their identity. Still, if I had to pitch an argument against the four statuses, it’d be the fact that there’s only four. I find that with some, there should be in-betweens. For example, a gradient between the Identity Moratorium and Identity Achievement statuses would be useful for many older adolescences who are on their way to the later; however, one could counter this by saying that the statuses are not supposed to be read as sequential stages and that individuals can bounce between them.

Personally, I find myself as being between the Identity Moratorium and Identity Achievement statuses. On some issues such as religion and moral values, I’m very much committed, yet on others like politics and my future in terms of academics or careers, I am in the grey. All and all though, I find Marcia’s steps helpful and extremely fascinating since any bit of information I can gather about myself to help me define who I am is of the utmost use.

With all the different ways people were raised, including how, when, and where they were raised, it comes as no surprise that people have many different ways that they choose to raise children. Many people, all around the world, find that however they were raised is the way they currently raise children also. Others thinks that the way they were brought up was completely wrong and go about parenting in a much different way. Psychologist, Diana Baumrind, is well known for her study of parenting and its effects on children. Her studies led her to a conclusion that there are two major important characteristics of parental behavior: how demanding a parent is to the child and how responsive the parent is to the child. Baumrind labeled four different styles according to her findings: authoritative, authorian, permissive, and uninvolved. In the world today, Baumrind’s four styles are found all over the place, in different homes, regions, and countries. Some more common and familiar names that have been given to some parenting styles are tiger moms, jellyfish dads, and helicopter dads. With all the different types around us today, one has to wonder: What is the best way to parent? 

Tiger moms are one of the well known parenting style in the world today, more popular in Asian culture. Tiger moms are described as extremely strict (particularly related to academics), showing tough love, and big on discipline in order to get children to succeed. A very popular stereotype is that Asian moms are mostly all tiger moms due to the very strict traditional Chinese way of raising children. Strict parenting like this has a positive outlook and perspective for the child’s future. Overall, it should help the child to grow into a self-disciplined and tough adult. The problems I see with this technique is that it risks damaging the current and future relationship between the child and the parent. There is a lot of risk for the child to have an unhappy childhood. This style of raising children fits hand in hand with Baumrind’s authorian style description. The authorian style is the high demand, low responsiveness approach to parenting. Baumrind’s study showed that the outcomes associated with this parenting style include low self-esteem, anger and aggression in the child.

 Two other popular types of parenting are jellyfish dads and helicopter parents. First, the jellyfish dad, who is the complete opposite of the tiger mom example. Jellyfish dads are more described as laid back, uncaring, not huge on discipline, and full of fun. These are the “pushover” parents who give children what they want and are there for their kids but don’t make their kids do the things they need to succeed in life such as chores, homework, etc. This parent’s only true advantage is that he has a good, loving relationship with his child. Some of the disadvantages include the possibility of disobedient and irresponsible children being an outcome of this type of parenting. Another effect this could have on the child is the risk of having a hard time doing things on their own in the future. Another closely related style of parenting to the jellyfish dad is the helicopter parent. This parent shares some of the advantage and disadvantages in jellyfish dads but is slightly different. Helicopter parents are defined as overprotective parents who are obsessive and “hover” over their child’s life at all times. These parent are always somewhere in the background watching their children. In contrast to jellyfish dad, these parents are not very highly favored by kids. These parents might know their kids pretty well and be able to keep a pretty tight leash on them, but like the jellyfish dads, they are putting the at risk of struggling out in the real world, on their own in the future. These two types of parenting relate closest to Baumrind’s permissive parent example, especially the helicopter parent. Permissive parents are Baumrind’s label for the low demand, high responsive parents in the world. Even though the most popular definition of a jellyfish dad is described as the permissive example, more lazy and unloving types of this style are more related to Baumrind’s uninvolved category.

 Tiger moms, jellyfish dads and helicopter parents are three popular ways of parenting today. They all show some of the different ways that Baumrind’s study has also showed we choose to raised children. The only style left, and in my opinion, the best way of parenting, is the authoritative style. This is the style that Baumrind defined as the high demand, high responsive approach to parenting. This is a way that, if done correctly, results in the best outcome for the child. Outcomes associated with this parenting style include high self-esteem, social maturity, and self-control. Closely related and more recent studies about parenting have labeled this as the “dolphin parenting” approach, it is often considered to be the combination of the tiger mom and jellyfish dad. In my opinion, this is the best way solely because there aren’t many disadvantages in this style but tons of advantages that lead to high chances of a successful future for the child.

https://www.loveandlogic.com/articles-advice/three-types-of-parents-which-parenting-style-is-yours

http://www.parents.com/parenting/better-parenting/what-is-helicopter-parenting/

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-dolphin-way/201602/dolphin-parenting-cure-tiger-moms-and-jellyfish-dads

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/david-martin/laid-back-parenting-_b_6281822.html

Sometimes You Need A Jellyfish

The Tiger Mom Effect Is Real, Says Large Study

Psychology around Us. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley, 2013. Print.

Tiger Mom:

The term “Tiger Mom” comes from Amy Chua’s memoir, “Battle Hymn of the Tiger Mother”. This type of parenting style originated in Asia, and is predominately practiced in Asia, but is seen across all types of cultures and families. Parents approach their children with extremely high expectations regarding all aspects of life, strict rules, and they constantly push their children to perfection. This approach can be beneficial, as there is research showing high academic performance, exceptional musical abilities, and success in careers later in life as a result of children who have been parented by a “tiger mom”. On the down side, children who have grown up with tiger parents can be depressed, lonely, have low self-esteem and anxiety because their parents tend to not be supportive emotionally. Tiger mom best fits with Baumrind’s “authoritarian” parenting style. Baumrind describes the parent to be cold, rejecting, and critical to the child. The child can become self-conscious and have a low self-esteem.

Jellyfish Dads:

“Jellyfish parents” are permissive parents. They tend to not give their children rules or punishments, allowing them to learn from their own mistakes. They also overindulge their children and can be assumed to be push-overs. The bad-side to this type of parenting is the child can fail to develop respect for authority. They can seem spoiled and demanding. When it is time for them to go on into the work world, they might have difficulty finding a job due to lack of determination and difficulty keeping a job because of authority issues. Contrarily, jellyfish parenting can prevent conflict between the parents and the child. Also, making one’s own mistakes and learning from them can be beneficial. This style most closely relates to Baumrind’s “uninvolved” parenting style. Parents have “little time for child rearing” and are emotionally detached. Kids can have little motivation and be disobedient to authority.

Helicopter Parents:

Helicopter parents are best defined as parents who “hover” their kids and do not want to see them fail. They are extremely involved with their child’s activities, and maybe a little too involved. The parents often try to solve their children’s problems for them and leave them with no room to learn for themselves. This type of style works positively in the fact the child receives positive attention from his/her parents, but negatively in the fact the child does not have room to make decisions and succeed on their own. This style is similar to Baumrind’s “permissive” parenting style. Parents are warm and loving, but overindulgent. Kids can become too dependent on their parents and unaware of how to act on their own.

Good parenting is a cross between all three styles. Parents need to set high standards and goals for their children, but be able to love them and help them when they fail, because they will. Parents need to be involved with their child’s life, but not to the extent the kids are completely dependent on their parents. Rules and boundaries should be set, so they know how to deal with authority. Children often need to make their own mistakes to learn from, but they need parents to aid them through the process.

Sources:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiger_mother

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-dolphin-way/201405/how-the-tigers-dolphins-and-jellyfish-parents-differ

http://www.ourkidsmagazine.com/tigers-and-dolphins-and-helicopters/

There are always new studies and books and tips on the best parenting techniques and how children should be treated at certain periods in their lives. Each child and parent are different and, therefore, various parenting styles arise each with there own unique twist on parenting.

There are tiger parents. This category describes parents who are very strict and have very high expectations for their children. In this relationship, the child may either respond by rebelling or by being very polite and well-behaved. This style can put an immense amount of pressure on the child which is a good lesson for later in life but it can be overwhelming for the child. This style is most similar to Baumrind’s authoritarian model of parenting. The authoritarian model describes a parent who has high demands but low responsiveness to the child (Comer, 81). Braumrind predicts that with this style, the child will typically have low self-esteem, be anxious, unhappy, angry, and aggressive (Comer, 82).

Jellyfish parents are another type that are quite the opposite of tiger parents. Jellyfish parents have few rules and do not have very high expectations for the child. While this may result in a close relationship between the child and parent, it is more of a friendship and therefore a certain level of respect can be lost. The child grows up doing what they like and do not pay for their actions which isn’t very realistic for when they grow up. This style of parenting is most like the permissive model that Braumrind presents where the parents have low demands and high responsiveness (Comer, 81). This may result in a child who is impulsive, disobedient, overly dependent on adults, and have low initiatives.

Helicopter parents are the last type of parents that I will analyze. These are the parents that do not leave their child alone to live their own lives. The child in this relationship can either become a homebody and become overly dependent on their parents because they don’t have to do anything themselves, or the child tries to pull away and rebel so they can live their own life. In this relationship, the parent is usually strict and has high expectations but is also very responsive to their child, therefore, they fall under the authoritative style of parenting presented by Braumrind (Comer, 81). Helicopter parents seem to go beyond the authoritative style of parenting because they bring the high responsiveness to a whole new level, almost to the point that it could potentially backfire on how they raise their children.

There are problems with each of these styles of parenting. The closest version I would say is the “right way” to raise children is the authoritative style where the parent has high expectations and high responsiveness (Comer, 81). Braumrind predicts positive outcomes for children with this model but, with what we’ve analyzed with helicopter parents, there needs to be a balance between the expectations and responsiveness.

There is no “right way” to raise children because no human actions can be fully predicted, however, there are some parenting styles that are more likely to be beneficial to the child so focusing on those would be recommended to any future parents.

Comer, Ronald J., and Elizabeth Gould. “Chapter 3 Human Development.”Psychology around Us. 2nd ed. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley, 2013. 81-82. Print.

Studying how jellyfish dads, tiger moms, and helicopter parents can make the outcome of their child contrast with the outcomes of other parenting styles is very intriguing and interesting to learn and think about.

(Authoritarian)

A tiger mom can be best associated with  the Authoritarian style of parenting. Even though there have been several new different methods of parenting these days, this kind of parenting style is one of the more common ones practiced, his style typically does not lead to this best outcomes in growing adolescents in America,  but in different Asian countries it is usually the more common one practiced. In this style of parenting a stern, strict approach is generally the approach taken. This means that there is a demand to follow the rules of the house or suffer the consequences if those rules are broken. It’s a good way to raise kids if the parents want their kids to be very hard working, obedient, and most of the time responding to what they tell them to do. On the other hand, sometimes a heavy reliance on following the rules are present, which creates low levels of self esteem for the children for always having to rely on rules and waiting for somebody to tell them what to do. This style could also cause children to grow into ‘bullies’ typically somebody who is usually engaging with negative feedback.

(Permissive)

A jellyfish is permissive which means a parent that is very involved in their child’s life attending to their needs and sometimes wants, allowing excessive freedom and behavior. Relating to a child as a friend, versus more of that ‘parenting’ style can have many positive outcomes such as understanding the child to a deeper level. Communication can also be made much easier, being positive about what children are doing and saying can raise levels of self-esteem and give them the knowledge that their parents will accept them and love them whatever they say or do. However,  there are very few rules and consequences typically with jellyfish parents. Some would say that jellyfish parents are called ‘push over’ parents. Children of jellyfish parents tend to lack impulse control. For example, children are allowed to set their own boundaries such as what time they will go to bed, what they eat, and the choice to do their school work or not. As they grow older this type of behavior can result in trouble with the law or drugs, alcohol, or violence because of the enforcement of rules.

(Authoritative)

Lastly, helicopter parents are certainly involved in their child’s lives like a “helicopter” Helicopter parents of younger children and teenagers are likely to know where their kids are at all times, which is an important safety consideration. They are also likely to be very aware of who their child is with and how their child is doing in school.The problems of helicopter parenting are that kids can lack problem solving skills. When parents are there to solve all their kids problems it can cause issues them always relying on the parents. Helicopter parents do so much for their kid that it can make them dependent on them. If a mom or dad is constantly reminding their kid to wake up on time or make it to practice then one day when that superior coaching is gone the kid will not learn how to do things for himself/herself.

I think parenting should be in between jellyfish and tiger moms, so not too many rules and only strictness at critical times, but not too much of being a pushover as well.

http://www.justparents.co.uk/parenting/styles/permissive-parenting.html

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-dolphin-way/201405/how-the-tigers-dolphins-and-jellyfish-parents-differ

http://www.devpsy.org/teaching/parent/baumrind_styles.html

http://discipline.about.com/od/typesofdiscipline/a/Helicopter-Parents-Do-They-Help-Or-Hurt-Kids.htm