# Searching for Autonomy before the Transition to Higher Education: How do Identity and Self-Determined Academic Motivation Co-Evolve?

Cécile Kindelberger, Claire Safont-Mottay, Lyda Lannegrand-Willems, Jean-Michel Galharret

<figure><img src="image_1.png" /></figure>

## To cite this version:

Cécile Kindelberger, Claire Safont-Mottay, Lyda Lannegrand-Willems, Jean-Michel Galharret. Search-
ing for Autonomy before the Transition to Higher Education: How do Identity and Self-Determined
Academic Motivation Co-Evolve?. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 2020, 49 (4), pp.881-894.
10.1007/s10964-019-01137-5 . hal-02890118

HAL Id: hal-02890118

https://nantes-universite.hal.science/hal-02890118v1

Submitted on 11 Feb 2025

HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access
archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci-
entific research documents, whether they are pub-
lished or not. The documents may come from
teaching and research institutions in France or
abroad, or from public or private research centers.

L'archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est
destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents
scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non,
émanant des établissements d'enseignement et de
recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires
publics ou privés.

<figure><img src="image_2.png" /></figure>

Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
# Searching for Autonomy before the Transition to Higher Education: How do Identity and Self-Determined Academic Motivation Co-evolve?

Cécile Kindelberger

BePsyLab, University of Nantes, France

Claire Safont-Mottay

Laboratory of Psychology of Socialization, Development and Work, University of Toulouse, France

Lyda Lannegrand-Willems

Laboratory of Psychology, University of Bordeaux

Jean-Michel Galharret

CNRS, Laboratoire de Mathématiques Jean Leray (LMJL-UMR 6629), Nantes, France

This is the pre-print of the published article:

Kindelberger, C., Safont-Mottay, C., Galharret, J-M., & Lannegrand-Willems, L. (2020). Searching for Autonomy before the Transition to Higher Education: How do Identity and Self-Determined Academic Motivation Co-evolve? *Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 49*(4), 881-894. DOI: 10.1007/s10964-019-01137-5

Thus, it may not exactly replicate the final version published in the journal The final authenticated version is available online at: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-019-01137-5

## Abstract

Identity and academic motivation are particularly at stake before the major transition to higher education. However, few studies have explored their changes and their longitudinal bidirectional links. To fill this gap, we conducted a three-wave study from the end of the 11th grade to the end of the 12th grade to explore changes in identity processes and academic motivation and to investigate how they might be interconnected over time. 599 adolescents (mean age 17.4; 59% girls) filled out questionnaires containing measures about identity processes and three types of academic motivation: autonomous, controlled, and impersonal. Throughout the study span of one year, four identity processes increased: commitment making, identification with commitment, exploration in breadth and exploration in depth, while the process of ruminative exploration decreased. Simultaneously, late adolescents encountered an increase in impersonal motivation, more salient for boys. The cross-lagged model revealed unidirectional links from motivation to identity processes, with no gender or age moderator effects: exploration in breadth and exploration in depth were positively predicted by autonomous motivation, ruminative exploration was positively predicted by autonomous, controlled, and impersonal motivation. In addition, impersonal motivation negatively predicted commitment
making. On the other hand, identification with commitment positively predicted autonomous motivation. Practical implications are discussed.

*Keywords:* Identity processes, Self-determined motivation, High school, Late adolescence, Longitudinal study
The need for autonomy expands drastically during late adolescence and is expressed at a general level in personal identity formation and at a more specific level in academic motivation. On the one hand, personal identity develops through the exploration of future alternatives (exploration process) and decisions about which alternative best fits with the inner self (commitment process). This process is particularly solicited toward the end of senior high school, because of the major challenge of preparing oneself for the transition to higher education, in which new mature roles are required (Lannegrand-Willems, 2008). On the other hand, academic autonomous motivation, and related self-determined behaviors, lead to academic success and contribute to the development of autonomy (Gillet, Vallerand, & Lafrenière, 2012; Mih & Mih, 2013).

The relationships between academic motivation and identity formation have recently been highlighted (Cannard, Lannegrand-Willems, Safont-Mottay, & Zimmermann, 2016) but without exploring either the directionality of the links or the changes in each construct. To go further, the present study aimed to examine the development of personal identity and academic motivation, and their interrelation during the specific period of pre-transition to higher education, using a longitudinal design.

## Identity during Adolescence

Identity formation constitutes a major developmental task in adolescence (Erikson, 1968). Based on Erikson's theory, Marcia specified two processes of personal identity formation (Marcia, 1966): exploration, which refers to the consideration of diverse potential identity alternatives, and commitment, which refers to the adoption of firm convictions or choices. Recently, the processes involved in the construction of identity have been further deepened in contemporary models such as the dual-cycle model of identity (Luyckx, Goossens, & Soenens, 2006a; Luyckx, Goossens, Soenens, & Beyers, 2006b). The first cycle of this model, the “commitment-formation cycle”, refers to the formation of stable commitments (i.e., commitment making) following the exploration of various options in important life domains (i.e., exploration in breadth). The second one, the “commitment-evaluation cycle”, refers to actively thinking about current commitments (i.e., exploration in depth) and to embracing commitments if they fulfill one’s internal standards (i.e.,
identification with commitment). Later, Luyckx et al. (2008) extended this model by introducing an additional type of exploration, namely ruminative exploration, to capture the maladaptive side of the identity formation process. Ruminative exploration characterizes individuals stranded in the process of exploration, continuing to think constantly about the various possibilities without being able to identify specific choices. Their hesitation and indecision jeopardize identity achievement (Luyckx, Klimstra, Duriez, Van Petegem, & Beyers, 2013).

During adolescence, important mean-level changes occur in identity processes, indicative of identity reorganization (Meeus, 2011; Topolewska-Siedzik, & Cieciuch, 2018). Specifically, an increase in exploration in breadth and in depth was recurrently observed (Luyckx et al., 2006a, 2006b, 2008) supporting the assumption that adolescence is a period of role experimentations and identity reevaluations (Erikson, 1968). For commitment making and identification with commitment, the findings were more mixed. Some studies revealed an increase in commitment making (Luyckx et al. 2008) or a decrease (Pop, Negru-Subtirica, Crocetti, Opre, & Meeus, 2016), and a linear or quadratic increase in identification with commitment during the middle to late teens (Luyckx et al. 2008, 2013). These fluctuations could be seen as resulting from the dual-cycle with temporary reevaluations of commitments that could weaken them. Moreover, these trends are experienced earlier by girls than boys, in accordance with their precocious physical and cognitive maturational processes (Meeus, van de Schoot, Keijsers, Schwartz, & Branje, 2010).

Beyond the maturational process that could account for identity development, the social environment, such as educational settings, could promote identity processes (Lannegrand-Willems & Bosma, 2006). In fact, during senior high school, adolescents are tuned into many questionings about their future, and especially their future in higher education. Institutional demands to explore and to choose prospective pathways could activate both processes of exploration and commitment, requiring adolescents to express an autonomous functioning.

## Self-determined Academic Motivation

Late adolescence is not only a period of identity changes. Other intra-individual changes co-occur, such as in academic motivation, which could also result from educational settings. Moreover, they could take place concurrently because of the human tendency to develop self-endorsed and integrated
behaviors that fit one's own values and standards, as it suggested by the self-determination theory (SDT, Ryan & Deci, 2000).

To understand behaviors, SDT highlights the importance of considering their causality orientation, which designates the origin of behavior as inner-driven, outer-driven or “not-driven”. This distinction leads to identifying three major types of academic motivation: autonomous, controlled, and impersonal. They concatenate the more specific dimensions placed along the classic continuum of auto-determination proposed by Ryan and Deci (2000; Kyndt et al., 2015). First, autonomous motivation is regulated by one's own values and interests: it includes the classic intrinsic motivation (going to school for the excitement, enjoyment, and interest that are inherent in learning) and the identified regulation, which is the higher form of internalization (going to school to achieve a desired job). Both types of regulation provide self-determined feelings and similar positive outcomes such as school well-being and perceived ability (Walls & Little, 2005). Second, controlled motivation is regulated by perceived or introjected social pressures: it encompasses the classic external regulation (going to school with an external goal that could be attained differently, such as reaching a social status) and the introjected one (going to school to avoid the shame of not having a school education). As the engagement in the activity depends on external imperatives, controlled motivation has more detrimental effects (Mouratidis & Michou, 2011).

Lastly, underscoring the causality orientation of behavior leads to giving the classic amotivation the new label of impersonal motivation. This label expresses the lack of a sense of mastery, as it is generally associated with feelings of incompetence and close to a learned helplessness state (Soenens, Berzonsky, Vansteenkiste, Beyers, & Goossens, 2005). Thus, impersonal motivation represents the most problematic form of non-self-determined motivation for students, putting them at risk of poor educational adjustment and school drop-out (Alivernini & Lucidi, 2011).

To summarize, autonomous motivation defines a self-determined regulation of academic behaviors; controlled motivation defines a hetero-determined one; and impersonal motivation a total lack of regulation, as behaviors are carried out without associated meanings. Each type of motivation could be experienced by an adolescent at the same time, but their levels are assumed to depend on the fulfillment of the three human basic psychological needs: relatedness, competence and autonomy
(Vansteenkiste & Ryan, 2013). Social environment plays a crucial role in their fulfillment: significant others exhibit intrinsically motivated behavior and offer support, fulfilling the need for relatedness; the person feels capable of performing the activity adequately, fulfilling the need for competence, and there is no undue external coercion to engage in the activity, fulfilling the need for autonomy.

These needs increase drastically during adolescence, although high school settings can be detrimental to their fulfillment. Western high schools are characterized by frequent evaluations leading to more achievement pressure, less supportive teaching, fewer cognitive stimulating experiences, and lower levels of clarity of presentation and classroom management (Wiegfield et al., 2015). These educational settings could explain the decrease in autonomous motivation throughout high school (Martinek, Hofmann, & Kipman, 2016). However, this decrease appears to slow down, or even reverse during the last part of high school in different countries, when adolescents are allowed to select courses to prepare for their future orientation in higher education, thus fulfilling their need for autonomy (Gillet et al., 2012; Kyndt et al., 2015).

Simultaneously, controlled motivation lessens throughout high school, although its level remains higher than that of autonomous motivation (Gillet et al., 2012). Once again, social environment seems to play a role in the explanation of this trend: parents and teachers often emphasize that academic behaviors are important for adolescents' future, underscoring the usefulness of schooling rather than its potential pleasure.

Finally, impersonal motivation, the most problematic one, has been shown to remain low throughout elementary and junior high school, and to increase slightly during the first year of senior high school (Gillet et al., 2012). Then, impersonal motivation is known to slow down after the transition to higher education (Kyndt et al., 2015), but less is known about its changes throughout senior high school (Martinek et al., 2016). It probably continues to rise slightly, because of the motivational exhaustion linked to the length of schooling. Moreover, impersonal motivation, like autonomous and controlled motivation, could challenge the concurrent development of identity.

## Identity Processes and Academic Motivation

Identity processes and academic motivation evolve significantly during the last year of senior high school, under the influence of intra-individual factors (cognitive and maturational factors) and social
environment (family and school settings). They could also be longitudinally interrelated. Their links have their source in Erikson's identity framework and SDT, both of which emphasize the need for autonomy and its development, as a key concept. The satisfaction of this need is recognized as sustaining autonomous motivation and identity achievement (Gillet et al., 2012; Luyckx, Vansteenkiste, Goossens, & Duriez, 2009).

Rooted in Erikson's theoretical framework, Waterman's writings (2004) called for the integration of autonomous motivation as the third dimension of identity formation. For Waterman, intrinsic motivation might promote identity development because people with high autonomous motivation would be more agentic: they would be more prone to identify the reasons for their actions and feel free to engage in them, therefore they would be more at ease with committing to goals, values, and beliefs. This would shape a more mature identity, prone to fitting with developmental changes and numerous situational demands.

With SDT backgrounds, Flum and Kaplan (2012) argued that educational settings would impact on autonomous motivation via their contribution to identity formation. Throughout their school years, children encounter a variety of school experiences, in which they build their identity by discovering their favorite domains, those in which they feel competent, and how these domains are valued by important others such as parents or teachers (La Guardia, 2009). This learning about themselves (interests, competences, and relatedness) is the underpinning of autonomous motivation. In sum, all these authors underline the links between identity and motivation, even though they put the emphasis on one side or the other.

Empirically, the association between academic motivation and identity processes has already been supported. Using a cross-sectional design, Cannard et al. (2016) demonstrated that adolescents with a combined profile of autonomous and controlled motivation scored higher on commitment and adaptive exploration processes (exploration in breadth and in depth) while those with an impersonal motivation profile exhibited a very low level of commitment processes and a high level of ruminative exploration. To go beyond the typological approach, which intertwines the different types of motivation, Luyckx, Duriez, Green and Negru-Subtirica (2017) explored the unique contribution of motivational orientation toward autonomous and controlled goals to identity processes. They
demonstrated that extrinsic motivational orientation did not account for any identity processes while intrinsic motivational orientation enhanced identification with commitment and exploration in depth, and lessened ruminative exploration, which is indicative of identity stagnation. However, this study did not include impersonal orientation, which has been shown to be the best predictor of this state (Soenens et al., 2005).

Overall, the few previous studies were designed with samples of college students, during an academic period in which some choices and educational futures had already been refined and some important identity reorganizations had occurred. In order to increase knowledge about the developmental stage of academic motivation and identity processes in a stressful period of necessary choices for the future, the longitudinal links between these two constructs were investigated with a sample of 16-year-old adolescents attending the last part of senior high school, before the transition to higher education.

## Current Study

The present study had two main goals: the first was to examine in detail the changes in the five identity processes (commitment making, identification with commitment, exploration in breadth, exploration in depth, and ruminative exploration) and in the three forms of academic motivation (autonomous, controlled, and impersonal) during the last part of senior high school. The second was to analyze the bidirectional longitudinal links between both constructs. Thus, a three-wave longitudinal study was conducted from the end of the 11th to the end of the 12th grade.

## Context of the Study

In France, social demands to explore professional outcomes begin early, with a compulsory work experience at the end of junior high school. However, concerns about the future are particularly active at the end of senior high school, when adolescents prepare for the transition to higher education. This is why the 12th grade was considered particularly interesting to study identity and motivational development. During this last year of high school, French students start to prepare actively by making higher education choices. During autumn, they find out about the complex range of courses available (in France, the same curriculum can be pursued in universities, private institutes or “Grandes Écoles”) and submit their choices to the teaching staff who give advice in return. In spring, students have to
express their ordered choices for higher education on a national website, which assigns them according to the number of places. French students receive the responses at the end of the 12th grade, just before taking the baccalaureate (i.e., High School Diploma). They must confirm their choices rapidly to ensure their assignment and cannot change their mind afterwards. Compared to other countries, such as the United States, this process of making educational choices seems premature (Arnett, 2007). Moreover, these educational choices intervene after the end of compulsory schooling (until 16 years old in France) but in a context of encouragement to continue into higher education, promoted by parents and teachers. Although this period appears particularly interesting, few studies have been conducted to explore changes in identity and motivation during the 12th grade.

## Developmental Changes in Identity and Motivational Processes

Taken together, previous statements, combined with the theoretical backgrounds and aforementioned studies, invite to suggest considering the significant changes in identity processes and academic motivations.

Concerning the identity processes, changes in commitment and exploration in a positive way were expected because of social and institutional urges to make some higher education choices. Thus, commitment making, identification with commitment, exploration in breadth and exploration in depth would increase, while ruminative exploration would lessen.

Concerning the three types of motivation, the fact that French adolescents have chosen some of their courses to prepare their future plans for senior high school would lead them to experience a slight increase in autonomous motivation (Gillet et al., 2012). At the same time, social and institutional demands to make choices for higher education are accompanied by achievement pressure, competition and the usefulness of graduation. Thus, controlled motivation would also rise. Finally, the length of previous schooling associated with social pressures to engage in higher education, could exhaust adolescents, leading to an increase in impersonal motivation.

Moreover, concomitant gender differences were explored to investigate a potential moderator effect. Regarding mean levels, few gender differences have been found in identity processes (Luyckx et al., 2013, 2017), but concerning motivations, girls are known to exhibit higher autonomous motivation and less impersonal motivation than boys (Ratelle, Guay, Vallerand, Larose, & Senécal,
2007). To date, there is no information regarding gender differences in developmental changes of identity processes and academic motivations. This study aimed to fill this gap.

## Cross-lagged Associations between Identity and Motivational Processes

Beyond developmental changes in identity and academic motivation processes, some bidirectional effects between them were expected, indicative of a cascade model on the pathway to autonomy development. Gender was also considered as a possible moderator. Based on Luyckx et al.'s results (2017) identifying unidirectional links from motivational orientation to identity processes, the three forms of motivation would be more likely to predict the identity processes than the reverse.

For the commitment processes, autonomous motivation could predict later commitment and identification with commitment because adolescents with a high level of autonomous motivation toward academic learning could be more able to identify the intrinsic values of activities for them, leading to accept them further as commitment (Waterman, 2004). In contrast, impersonal motivation would predict negatively later commitment and identification with commitment, because of the lack of competence and relatedness with the learning context associated with this motivation (Soenens et al., 2005).

For the exploration processes, both autonomous and controlled motivation would positively predict exploration in depth and in breadth. Adolescents with a high level of autonomous motivation would use positive exploration to verify the fit of their actual choices with their inner identity. In comparison, adolescents with a high level of controlled motivation would do so to reply to social imperatives coming from school settings. Because of the distinct locus of causality, when exploring unique longitudinal associations, stronger paths from autonomous motivation to exploration in depth and from controlled motivation to exploration in breadth were expected.

Finally, ruminative exploration would also be positively predicted by impersonal motivation. Considering the social urge to explore future plans, adolescents with a high impersonal motivation could attempt to explore but they would simultaneously avoid negative statements about themselves (strong feelings of incompetence), leading to ruminative questioning without actively searching for a reply.

## Method
Below are the reports about how sample size was determined, which measures were used in the study and how missing data were managed.

## Participants

The present study is part of a broader one, which aimed to examine several aspects of adolescent development such as motivation in different domains, the quality of relationships, romantic experiences and identity formation. The data came from the last three waves, in which identity measures were collected. Participants filled out questionnaires at the end of the 11th grade in May (T1), at the beginning of the 12th grade in October (T2) and at the end of the 12th grade in May (T3).

The study took place in a high school, located in the urban area of Nantes in France. This high school provides general and technological teaching to prepare for both higher education and vocational training. It is also a boarding school, which enables some rural adolescents to take the courses provided (about 10% of the pupils were boarders). These characteristics ensured a diverse sample of adolescents in terms of socio-cultural backgrounds, even though the sample was school-based.

The sample was quite different at each wave for several reasons (school retention, temporary absence or school change, which meant that some adolescents joined the study at T2 or T3). Of the 572 pupils with informed consent at T1, 523 took part in the study. At T2, 535 adolescents took part in the study and 32 were absent. At T3, 462 adolescents took part in the study. Thus, 388 adolescents were present at each wave (74.2% of the initial sample), 144 were present at two waves and 67 were present at only one wave (which could be T1, T2 or T3). Multivariate analyses of variance (MANOVA), comparing the students who dropped out at the beginning of the 12th grade or who were retained in the 11th grade to those who did not, revealed that they differed in their level of motivations at T1, Wilks's $\lambda = .99, F(3, 515) = 2.64, p = .05$. Follow-up univariate analyses showed that they scored lower on controlled motivation, $M = 3.39, SD = .98$ and $M = 3.67, SD = .76; F(1,517) = 6.74; p = .01$. They did not differ in identity processes, Wilks's $\lambda = .99, F(5, 510) = 1,81, p = .48$.

Given the large proportion of missing data caused by the variability in the sample composition (about 26% of adolescents missed at least one wave), only the adolescents with complete data were included in the present sample. 388 adolescents (242 girls and 138 boys, 63% girls) took part in the data collection. They were aged between 16 and 21 years at T1 ($M = 17.29, SD = 0.67$). As suggested
by the wide age range, 15 adolescents were outliers in the age distribution. However, multivariate
analyses of variance (MANOVA) with all study variables at T1 revealed that they did not differ in
identity processes, Wilks' λ = .98, F(5,374) = 1.06, p= .39, nor in motivation, Wilks's λ = .99,
F(3,376) = 0,34, p = .79. They were thus kept for the subsequent analyses.

Procedure

An informational letter describing the purpose and the procedure of the research (duration and nature
of the tasks) and a parental consent for minor adolescents were sent to the family. All adolescents in
11th grade were eligible to take part in the study (N = 575, 19 classes). Two families refused the
participation of their children, and one adult pupil decided not to participate. The study design was
approved by the educational institution, which chose the best schedule for the administration of the
questionnaire. Before completing the questionnaires, students were reminded of the purpose and the
procedure of the research and ethical information about the rights of participants was displayed. Thus,
informed consents were collected from the adolescents and then each one received a questionnaire,
containing several scales, which were counterbalanced to avoid order effects (four forms of the
questionnaire randomly distributed). The adolescents filled out the questionnaire during regular class
hours in a group setting and received private oral assistance on request. The duration of the assessment
was about 30 minutes. They received no monetary compensation for their participation.

Measures

Identity Processes

Identity processes were assessed using the Dimensions of Identity Development Scale (DIDS), first developed by Luyckx et al. (2008) and validated in French by Zimmermann, Lannegrand-Willems, Safont-Mottay, & Cannard (2015). This tool assesses five dimensions: commitment making (CM; e.g., “A clear view of my future”), identification with commitment (IC; e.g., “Future plans give me self-confidence”), exploration in breadth (EB; e.g., “Think a lot about how I see my future”), exploration in depth (ED; e.g., “Think a lot about the future plans I strive for”), and ruminative exploration (RE; e.g., “Worry about what I want to do with my future”). Adolescents filled out the DIDS using a five-point scale (1: strongly disagree; 5: strongly agree). Across the waves, Cronbach’s alphas ranged from .87 to .91 for CM, from .84 to .86 for IC, from .78 to .79 for EB, from
.53 to .57 for ED, and from .81 to .83 for RE. They were satisfactory, except for exploration in depth, which was below the reference cutoff of .70. Even so, this dimension was kept because of its theoretical significance. Moreover, its inter-item correlation, which is also indicative of item homogeneity and is not influenced by the length of the scale, was within the acceptable range of .20 and .50, varying from .22 to .25 between T1 and T3 (Briggs & Cheek, 1986).

## Motivations

Autonomous, controlled and impersonal motivation was assessed with the French version of the motivation in education scale (Blanchard, Vrignaud, Lallemand, Dosnon, & Wach, 1997, adapted from Ryan, Connell, & Deci, 1985). For this measure, pupils are asked why they attend high school and 28 items are proposed with a response format from 1 (completely untrue) to 5 (completely true). This scale was built to provide seven sub-scale scores, which were concatenated to provide three scores, as explained below. Thus, confirmatory factor analyses were performed to check whether the three-factor solution fitted the data adequately at each measurement time. Standard model fit indices were used to estimate the models: the chi-square index should be as small as possible, the RMSEA value should be below .06 with its 90% confidence interval having a lower value not worse than .05 and an upper value less than .08, the CFI should exceed .90 and the SRMR value should be below .08 (Kline, 2015). The three-factor solution fitted the data adequately at Time 1 ($\chi^2 = 521.6, df = 244, RMSEA = .048$ [.043, .054]; CFI = .961; SRMR = .068], at Time 2 ($\chi^2 = 527, df = 244, RMSEA = .049$ [.043, .054]; CFI = .962; SRMR = .068) and at Time 3 ($\chi^2 = 527.5, df = 244, RMSEA = .052$ [.046, .058]; CFI = .965; SRMR = .07).

**Autonomous motivation.** Autonomous motivation encompasses intrinsic motivation for knowledge (e.g., “Because I experience pleasure and satisfaction while learning new things”), achievement (e.g., “For the high feeling I experience while surpassing myself in my studies”) and experience (e.g., “For the pleasure that I experience while reading about various interesting subjects”) with identified regulation (e.g., “Because I think that a high school education will help me better prepare for the career I have chosen”). These four sub-dimensions shared strong correlations (from .36 to .56, *p* = .0001) and Cronbach’s alphas between the 16 items were satisfactory: .91 at each wave.

**Controlled motivation.** Controlled motivation encompasses extrinsic regulation (e.g.,
"Because I need at least a high school degree in order to find a high-paying job later on") and introjected regulation (e.g., "To prove to myself that I am an intelligent person"). These two sub-dimensions shared strong correlations (from .34 to .46, *p* = .0001) and Cronbach's alphas between the 8 items were satisfactory: .82 at T1 and T2, and .84 at T3.

**Impersonal motivation.** Impersonal motivation matches amotivation (e.g., "I can't see why I go to high school and frankly I couldn't care less"). Cronbach's alphas between the 4 items were satisfactory: .90 at each wave.

## Results

### Preliminary Analyses

The measurement model including both scales was quite complex: It included eight dimensions, some of which were built with many items (e.g., 16 items for autonomous motivation) while others used far fewer items (e.g., 4 items for impersonal motivation). This would have led to estimating a measurement model with 120 parameters before performing the cross-lagged model analysis. In addition, the dimension of exploration in depth had a quite low internal consistency, despite its theoretical utility. For these reasons, subsequent analyses were run with manifest variables, as done in previous studies with similar data characteristics (e.g., Luyckx et al., 2017). Moreover, results have been shown to be fairly similar when modeling linear relationships with manifest models are compared to structural equation modeling with latent variables (Hayes, 2013).

As a preliminary step to the construction of the manifest variables, the measurement model as strictly invariant over time was tested for the identity and motivation scales (i.e., same loadings, intercepts, and residual errors over time). Standard model fit indices were used to estimate the models: the chi-square index should be as small as possible, the RMSEA value should be below .06 with its 90% confidence interval having a lower value not worse than .05 and an upper value less than .08, the CFI should exceed .90 and the SRMR value should be below .08 (Kline, 2015). Given the above arguments, to avoid convergence problem, we conducted independent confirmatory analysis for the two measurement scales. For the identity scale, the strict invariant over time measurement model fitted the data adequately: χ² = 2522.1, df = 1428, RMSEA = .048 [.045, .051]; CFI = .971; SRMR = .080. For the motivation scale, the model also fitted the data adequately: χ² = 2932.8, df = 1539, RMSEA =
.052 [.049, .055]; CFI = .958; SRMR = .077.

Descriptive statistics and bivariate correlations, displayed in Table 1, were performed with JASP 0.9.1.

Insert Table 1 about here

## Developmental Changes in Identity Processes and in Academic Motivations

Growth curve modeling on each variable (identity processes and motivations) was conducted, using the package *lavaan* in R (R Core Team, 2016; Rosseel, 2012). These analyses provide mean levels (intercepts) and mean change rates (slopes), with variances for both indicators that indicate inter-individual differences in initial mean levels and rates of change when significant<fnref n="1" />.

The results, displayed in Table 2, showed that all identity processes depended on time. The levels of commitment making, identification with commitment, exploration in breadth and exploration in depth rose significantly, while the level of ruminative exploration lessened. As shown in Table 2, the slope variances of the three exploration processes were not significant, indicating that the adolescents' trajectories in exploration were summed up adequately by these slopes. In contrast, the slope variances of commitment making and identification with commitment were significant, suggesting inter-individual differences in the levels of changes. Moderation analyses showed that changes in identity processes did not vary with gender.

Insert Table 2 about here

The same analyses were conducted for academic motivation. Overall, the results presented in Table 2 pointed out that motivation was characterized by a high initial level of controlled motivation, moderately high initial level of autonomous motivation and a quite low initial level of impersonal motivation. Only impersonal motivation significantly increased over time, with significant slope variance, suggesting inter-individual variation in change. Gender was a significant moderator of this developmental pattern, with girls showing a stronger increase in impersonal motivation than boys ($\beta$ = -.10, *p* = .03).

## Longitudinal Links between Academic Motivation and Identity Processes

<footnote n="1">¹ Since the present data included only three waves, only linear changes could be reasonably estimated. Since no comparison of models were run, the presentation of goodness of fit indices was superfluous.</footnote>
Before investigating reciprocal relationships between academic motivation and identity processes over time with autoregressive cross-lagged models, we first explored their within-time correlations. As shown in Table 1, correlations between identity processes and motivations were weak to moderate, even null concerning the relationship between ruminative exploration and autonomous motivation. Commitment making and identification with commitment were positively correlated with autonomous and controlled motivation and negatively with impersonal motivation. Exploration in breadth and exploration in depth were also positively related to autonomous and controlled motivation and negatively associated with impersonal motivation, specifically at T3. Ruminative exploration was positively associated with controlled motivation at T1 and T2 and negatively with impersonal motivation in all waves.

Then, cross-lagged analyses were performed in *R* (R Core Team, 2016), using the package *lavaan* (Rosseel, 2012). Because skewness was detected in the distributions of some variables (controlled and impersonal motivation, commitment making and identification with commitment) high kurtosis in impersonal motivation, and low kurtosis in commitment making and ruminative exploration, the Maximum Likelihood Robust Estimator (MLR) with Huber-White robust standard errors was used (Alisson, 2003; Huber, 1967). As the models were nested, they were compared with the likelihood-ratio test (known as the difference chi-square test), using a scaling correction factor to set conditions of non-normality (Satorra & Bentler, 2001). Δ CFI < .01, the most common criterion to compare increasingly constrained models, was used to estimate if the models could be considered identical or not (Chen, 2007; Cheung & Rensvold, 2002).

Insert Table 3 about here

The model built was a first-order autoregressive cross-lagged model, taking into account the stability of identity processes and motivation over time (autoregressive paths between adjacent time points for all variables between T1 and T2, and T2 and T3), within-wave correlations between these variables at T1, T2 and T3, and the adjacent cross-lagged paths for all variables (between T1 and T2, and T2 and T3).

Different increasingly constrained models were tested, allowing or not some coefficients to be
dependent on time and to vary across gender. The estimation of the baseline model (M0) allowed all the paths (stability, cross-lagged, and covariances) to vary between variables without time constraints. The results, shown in Table 3, provided an acceptable fit to the data, except for the RMSEA. As the intervals between the measurement times were short, the paths between T1 and T2 and between T2 and T3 could present the same pattern of effects. Thus, a second model (M1) was built, in which stability paths were constrained across time. Fixing these paths had no practical effects on the RMSEA, nor on the CFI (Δ CFI = -.001). In the third model (M2), constraints to be time-invariant were added to the cross-lagged paths. Fixing these coefficients had no practical effect on the CFI (Δ CFI = -.003) but improved the RMSEA and its 90% CI, which were closer to the expected value (Kline, 2015). The total time-invariant model (M2) was retained as the final one, since it was more parsimonious and fitted the data better than the previous models<fnref n="2" />.

Finally, a multiple-group analysis for gender (M2p) was run to test whether this variable would moderate the time-invariant cross-lagged paths between motivation and identity processes. Allowing cross-lagged paths to vary across gender worsened the RMSEA and CFI fit indices. This suggested that it was reasonable to consider that all stability and cross-lagged paths between motivation and identity processes over the three periods were the same for boys and girls.

Insert Figure 1 about here

Figure 1 displays all the significant standardized stability and cross-lagged paths from identity processes to autonomous, controlled and impersonal motivation, and vice versa. Since the assumption of time-invariance had been confirmed, we reported paths only once. Six paths from academic motivation to identity processes were significant: autonomous motivation positively predicted exploration in breadth, exploration in depth and ruminative exploration. Controlled motivation positively predicted ruminative exploration. Impersonal motivation positively predicted ruminative exploration and negatively predicted commitment making. In contrast, only one path from identity processes to academic motivation was significant: identification with commitment positively predicted

<footnote n="2">² Time constraints on variances and covariances were also tested. Fixing these estimations to be equal across time damaged the model fit, compared to M2 ($\chi^2(154) = 532.1, p < .0001$, CFI = .922, RMSEA = .08 [07-.09], SRMR = .05, $\Delta \chi^2(26) = 224.6, p<.0001$, $\Delta$ CFI = -.041). This result suggested that correlated relative change and disturbances variance were not stable across waves.</footnote>
autonomous motivation.

Some cross-lagged paths within academic motivation and within identity processes, not shown in Figure 1, were also significant (Table 4 with all estimates and their standard error is provided as supplementary file in appendix). Regarding identity processes, commitment making and identification with commitment positively predicted each other (.18 and .15, respectively). Ruminative exploration positively predicted exploration in breadth (.09) and in depth (.15) and was negatively predicted by commitment making (-.23) and by identification with commitment (-.10). Regarding academic motivation, autonomous motivation and impersonal motivation negatively predicted each other (-.13 and -.08, respectively).

## Discussion

Autonomy is particularly at stake during the last year of senior high school because of the preparation for the challenge of higher education (Lannegrand-Willems, 2008). Adolescents have to make future educational choices as well as preparing themselves for a new teaching format (more personal work, less controlled academic activities). This general process entails personal identity and self-determined motivation, which thus could be interrelated over time. The present study highlighted some significant changes in identity processes and in motivation toward more autonomy. Cross-lagged analyses also revealed that each type of motivation predicted at least one identity process while only identification with commitment predicted autonomous motivation. This pattern applied equally to boys and girls. This result extends our knowledge about identity development, showing that motivation contributes to shaping identity processes among other variables such as school experiences (Lannegrand-Willems & Bosma, 2006). Below, changes in identity and motivation are first discussed, followed by their longitudinal associations.

## Identity Changes and Longitudinal Paths within Identity Processes

The expected significant identity changes for each process and interrelations throughout the last year of high school were observed. Commitment processes strongly heightened with time, reinforcing each other over time. Concurrently, exploration in breadth and in depth increased while ruminative exploration – the dark side of identity exploration – strongly decreased, which was predicted by the prior level of commitment making, as suggested by the cross-lagged path. Overall, these results
underline a general process of identity clarification (Meeus et al., 2010) and are in line with previous studies carried out in different countries (Luyckx et al., 2013).

Our results also revealed that ruminative exploration predicted an increase in exploration in breadth and in depth. This result highlights that ruminative exploration is not only “dark”, at least during late adolescence. Temporarily, rumination could be a normative process, as a precursor of later adaptive exploration. This is in line with previous results showing that ruminative exploration predicts the search for life meaning (Negru-Subtirica, Pop, Luyckx, Dezutter, & Steger, 2016). It is probable that current institutional demands and education aids to make higher educational choices promote exploration, which could be temporarily ruminative.

## Motivational Changes and Longitudinal Paths within Motivation

This study adds to the exploration of motivational changes during senior high school, and is one of the first to exhibit gender differences in the trend. As expected, impersonal motivation increased throughout the last part of senior high school, but no significant changes appeared in autonomous and controlled motivation. The result about impersonal motivation is mainly in line with previous studies (Gillet et al., 2012; Kyndt et al., 2015), suggesting that adolescents from different academic settings experience the same trend in this type of motivation. Moreover, this trend was more marked for the girls in the present results. This gender difference has never been examined before and indicates that individual differences in motivational changes should be considered more systematically. Impersonal motivation signals the loss of sense to pursue academic learning. Its increase could be due to schooling length, leading to motivational exhaustion. It could also come from the specific context of the end of senior high school, during which adolescents are asked to examine their likings and motivations. Since they have been used to going to school to comply with parents' and educators' expectations, questioning their inner motivations could lead to a loss of sense, and that would be more problematic for girls.

In addition, the results of the cross-lagged model revealed that the trajectories of autonomous and impersonal motivation were interdependent: a high level of impersonal motivation negatively predicted autonomous motivation six months later, while the reverse path from autonomous motivation to impersonal motivation was also significant. This motivational dynamic suggests a
virtuous or vicious circle of self-determined motivation at the end of high school.

## Reciprocal Effects between Identity and Motivation

As expected, motivation and identity processes were concurrently and longitudinally linked during late adolescence, with more predictions from motivation to identity formation. Six unidirectional paths linked motivation to identity processes, while only one linked identity processes to motivation. This main result supports the assumption that the level of feeling of autonomy associated with each type of motivation could speed up or slow down identity processes (Waterman, 2004). The general pattern of results is in line with some previous studies using a different theoretical framework (Klimstra, Luyckx, Germeijs, Meeus, & Goossens, 2012; Pop et al., 2016) and extends them by focusing on general identity rather than only on specific educational identity.

Exploration in breadth and exploration in depth were both positively predicted by autonomous motivation, which defines a self-regulation toward academic activities. They were the most powerful cross-lagged paths linking motivations longitudinally to identity processes. In the developmental context of the transition toward higher education requiring intense questioning (Luyckx et al., 2008), exploration in breadth and in depth could be seen as necessary and adaptive. A high level of autonomous motivation, indicative of the satisfaction of basic needs (autonomy, competence, and relatedness), provides energy that could be allotted to sustain them (Duriez, Luyckx, Soenens, & Berzonsky, 2012; Soenens & Vansteenkiste, 2011). It enables adolescents to be on track for active adaptation to find their lifestyle on their own (Waterman, 2004). Simultaneously, autonomous motivation positively predicted ruminative exploration, which is often described as the dark side of the exploration process. Since ruminative exploration positively predicted exploration in breadth and in depth, this negative characteristic of ruminative exploration could be tempered. At least, ruminative exploration would be dual-sided. Because of these three paths, autonomous motivation appeared the most powerful dimension of motivation to predict the general exploration process, which is required and expected during 12th grade in French high school.

Ruminative exploration was also positively predicted by impersonal motivation, which is indicative of a lack of sense of mastery, and controlled motivation, which is indicative of a hetero-regulation toward academic activities. These motivations increase when the basic needs of
autonomy, competence, and relatedness are damaged. Thus, ruminative exploration appears particularly sensitive to the lack of satisfaction of the basic needs underlying motivation, as it has been previously shown that relatedness satisfaction negatively predicts ruminative exploration (Luyckx et al., 2009). High levels of impersonal and controlled motivation would be harmful for identity, considering that rumination could impede identity in an exploration without end, avoiding firm commitments and entailing identity stagnation (Luyckx et al., 2008).

Concerning commitment processes, only one cross-lagged path was significant showing that commitment making was negatively predicted by impersonal motivation. This result indicates that the difficulty of identifying values and interests of academic activities brakes the process of commitment making, as suggested by Waterman (2004). This is in line with Soenens et al.'s results (2005) and confirms the idea that adolescents who feel unable to regulate their behaviors effectively are likely to procrastinate when faced with identity-relevant decisions.

Mainly, our results showed that exploration processes were more predicted by motivation than commitment processes, which could be explained in several ways. Firstly, general commitment processes would be hardly sensitive to academic motivation, because they are rather predicted by emotional characteristics, such as negative emotionality (Erentaite, Vosylis, Gabrialaviciute, & Raiziene, 2018; Klimstra et al., 2012). Secondly, the prominent task in identity formation begins with exploration during adolescence (Erikson, 1968). During late adolescence, exploration processes are central to bolstering or reconsidering commitment processes. Hence, their interface position would lead them to be more sensitive to contextual factors.

Finally, the cross-lagged model revealed one significant path from identification with commitment to autonomous motivation, suggesting a reverse role from identity development to academic motivation. Identification with commitment supposes one has wondered about oneself, made choices for future lifestyles and even taken responsibilities upon oneself. It is thus recognized as revealing an advanced identity formation, which would promote a better integration of life experiences (Grotevant, 1987; Meeus, 2011). In accordance with this assumption and previous studies, our results support that the identification with commitment process would lead to experiencing more integrated and autonomous academic motivation (Flum & Kaplan, 2012).
## Practical Implications

Our results have practical implications because they highlight the substantial role of motivation in identity formation. A mature identity, i.e. a stable but flexible identity, is known to be a keystone in coping with the current challenges of socioeconomic changes in postmodern societies, not only in adolescence but over one's lifespan. To prepare adolescents for their future, educators are usually willing to optimize exploration and commitment by direct means, compelling the adolescents to search for future alternatives and to decide on one among others. In France, this is particularly true in the last year of senior high school. However, this external requirement could be seen as a duty by adolescents and they could comply passively to cope with this demand or procrastinate to avoid dealing with identity-relevant decisions. The present results invite educators to favor more indirect means by supporting autonomous motivation, which appeared to be the best predictor of later adaptive exploration. Since educators' practices contribute strongly to fulfilling or frustrating the needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness, they have the ability to sustain identity development by the indirect means of motivation (Vansteenkiste & Ryan, 2013).

## Limitations and Future Directions

The first limitation of the present study is that all measures came from adolescent self-reports, increasing the likelihood of shared method variance. As an alternative, multiple sources of information (teachers, parents, and peers) could prevent this effect. However, adolescents are recognized as reliable informers about their relationships, such as those with their parents (Claes et al., 2011). Their self-reports about inner processes, such as identity and motivation, may even be the best source of information. Nevertheless, the measure of exploration in depth was not satisfactory. This seems specific to French-speaking participants (see Zimmerman et al., 2015 for the same limitation) and suggests providing new items for this population to measure exploration in depth in future studies.

A second important limitation relates to the study design, which lasted only 12 months, although three measurement waves were carried out and captured changes in identity processes and academic motivation throughout the last year of senior high school. Considering previous studies showing changes in these processes at the transition to senior high school and to higher education (e.g. Kyndt et al., 2015; Luyckx et al., 2013), a longer-lasting study from junior high school to higher
education could enable the detailed observation of the different cycles of identity formation and the specific role of academic motivation at each stage. In addition, the study took place in only one high school, which could limit the generalizability of the results even though the characteristics of this high school (general and vocational courses, boarding school) ensured sociocultural diversity.

Finally, we focused only on a personal dimension, motivation, to capture its role in identity formation. Future research should also consider socio-contextual factors, coming from educational settings, such as grade point average, type of teaching or school tracking (Flum & Kaplan, 2012; Pop et al., 2016), or from socializing agents, as they could satisfy or not the three basic needs that are relevant for both motivation and identity (Soenens & Vansteenkiste, 2011). This would offer the opportunity of exploring the specific roles of personal and contextual factors in identity formation, and even the moderator effects of motivation on socio-contextual factors.

## Conclusion

The present study extends our knowledge about changes and longitudinal interrelations between identity processes and academic motivation in late adolescence. The main results showed a rise in autonomous motivation that co-occurred with an increase in commitment and exploration processes. These positive changes underline that late adolescents experience a general trend toward more autonomy, which is crucial to deal with new roles when entering higher education. Our cross-lagged model went further, by demonstrating that paths were unidirectional, leading rather from motivation to identity processes. The present results strengthened empirical support for the assumption that intrinsic orientation, and here especially autonomous motivation, is a key component of identity formation (Waterman, 2004). Moreover, they revealed that links between academic motivations with identity were not limited to the educational domain but extended to general identity. These findings suggest that teaching practices respectful of basic human needs are important not only for the learning process but also for sustaining identity formation. Given the importance of social environment, future studies might include both intra-individual and social factors to elucidate their respective roles and mediating effects in identity and motivation in late adolescence.
## References

Alisson, P.D. (2003). Missing data techniques for structural equation modeling. *Journal of Abnormal Psychology*, 112(4), 545-557.

Alivernini, F., & Lucidi, F. (2011). Relationship between social context, self-efficacy, motivation, academic achievement, and intention to drop out of high school: A longitudinal study. *The Journal of Educational Research*, 104(4), 241-252.

Arnett, J.J (Ed.) (2007). *International Encyclopedia of Adolescence*. New York, USA: Routledge.

Blanchard, S., Vrignaud, P., Lallemand, N., Dosnon, O., & Wach, M. (1997). Validation de l'échelle de motivation en éducation auprès de lycéens français [Validation of academic motivation scale on a French high school student sample]. *L'Orientation Scolaire et Professionnelle*, 26(1), 33-56.

Cannard, C. Lannegrand-Willems, L., Safont-Mottay, C., & Zimmermann, G. (2016). Brief report: Academic amotivation in light of the dark side of identity formation. *Journal of Adolescence, 47*, 179-184.

Briggs, S.R., & Cheek, J.M. (1986). The role of factor analysis in the development and evaluation of personality scales. *Journal of Personality, 54*(1), 106-148.

Chen, F. F. (2007). Sensitivity of goodness of fit indexes to lack of measurement invariance. *Structural Equation Modeling, 14*, 464-504.

Cheung, G.W., & Rensvold, R.B. (2002). Evaluating goodness-of- fit indexes for testing measurement invariance. *Structural Equation Modeling, 9*, 233-255.

Claes, M., Perchec, C., Miranda, D., Benoit, A., Bariaud, F., Lanz, M., et al. (2011). Adolescents' perceptions of parental practices: A cross-national comparison of Canada, France, and Italy. *Journal of Adolescence, 34*(2), 225-238.

Duriez, B., Luyckx, K., Soenens, B., & Berzonsky, M. (2012). A process-content approach to adolescent identity formation: Examining longitudinal associations between identity styles and goal pursuits. *Journal of Personality, 80*(1), 135-161.

Erentaitė, R., Vosylis, R., Gabrialaviciute, I., & Raiziene, S. (2018). How does school experience relate to adolescent identity formation over time? Cross-lagged associations between school engagement, school burnout and identity processing styles. *Journal of Youth and Adolescence,*
47(4), 760-774.

Erikson, E. (1968). *Identity: Youth and crisis*. New York, NY: Norton Press.

Flum, H., & Kaplan, A. (2012). Identity formation in educational settings: A contextualized view of theory and research in practice. *Contemporary Educational Psychology*, *37*(3), 240-245.

Gillet, N., Vallerand, R.J., & Lafrenière, M-A.K. (2012). Intrinsic and extrinsic school motivation as a function of age: The mediating role of autonomy support. *Social Psychology of Education, 15*, 77-95.

Grotevant, H.D. (1987). Toward a process model of identity formation. *Journal of Adolescent Research, 2*(3), 203-222.

Hayes, A.F. (2013). Multiple Mediator Models. In A.F. Hayes (Ed.) *Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process Analysis: A Regression-Based Approach* (pp. 123-164). New York: The Guilford Press

Huber, P.J. (1967). The behavior of maximum likelihood estimates under nonstandard conditions. In L.M. Le Cam & J. Neyman (Eds.), *Proceedings of the fifth Berkeley symposium on mathematical statistics and probability, Volume 1: Statistics* (pp. 221-233). Berkeley, USA: University of California Press.

Kline, R.B. (2015). *Principles and practice of structural equation modeling*. 4th edn. New York, NY: The Guilford Press.

Klimstra, T.A., Luyckx, K., Germeijs, V., Meeus, W.H.J., & Goossens, L. (2012). Personality traits and educational identity formation in late adolescents: Longitudinal associations and academic progress. *Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 41*(3), 346-361.

Kyndt, E., Coertjens, L., van Daal, T., Donche, V., Gijbels, D., & Van Petegem, P. (2015). The development of students' motivation in the transition from secondary to higher education: A longitudinal study. *Learning and Individual Differences, 39*, 114-123.

La Guardia, J.G. (2009). Developing who I am: A self-determination theory approach to the establishment of healthy identities. *Educational Psychologist, 44*(2), 90-104.

Lannegrand-Willems, L., & Bosma, H.A. (2006). Identity development-in-context: The school as an important context for identity development. *Identity: An International Journal of Theory and
Research, 6(1), 85-113.

Lannegrand-Willems, L. (2008). La question de la construction identitaire à l'adolescence à deux paliers de l'orientation: La troisième et la terminale [Identity construction in adolescence at two transitional points of the French school system: 9th and 12th grades]. *L'Orientation Scolaire et Professionnelle*, 37(4), 527-544.

Luyckx, K., Duriez, B., Green, L.M., & Negru-Subtirica, O. (2017). Identity processes and intrinsic and extrinsic goal pursuits: Directionality of effects in college students. *Journal of Youth and Adolescence*, 46(8), 1758-1771.

Luyckx, K., Goossens, L. & Soenens, B. (2006a). A developmental contextual perspective on identity construction in emerging adulthood: Change dynamics in commitment formation and commitment evaluation. *Developmental Psychology*, 42(2), 366-380.

Luyckx, K., Goossens, L., Soenens, B. & Beyers, W. (2006b). Unpacking commitment and exploration: Preliminary validation of an integrative model of late adolescent identity formation. *Journal of Adolescence*, 29(3), 361-378.

Luyckx, K., Klimstra, T. A., Duriez, B., Van Petegem, S., & Beyers, W. (2013). Personal identity processes from adolescence through the late 20s: Age trends, functionality, and depressive symptoms. *Social Development*, 22(4), 701-721.

Luyckx, K., Schwartz, S. J., Berzonsky, M.D., Soenens, B., Vansteenkiste, M., Smits, I., & Goossens, L. (2008). Capturing ruminative exploration: Extending the four-dimensional model of identity formation in late adolescence. *Journal of Research in Personality*, 42(1), 58-82.

Luyckx, K., Vansteenkiste, M., Goossens, L., & Duriez, B. (2009). Basic need satisfaction and identity formation: Bridging self-determination theory and process-oriented identity research. *Journal of Counseling Psychology*, 56(2), 276-288.

Marcia, J.E. (1966). Development and validation of ego-identity status. *Journal of Personality and Social Psychology*, 3(5), 551-558.

Martinek, D., Hofmann, F., & Kipman, U. (2016). Academic self-regulation as a function of age: The mediating role of autonomy support and differentiation in school. *Social Psychology of Education*, 19(4), 729-748.
Meeus, W. (2011). The study of adolescent identity formation 2000-2010: A review of longitudinal research. *Journal of Research on Adolescence, 21*(1), 75-94.

Meeus, W., van de Schoot, R., Keijsers, L., Schwartz, S. J., & Branje, S. (2010). On the progression and stability of adolescent identity formation: A five-wave longitudinal study in early-to-middle and middle-to-late adolescence. *Child Development, 81*(5), 1565-1581.

Mih, V., & Mih, C. (2013). Perceived autonomy-supportive teaching, academic self-perceptions and engagement in learning: Toward a process model of academic achievement. *Cognition, Brain, Behavior: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 17*(4), 289-313.

Mouratidis, A., & Michou, A. (2011). Self-determined motivation and social achievement goals in children's emotions. *Educational Psychology, 31*(1), 67-86.

Negru-Subtirica, O., Pop, E.I., Luyckx, K., Dezutter, J. & Steger, M.F. (2016). The meaningful identity: a longitudinal look at the interplay between identity and meaning in life in adolescence. *Developmental Psychology, 52*(11), 1926-1936.

Pop, E.I., Negru-Subtirica, O., Crocetti, E., Opre, A., & Meeus, W. (2016). On the interplay between academic achievement and educational identity: A longitudinal study. *Journal of Adolescence, 47*, 135-144.

R Core Team (2016). *R: A language and environment for statistical computing*. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. https://www.R-project.org/.

Ratelle, C.F., Guay, F., Vallerand, R.J., Larose, S., & Senécal, C. (2007). Autonomous, controlled, and amotivated types of academic motivation: A person-oriented analysis. *Journal of Educational Psychology, 99*(4), 734-746.

Rosseel, Y. (2012). Lavaan: An R Package for Structural Equation Modeling. *Journal of Statistical Software, 48*(2), 1-36.

Ryan, R.M., & Deci, E.L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. *American Psychologist, 55*(1), 68-78.

Ryan, R.M., Connell, J.P., & Deci, E.L. (1985). A motivational analysis of self-determination and self-regulation in education. In C. Ames & R.E. Ames (Eds.), *Research on motivation in education: The classroom milieu* (pp. 13-51). New York, NY: Academic Press.
Satorra, A., & Bentler, P.M. (2001). A scaled difference chi-square test statistic for moment structure analysis. *Psychometrika*, **66**(4), 507-514.

Soenens, B., Berzonsky, M.D., Vansteenkiste, M., Beyers, W., & Goossens, L. (2005). Identity styles and causality orientations: In search of the motivational underpinnings of the identity exploration process. *European Journal of Personality*, **19**, 427-442.

Soenens, B., & Vansteenkiste, M. (2011). When is identity congruent with the self? A self-determination theory perspective. In S.J. Schwartz, K. Luyckx, & V.L. Vignoles (Eds.), *Handbook of identity theory and research*, Vol. 1-2 (pp. 381-401). New York, NY: Springer.

Topolewska-Siedzik, E. & Cieciuch, J. (2018). Trajectories of identity formation modes and their personality context in adolescence. *Journal of Youth and Adolescence*, **47**(2), 775-792.

Vansteenkiste, M., & Ryan, R.M. (2013). On psychological growth and vulnerability: Basic psychological need satisfaction and need frustration as a unifying principle. *Journal of Psychotherapy Integration*, **23**(3), 263-280.

Walls, T.A., & Little, T.D. (2005). Relations among personal agency, motivation, and school adjustment in early adolescence. *Journal of Educational Psychology*, **97**(1), 23-31.

Waterman, A.S. (2004). Finding someone to be: Studies on the role of intrinsic motivation in identity formation. *Identity: An International Journal of Theory and Research*, **4**(3), 209-228.

Wigfield, A., Eccles, J., Fredricks, J., Simpkins, S., Roeser, R., & Schiefele, U. (2015). Development of achievement motivation and engagement. In M.E. Lamb & R.M. Lerner (Eds.) *Handbook of Child Psychology and Developmental Science*, Vol. 3 (pp. 657-700). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

Zimmermann, G., Lannegrand-Willems, L., Safont-Mottay, C., & Cannard, Ch. (2015). Testing new identity models and processes in French-speaking adolescents and emerging adults' students. *Journal of Youth and Adolescence*, **44**(1), 127-141.
<caption>**Table 1.**</caption>

Descriptive Statistics: Within-Time Correlations between Identity Processes and Motivations

<table><thead><tr><th></th><th>2.</th><th>3.</th><th>4.</th><th>5.</th><th>6.</th><th>7.</th><th>8.</th><th>Means (SD)</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td rowspan="3">1. CM</td><td>.68***</td><td>.23***</td><td>.19***</td><td>-.47***</td><td>.23***</td><td>.14*</td><td>-.20***</td><td>3.36 (1.19)</td></tr><tr><td>.71***</td><td>.17***</td><td>.19***</td><td>-.57***</td><td>.26***</td><td>.10</td><td>-.23***</td><td>3.64 (1.06)</td></tr><tr><td>.69***</td><td>.25***</td><td>.18***</td><td>-.53***</td><td>.23***</td><td>.29***</td><td>-.30***</td><td>3.89 (0.89)</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="3">2. IC</td><td>.28***</td><td>.16**</td><td>-.37***</td><td>.32***</td><td>.20***</td><td>-.25***</td><td>3.39 (.97)</td></tr><tr><td>.18***</td><td>.16**</td><td>-.43***</td><td>.30***</td><td>.13*</td><td>-.24***</td><td>3.64 (1.06)</td></tr><tr><td>.26***</td><td>.16**</td><td>-.44***</td><td>.28***</td><td>.29***</td><td>-.27***</td><td>3.88 (.89)</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="3">3. EB</td><td>.36***</td><td>.26***</td><td>.34***</td><td>.33***</td><td>-.12*</td><td>3.55 (.88)</td></tr><tr><td>.35***</td><td>.26***</td><td>.23***</td><td>.17***</td><td>-.08</td><td>3.73 (.83)</td></tr><tr><td>.28***</td><td>.15**</td><td>.33***</td><td>.33***</td><td>-.15**</td><td>3.74 (.81)</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="3">4. ED</td><td>.28***</td><td>.34***</td><td>.23***</td><td>-.10</td><td>3.15 (.82)</td></tr><tr><td>.19***</td><td>.25***</td><td>.20***</td><td>-.08</td><td>3.32 (.79)</td></tr><tr><td>.22***</td><td>.32***</td><td>.29***</td><td>-.19***</td><td>3.28 (.80)</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="3">5. RE</td><td></td><td>.05</td><td>.17***</td><td>.16*</td><td>2.96 (1.04)</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>-.01</td><td>.18***</td><td>.13*</td><td>2.99 (1.07)</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>.07</td><td>.08</td><td>.18***</td><td>2.62 (1.05)</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="2">6. Autonomous</td><td></td><td>.40***</td><td>-.46***</td><td>2.98 (.79)</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>.35***</td><td>-.44***</td><td>3.07 (.77)</td></tr></tbody></table>
<table><tr><td></td><td>.46***</td><td>-.27***</td><td>3.05 (.78)</td></tr><tr><td>7. Controlled</td><td></td><td>-.27***</td><td>3.67 (.74)</td></tr><tr><td></td><td></td><td>-.33***</td><td>3.75 (.77)</td></tr><tr><td></td><td></td><td>-.45***</td><td>3.73 (.75)</td></tr><tr><td>8. Impersonal</td><td></td><td></td><td>1.69 (.94)</td></tr><tr><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>1.73 (.94)</td></tr><tr><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>1.74 (.92)</td></tr></table>

*Note.* The first correlation is for Time 1, the second for Time 2, the third for Time 3. The same pattern applies to means and standard deviations

CM: Commitment Making, IC: Identification with Commitment, EB: Exploration in Breadth, ED: Exploration in Depth, RE: Ruminative Exploration

* p < .05; ** p < .01; *** p < .001
<caption>**Table 2.**</caption>

Latent Growth Curve Analyses for Identity Processes and Motivation

<table><thead><tr><th rowspan="2">Variable</th><th colspan="4">Growth Factors</th></tr><tr><th><i>M</i> Intercept</th><th>σ<sup>2</sup> Intercept</th><th><i>M</i> Slope</th><th>σ<sup>2</sup> Slope</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>CM</td><td>3.34***</td><td>1.01***</td><td>.20***</td><td>.11***</td></tr><tr><td>IC</td><td>3.44***</td><td>0.62***</td><td>.11**</td><td>.06**</td></tr><tr><td>EB</td><td>3.52***</td><td>0.33***</td><td>.11**</td><td>.02</td></tr><tr><td>ED</td><td>2.90***</td><td>.28***</td><td>.12**</td><td>.01</td></tr><tr><td>RE</td><td>2.87***</td><td>0.56***</td><td>-.10*</td><td>.04</td></tr><tr><td>Autonomous</td><td>3.10***</td><td>0.39***</td><td>-.02</td><td>.02**</td></tr><tr><td>Controlled</td><td>3.63***</td><td>0.29***</td><td>-.05</td><td>.01</td></tr><tr><td>Impersonal</td><td>1.83***</td><td>0.63***</td><td>.09*</td><td>.06**</td></tr></tbody></table>

*Note.* CM = Commitment Making, IC = Identification with Commitment, EB = Exploration in Breadth, ED = Exploration in Depth, RE = Ruminative Exploration.

$M$ = Mean; $\sigma^2$ = Variance

* $p < .05$; ** $p < .01$; *** $p < .001$
<caption>**Table 3.**</caption>

Results of cross-lagged model analyses.

<table><thead><tr><th rowspan="2">Model</th><th colspan="6">Model fit statistics</th><th colspan="3">Model fit changes statistics</th></tr><tr><th>NPAR</th><th>χ<sup>2</sup></th><th>df</th><th>CFI</th><th>RMSEA [90% CI]</th><th>SRMR</th><th>Δ χ<sup>2</sup></th><th>Δ df</th><th>Δ CFI</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>M0</td><td>260</td><td>229.1***</td><td>64</td><td>.966</td><td>.08 [.07 - .09]</td><td>.03</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>M1</td><td>252</td><td>239.4***</td><td>72</td><td>.965</td><td>.08 [.07 - .09]</td><td>.03</td><td>10.27</td><td>8</td><td>-.001</td></tr><tr><td>M2</td><td>196</td><td>307.4***</td><td>128</td><td>.963</td><td>.06 [.05 - .07]</td><td>.04</td><td>68.02**</td><td>56</td><td>-.003</td></tr><tr><td>M2p</td><td>456</td><td>405.2***</td><td>192</td><td>.956</td><td>.08 [.07 - .09]</td><td>.04</td><td>97.78***</td><td>64</td><td>-.006</td></tr></tbody></table>

*Note.* Each model included covariance between variables at identical times.

** *p* < .001, *** *p* < .0001