This test draws on five major streams of identity research.

Marcia (1966) [1] operationalized Erikson's theory of identity by proposing the "identity status" model. Based on the presence or absence of exploration and commitment, he defined four states: achievement, moratorium, diffusion, and foreclosure. His framework informs the concept of identity "establishment" used in this test.

Berzonsky (1989) [2] introduced the concept of "identity style," shifting focus from outcomes to the process by which people form their identities. He described three styles: information-oriented, normative, and diffuse/avoidant. This framework underlies the Self-Understanding and Agency dimensions of this test.

Shimoyama (1992) [3] examined the relationship between moratorium and identity development in Japanese university students. His work contributed to the question design for measuring identity establishment in young adults.

Tani (2001) [4] developed a multidimensional identity scale (MEIS) that captured identity as a complex, multi-faceted construct rather than a single dimension. The five-dimension structure of this test reflects his approach.

Nakama et al. (2014) [5] used the Dimensions of Identity Development Scale (DIDS) to examine identity development patterns, emphasizing that identity continues to evolve over time. This perspective informs how we present the results — not as fixed labels, but as a current snapshot with room for growth.

A development team of a Certified Public Psychologist (Japan), a Certified Clinical Psychologist (Japan), and a graduate of a psychology master's program reviewed the literature and developed 4 questions per dimension, for a total of 20 items. A 5-point response scale is used.

Past Acceptance
I accept who I was.
My experiences have been valuable.
My past shaped who I am now.
I've grown from past hardships.

Self-Understanding
I know who I am.
I have goals for my future.
I understand my strengths and limitations.
I know what I want.

Agency
I can stand up for my own opinions.
I'm not easily swayed by people around me.
I stand by my own choices.
I trust my own conviction.

Respect for Diversity
I understand different viewpoints.
I respect others' perspectives.
People can live differently.
I connect with very different people.

Social Role
My work or studies feel meaningful.
I feel I contribute to society.
I fit into the world around me.
I have a role in society.

Response scale (5 points):
Strongly disagree = 0 / Disagree = 1 / Neutral = 2 /
Agree = 3 / Strongly agree = 4

Score range per dimension: 0–16

Level per dimension:
13–16: Good
9–12: Fair
0–8: Poor

Overall score (0–80):
65–80: Excellent
53–64: Good
41–52: Fair
0–40: Poor

For each dimension at each level, we wrote a description of characteristic strengths and a growth note. These draw on the prior research reviewed above and on the clinical experience of the development team.

This instrument has not undergone formal statistical validation, including factor analysis or reliability and validity testing. It reflects the knowledge and judgment of its developers. Results should be treated as a starting point for self-reflection, not as a clinical assessment, and are not suitable for academic research purposes.

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

[2] Berzonsky, M. D. (1989). Identity style: Individual differences in processing identity-relevant information. Journal of Research in Personality, 23(1), 58–74.

[3] Shimoyama, H. (1992). A study of moratorium subtypes in university students: In relation to identity development. Japanese Journal of Educational Psychology, 40(2), 121–129. (Originally published in Japanese; title translated by the authors.)

[4] Tani, F. (2001). The structure of identity in adolescence: Development of the Multidimensional Ego Identity Scale (MEIS). Japanese Journal of Educational Psychology, 49(2), 265–273. (Originally published in Japanese; title translated by the authors.)

[5] Nakama, R., Sugimura, K., Hatano, K., Mizokami, S., & Tsuzuki, M. (2014). Examining identity development and typology using the Dimensions of Identity Development Scale (DIDS). Japanese Journal of Psychology, 85(1), 74–84. doi: 10.4992/jjpsy.85.13074

Additional references:

Sugimura, K. (2001). Female adolescent identity exploration from a relational perspective: A two-year longitudinal study. Doctoral dissertation, Nagoya University. (Originally published in Japanese; title translated by the authors.)

Mizuno, K. (2006). Development of a romantic love psychology scale and study of romantic tendencies. Seisen Ronso, 14, 35–52. (Originally published in Japanese; title translated by the authors.)

Ozawa, K. (2003). Reconsidering identity from the perspective of self-estrangement in identity crisis. Tokyo Polytechnic University Bulletin (Arts), 27(2), 79–89. (Originally published in Japanese; title translated by the authors.)

Ohno, H. (1984). A study of fulfillment in contemporary youth: Examining a psychological model for Japanese adolescents. Japanese Journal of Educational Psychology, 32(2), 100–109. (Originally published in Japanese; title translated by the authors.)

Yamaguchi, M. (2016). Relationship between mentalization and borderline personality tendencies: From an attempt to develop a mentalization questionnaire. Fukuyama City University Bulletin (Education), 4, 129–136. (Originally published in Japanese; title translated by the authors.)

Kitayama, S. (1994). Cultural construals of the self and psychological processes. Japanese Journal of Social Psychology, 10(3), 153–167. (Originally published in Japanese; title translated by the authors.)