Part I: According to Erikson’s psychosocial theory of development, as a 20-year-old male, I am considered to be an emerging adult who is currently experiencing the conflict between intimacy and isolation. I have recently progressed from the stage of identity vs. identity confusion of adolescence (ages 10–18). However, I would argue the age for the identity vs. identity confusion stage can extend into an individual’s early twenties. If adolescence is defined as an emerging adult who remains financially dependent on one’s parents, then most college students (ages 19-22) meet this criteria. Furthermore, the college atmosphere provides a nearly perfect opportunity for individuals to explore and seek out new endeavors which ultimately help to develop
…show more content…
Thus, resolution requires an individual to appropriately balance the two attributes of a stage. For example, a resolution of Erikson’s stage 5 (identity vs. identity confusion) is achieved after an individual successfully explored and committed oneself to various roles to develop a unique sense of self, but maintains a small amount of identity confusion. This enables the individual to establish an identity, yet remain flexible and open-minded which allows for new experiences regardless of age. Eventually, all individuals reach each particular stage based on age; however, not every member of their cohort will obtain a resolution. This results in some individuals progressing into a new stage without resolving the previous stage, which illustrates the dependent nature of Erikson’s stages. For example, if child A resolves the initiative vs. guilt stage and child B is unable to develop a prideful sense of exploration, child A will be better equipped to resolve stage 4 than child B. The rationale supporting this claim is logical. Child B cannot develop the sense of mastering a particular skill when the skill was never explored, thus typifying the dependency and effects of Erikson’s …show more content…
Initial analysis of the MPD revealed all of my resolution scores lie within 20 percentiles of the average. Although nearly all of my scores were either slightly above or slightly below the average psychosocial development of a male my age (20 years old), these averages have very different implications. My resolution score on Erikson’s first, fourth, seventh, and eighth stages were all slightly above the 50th percentile. However, according to Erikson’s psychosocial theory of development, I should have resolved stages one and four before reaching adolescence! In contrast, Erikson’s stages seven and eight are conflicts encountered by middle-aged and elderly adults. Thus, despite these resolution scores being slightly above average and nearly the same percentile, it does not imply that I have resolved these stages. In addition, despite my score of slightly below average for Erikson’s stage two and three (31st and 42nd percentiles respectively), I can conclude that I resolved these stages similar to many other men my age. Finally, my exceptionally high score for ego-integrity at the 95th percentile is not indicative of my successful resolution of Erikson’s final stage, but rather reflects one aspect of my identity that my life is both meaningful and satisfactory. The analysis of my MPD scores using Erikson’s stages
Thus, resolution requires an individual to appropriately balance the two attributes of a stage. For example, a resolution of Erikson’s stage 5 (identity vs. identity confusion) is achieved after an individual successfully explored and committed oneself to various roles to develop a unique sense of self, but maintains a small amount of identity confusion. This enables the individual to establish an identity, yet remain flexible and open-minded which allows for new experiences regardless of age. Eventually, all individuals reach each particular stage based on age; however, not every member of their cohort will obtain a resolution. This results in some individuals progressing into a new stage without resolving the previous stage, which illustrates the dependent nature of Erikson’s stages. For example, if child A resolves the initiative vs. guilt stage and child B is unable to develop a prideful sense of exploration, child A will be better equipped to resolve stage 4 than child B. The rationale supporting this claim is logical. Child B cannot develop the sense of mastering a particular skill when the skill was never explored, thus typifying the dependency and effects of Erikson’s …show more content…
Initial analysis of the MPD revealed all of my resolution scores lie within 20 percentiles of the average. Although nearly all of my scores were either slightly above or slightly below the average psychosocial development of a male my age (20 years old), these averages have very different implications. My resolution score on Erikson’s first, fourth, seventh, and eighth stages were all slightly above the 50th percentile. However, according to Erikson’s psychosocial theory of development, I should have resolved stages one and four before reaching adolescence! In contrast, Erikson’s stages seven and eight are conflicts encountered by middle-aged and elderly adults. Thus, despite these resolution scores being slightly above average and nearly the same percentile, it does not imply that I have resolved these stages. In addition, despite my score of slightly below average for Erikson’s stage two and three (31st and 42nd percentiles respectively), I can conclude that I resolved these stages similar to many other men my age. Finally, my exceptionally high score for ego-integrity at the 95th percentile is not indicative of my successful resolution of Erikson’s final stage, but rather reflects one aspect of my identity that my life is both meaningful and satisfactory. The analysis of my MPD scores using Erikson’s stages