We are our passions: The role of identity processes in harmonious and obsessive passion and links to optimal functioning in society

Abstract

The Dualistic Model of Passion (DMP) proposes two types of passion, namely harmonious passion and obsessive passion. The DMP posits that the activity becomes part of one’s identity. However, little research assessed how the two types of passion relate to identity. Two important facets of identity hypothesized to be associated with passion are identity integration and identity styles. In two studies, we assessed these types of identity processes as determinants of passion. We expected the presence of positive associations between on the one hand informational identity style, identity integration, and their interaction term and HP on the other, and positive associations between normative identity style and OP. Participants in both studies (N1 = 107 and N2 = 135) completed the Identity Style Inventory-3, the Identity Integration subscale of the Multidimensional Self-Esteem Inventory, and the Passion Scale. In addition, in Study 2 we also looked at the relationships between passion and five indicators of the construct of Optimal Functioning in Society. Overall, results were consistent with our hypotheses.

Keywords:

• Identity styles
• passion
• identity integration

Notes

1. Research suggests that the Cronbach alpha systematically underestimates internal consistency especially when a scale contains few items, and when each of the scale's dimensions target different areas and processes (Dunn, Baguley, & Brunsden, 2014). In such cases, the Mcdonald's Omega represents a more precise indicator of internal consistency (e.g., Dunn et al., 2014; Zinbarg, Revelle, Yovel, & Li, 2005). Based on these considerations we chose to report the Mcdonald's Omega indices and to use them as an indicator of the internal consistency of our scales. The Omega coefficient is interpreted in the same way as the alpha coefficient. In any event, for comparison purposes here are the Cronbach alpha values. In Study 1 alpha’s and 95% CI were. .80 [.73, .85] for HP, .55 [.40, .67] for OP, .68 [.56, .75] for identity integration, .58 [.43, .65] for informational identity, and .52 [.38, .65] for normative identity style. In Study 2 alpha’s and 95% CI were .79 [.72, .84] for HP, .61 [.49, .70] for OP, .60 [.50, .70] for identity integration, .65 [.52, .71] for informational identity, .52 [.41, .65] for normative identity style, .84 [.78, .87] for psychological well-being, .75 [.67, .80] for physical well-being, .74 [.68, .82] for performance, .90 [.87, .93] for relational well-being, and .79 [.69, .82] for contribution to society.

2. We also tested two alternative models where the order of the variables was in the opposite direction of the proposed model. Specifically, these two alternative models posit that passion is a determinant of identity (Model 1: Passion variables → identity variables → OFIS outcomes; Model 2: OFIS outcomes → passion variables → identity variables). Both models fits were clearly inadequate (Model 1: χ² (21) = 56.124, p = .983; CFI = .76; RMSEA = .16; SRMR = .09; Model 2: χ² (21) = 76.564, p = .745; CFI = .64; RMSEA = .18; SRMR = .11. Thus, even though ultimately experimental and longitudinal methods are needed to demonstrate the causality of the relationship among model variables, this analysis provides some additional support to the idea that identity is a determinant of passion and not the other way around.