A R T I C L E

SENSE OF COMMUNITY, IDENTITYSTATUSES, AND LONELINESS INADOLESCENCE: A CROSS-NATIONAL STUDY ON ITALIANAND BELGIAN YOUTHElvira CicognaniUniversity of Bologna

Theo KlimstraTilburg University

Luc GoossensKULeuven – University of Leuven

The aim of this cross-national study was to assess the relationships amongsense of community (SoC) vis-a-vis the residential community (i.e., one’shome town), identity formation processes, and feelings of loneliness towardparents and peers. The sample included 431 Italian adolescents (59.4%females) and 221 Belgian (Flemish) adolescents (54.3% females) aged14–23 years. Results indicate that the more adolescents developed firm andsustained commitments, the more they developed positive feelings toward theresidential community. SoC toward the home town is lower among youth inless advanced identity statuses. Parent- and peer-related lonelinessdifferentially predicted Italian and Belgian adolescents’ SoC. Results havesignificant theoretical and methodological implications for the study ofSoC, identity, and loneliness. C© 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

INTRODUCTION

There is growing recognition of the role of neighborhoods and community contexts ininfluencing adolescent development, problem behavior, and health (e.g., Eccles & Roeser,

Please address correspondence to: Elvira Cicognani, University of Bologna (Bologna, Italy), Department ofPsychology. E-mail: elvira.cicognani@unibo.it

JOURNAL OF COMMUNITY PSYCHOLOGY, Vol. 42, No. 4, 414–432 (2014)Published online in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/jcop).C© 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. DOI: 10.1002/jcop.21618

Sense of Community, Identity, and Loneliness � 415

2011; Leventhal & Brooks-Gunn, 2000). However, it is less clear how adolescents developan understanding and feelings of belonging in the community where they live and growup. To contribute to this debate, the present study provides a cross-national examination,in Italian and Belgian adolescents, of the associations among sense of community (SoC)with regard to the residential community, identity formation processes, and feelings ofloneliness with parents and peers.

SoC IN ADOLESCENCE

The concept of SoC is widely used to describe individuals’ feelings of belonging to differentkinds of communities (Fisher, Sonn, & Bishop, 2002; McMillan & Chavis, 1986), includingformal or informal social organizations bounded by a physical or geographical location(e.g., the town/city or the neighborhood) and social entities based on common interests,goals, or needs (e.g., volunteer organizations, the workplace, or the school). Such feelingsrefer to a generalized entity and not to specific relationships (Fisher et al., 2002). Adistinctive aspect is that it includes the consideration of the ecological dimension ofcontexts and its relevance for satisfaction of individuals’ needs (Deci & Ryan, 2000).

In adolescence, research indicates that SoC is best captured by five distinct but interre-lated dimensions (Chiessi, Cicognani, & Sonn, 2010): support and emotional connectionin the community (SCC), support and emotional connection with peers (SCG), sense ofbelonging (SB), satisfaction of needs and opportunities for involvement (NS), and per-ceived opportunities for influence over the community (I). These SoC dimensions weredifferentially associated with social support, psychosocial well-being, and community par-ticipation (Albanesi, Cicognani, & Zani, 2007; Chiessi et al., 2010).

Several aspects of adolescents’ experiences in their community have potential implica-tions for the aforementioned aspects of adolescent SoC. These include the emergence ofnew opportunities for social involvement and the exploration of new values and intereststhat follow from psychosocial transitions and changing relationships in different commu-nity settings (e.g., neighborhoods and schools; Evans, 2007). Young people’s participationin activities in different settings offers them the opportunity to cultivate different socialrelationships; this helps them to gain a sense of connectedness and belonging, whichstrengthens their social identity. The experience of power and opportunities to influenceand interpret different social roles are also crucial for the experience of SoC (Albanesiet al., 2007; Evans, 2007). These interactions are also central to the development of apersonal and social identity (Evans, 2007; Pretty, 2002).

SoC has often been found to be stronger among males (e.g., Pretty et al., 1996;Chiessi et al., 2010) and to be stronger during early versus late adolescence (Chiessiet al., 2010; Chipuer et al., 1999; Cicognani, Albanesi, & Zani, 2006; Pretty et al., 1996).Exploration processes associated with identity construction may stimulate an increasinglycomplex and critical understanding by adolescents of the different contexts and theircontribution in satisfying their evolving needs (e.g., of connectedness, autonomy, andcompetence; Pretty, 2002). These processes may bring about a general reduction in levelsof SoC with reference to the home town from early to late adolescence, as young peopleachieve greater autonomy and have the desire to make new experiences and explore andfamiliarize themselves with other places and groups (Chipuer et al., 1999; Evans, 2007;Pretty et al., 1996). However, so far the potential role of identity formation processesin influencing adolescents’ perceptions and generalized feelings toward their residentialcommunity remains unexplored.

Journal of Community Psychology DOI: 10.1002/jcop

416 � Journal of Community Psychology, May 2014

Another issue that needs further investigation is the role of adolescents’ relationshipwith their family and friends in potentially influencing adolescents’ perceptions and feel-ings toward their community. The construction of SoC also requires from adolescents,besides structural opportunities, the capacity to form significant social relationships andemotional bonds with different individuals in their community to be able to success-fully negotiate their changing needs. Difficulties experienced in facing the importanttransformations in family and peer relationships and negotiating attachment bonds ver-sus autonomy (e.g., which may express themselves through feelings of loneliness) mightpotentially affect such processes.

Identity Formation in Adolescence

The development of identity has long been considered a crucial developmental task ofadolescence (Erikson, 1968; Marcia, 1966). Based on Marcia’s (1966) theory and contri-butions from Bosma (1985) and Meeus and colleagues (1996; Meeus, Iedema, Helsen,& Vollebergh, 1999), Luyckx and collaborators (Luyckx, Goossens, Soenens, & Beyers,2006; Luyckx et al., 2008) proposed an integrative identity model including four pro-cesses: commitment making, identification with commitment, exploration in breadth,and exploration in depth. The model has been further expanded with the addition ofruminative exploration, described as a dysfunctional form of exploration, typical of indi-viduals that continuously mull over available possibilities without being able to commit(Luyckx et al., 2008). Adolescents’ in-depth exploration showed consistent increases inmiddle to late adolescence (Luyckx et al., 2006, 2008), but the findings concerning agedifferences in commitment appear inconsistent (Klimstra, Hale, Raaijmakers, Branje, &Meeus, 2010; Klimstra, Crocetti, Hale, Fermani, & Meeus, 2011). Assessments of genderdifferences have indicated that girls show higher scores of in-depth exploration than boys(Crocetti, Luyckx, Scrignaro, & Sica, 2011).

Through the use of cluster analysis, six identity statuses have been identified inBelgian adolescents (Luyckx et al., 2008): achievement (high on commitment making,identification with commitment, exploration in depth, and exploration in breadth, andlow on ruminative exploration); foreclosure (high on both commitment dimensions and lowon the three exploration factors); moratorium (low on both commitment dimensions andhigh on the three exploration factors); carefree diffusion (low scores on all the five identityprocesses), diffused diffusion (similar to the former but with a high score on ruminativeexploration), and undifferentiated (moderate scores on all the identity dimensions). Thesestatuses can be regarded as an extension of Marcia’s (1966) classic work on identitystatuses. In addition, the statuses were shown to be replicable across gender and amongItalian young adults (Crocetti et al., 2011).

Loneliness in Adolescence

Adolescence has long been considered a period of life when loneliness is particularlyprevalent (Goossens, 2006; Marcoen & Goossens, 1993). According to classical theories,feelings of loneliness appear from preadolescence onward and have been variously ex-plained as resulting from a reorganization of the attachment system (i.e., an increasedfocus on peers and a decreased focus on the family) and active exploration regardingidentity issues or accumulation of developmental changes (Goossens, 2006). Lonelinesshas also been associated with insufficient social competences to satisfy adolescents’ evolv-ing needs within different relationships. In most studies, loneliness is conceived of as a

Journal of Community Psychology DOI: 10.1002/jcop

Sense of Community, Identity, and Loneliness � 417

unitary phenomenon, which takes the same form across relationships and social contexts(Russell, Peplau, & Cutrona, 1980). In such studies, loneliness and SoC in adolescencehave been shown to be negatively associated with one another (Pretty et al., 1996).

The developmental approach to the study of adolescent loneliness by Goossens andcolleagues (Marcoen & Goossens, 1993) is characterized by a more specific focus on dif-ferent relationship contexts. Within this line of research, it has been shown that parent-and peer-related loneliness represents distinct forms of loneliness (Goossens et al., 2009)with different correlates (Lasgaard, Goossens, Bramsen, Trillingsgaard, & Elklit, 2011).Across several studies, parent-related loneliness increased from 15 to 18 years of age.Peer-related loneliness decreased across the adolescent period (Goossens, 2006). More-over, results seem to indicate higher loneliness among male adolescents (DiTommaso,Brannen, & Burgess, 2005).

Chipuer (2001) has pointed out the importance of investigating loneliness and at-tachment experiences across different ecological contexts (beyond the family and peers),by also including young people’s appraisals of larger physical and social environmentswhere they live. An important question within this perspective is whether loneliness withregard to parents and peers may be associated with young people’s appraisal and feelingof belonging to the community in which adolescents, their families, and peers are em-bedded. To the extent that loneliness may be dependent on young people’s insufficientsocial competences and social skills in negotiating their emotional needs within parentand peer relationships, it is likely that such difficulties will extend to other types of re-lationships within different contexts in the community (e.g., teachers and other adults).Such experiences might also affect adolescents’ overall appraisals of their community(e.g., feelings of emotional connection with people in general, perceptions of having aninfluence over them, and feelings that they can find satisfaction for their needs). Unfortu-nately, little is known about the associations of SoC and loneliness in different relationshipcontexts.

THE IMPORTANCE OF CROSS-NATIONAL COMPARISONS

One important but still understudied issue in the study of SoC and its associations with keyprocesses in adolescent development (identity formation, family, and peer relationships)is the role of macro-social and cultural factors. The few studies that have compared SoClevels across countries and different regions within the same country suggest that bettersocioeconomic conditions (e.g., assessed by quality of life indicators) and higher socialcapital (e.g., social participation in groups and associations; see also Crocetti, Jahromi, &Meeus, 2012) are associated with higher SoC and that objective conditions may moderateage and gender differences in SoC.

Some studies also suggest differences in identity statuses and processes between andamong national contexts (cf. also Crocetti, Schwartz, Fermani, Klimstra, & Meeus, 2012).Comparisons between countries in the north (Netherlands) and south of Europe (Italy)have explained such differences in terms of family cultural traditions, for instance, agreater focus on family closeness, and less on individual choice and self-direction, in Italywhen compared to Northern European countries (see also Claes, 1998, for comparisonson parent-adolescent relationships between Italy and Belgium). The economic crisis af-fecting South European countries in recent years and the reduction in job opportunitiesfor youth (e.g., Eurostat statistics for 2012 indicate that unemployment rates for youth<25 years are 35.3% in Italy vs. 19.8% in Belgium) seems to have exacerbated young

Journal of Community Psychology DOI: 10.1002/jcop

418 � Journal of Community Psychology, May 2014

people’s dependence on their family. According to Menniti, Misiti, and Savioli (2000),economic insecurity generates a negative outlook toward society, and further strength-ens youth’s perception of the family as a “safe land” where they can find material andemotional support and where they are allowed (and even expected by parents) to remainuntil they decide to form a family and enjoy a condition of economic and relationalsecurity.1

This suggests that, in Italy, the family (and the quality of adolescent-parent rela-tionships) might play a stronger role, not only on identity formation processes but alsoas a mediating structure for young people’s construction of their relationship with thecommunity. Such an effect of the family is less strong in Northern European countries(e.g., Belgium), where cultural expectations toward youth are of a greater autonomy andself-direction, also within their relationships.

THE PRESENT STUDY

The aim of this study, conducted with Italian and Belgian adolescents, was to assess cross-nationally the relationships between SoC with reference to the residential community(i.e., one’s home town), identity formation, and feelings of loneliness. We chose as targetcountries Italy and (Flemish) Belgium because they represent Southern and NorthernEuropean cultures well. In addition, we already had some comparative data on identity(Crocetti et al., 2011), suggesting the existence of cultural differences that could be wortha more thorough examination. Our first objective was to assess differences in adolescents’SoC based on their identity statuses and the comparability of such differences acrosscountries. We expected that adolescents in the achieved identity status (i.e., who exploreddifferent alternatives and made firm commitments in different life domains) would reporthigher SoC scores than adolescents in other identity statuses, and particularly those inthe diffused status (i.e., who have not started exploration processes and have not madecommitments).

The second objective was to assess the role of feelings of loneliness in parent and peerrelationships in influencing adolescents’ SoC and the comparability of these differencesacross Italian and Belgian adolescents. Following the literature (Chipuer, 2001; Prettyet al., 1996), we expected that higher loneliness in such relationships (as an indicatorof difficulties in negotiating adolescents’ autonomy and emotional needs) would reducefeelings of SoC vis-a-vis the larger community, by reducing young people’s willingnessto become involved in relationships and experiences with other people. Gender andage differences in all the scales were preliminarily tested to ascertain whether previouslydemonstrated findings would be replicated.

1The profile of the Italian young adult forms part of a “Mediterranean” typology, quite distinct from northernEuropeans and is characterised by young people who tend: 1) to study longer, even if they are not particularlyable scholars; 2) to take longer to find a stable job; 3) to continue living at home even when economic stabilityhas been achieved; and 4) to marry very soon after leaving home and not to try out any non-traditional kindof living arrangement. Therefore “in Italy young people who continue to live at home are happy to adapt toa comfortable, reassuring situation with no responsibilities: they live and grow up in a malleable environmentthat adapts itself to the needs of the young person, attenuating any kind of criticism and conflict, making itobjectively difficult and indeed almost unreasonable to leave home” (Menniti et al., 2000, p. 8)

Journal of Community Psychology DOI: 10.1002/jcop

Sense of Community, Identity, and Loneliness � 419

METHOD

Participants and Procedure

The Italian sample included 431 adolescents (256 females, 59.4%) aged 14–19 years(Mage = 16.43, standard deviation [SD] = 1.42). They fell into two age groups: 14–16years (n = 212 or 49.2%; mean [M] = 15.17, SD = .80) and 17–19 years (n = 219or 50.8%; M = 17.62; SD = .66). Participants attended different types of high schools(university preparatory education, technical oriented school, and vocational school) inNorth Italy.

The Belgian sample included 221 adolescents (120 females, 54.3%) aged 14–23 years(Mage = 16.54, SD = 1.22). They fell into two age groups: ≤16 years (n = 110 or 50.2%)and ≥17 years (n = 109 or 49.8%). They were all students attending different types ofhigh schools (university preparatory education, technical oriented school, and vocationalschool) in the Dutch-speaking part of Belgium (Flanders).

Students were contacted at school by a researcher, after obtaining the consent ofschool authorities. They were provided information about the research and asked whetherthey wished to participate by filling out a self-report questionnaire in class. All the ap-proached Italian students chose to participate and obtained credit for their participation.Of the 275 Belgian students approached, 250 (or 90.9%) chose to participate, and 221(or 80.4%) provided complete data.

Measures

SoC was measured using the 20-item version of the SoC scale for adolescents (SoC-A;Chiessi et al., 2010). The community referred to was the town where the participantslived. The scale has been validated for use in Italy. For the Belgian sample, we created aDutch-language version of the same scale using a back-translation procedure. Responseswere provided on a 5-point Likert type scale. In the Italian sample scores ranged from1 (completely disagree) to 5 (completely agree). In the Belgian sample they ranged from 0(completely disagree) to 4 (completely agree).

The alpha coefficients for the five subscales, for the Italian and Belgian samples,respectively, were as follows: SB (.78 and .79); SCG (.70 and .80), NS (.80 and .85), I (.69and .71), and SCC (.81 and .88). Information with regard to the factor structure in theBelgian sample is provided in the Results section.

Identity. We used the Dimensions of Identity Development Scale (DIDS; original Dutchversion by Luyckx et al., 2008; Italian version by Crocetti et al., 2011) to measure fivedimensions of identity formation. The DIDS includes 25 items (five items for each di-mension) with a response scale ranging from 1 (completely disagree) to 5 (completely agree).Sample items are “I have decided on the direction I want to follow in my life” (Commit-ment Making), “I sense that the direction I want to take in my life will really suit me”(Identification with Commitment), “I regularly think over a number of different plans forthe future” (Exploration in Breadth), “I regularly talk with other people about the plansfor the future I have made for myself” (Exploration in Depth), and “It is hard for me tostop thinking about the direction I want to follow in my life” (Ruminative Exploration).Cronbach’s αs were .85 and .92 for Commitment Making, .77 and .86 for Identificationwith Commitment, .68 and .79 for Exploration in Breadth, .59 and .79 for Exploration

Journal of Community Psychology DOI: 10.1002/jcop

420 � Journal of Community Psychology, May 2014

in Depth, and .69 and .80 for Ruminative Exploration, respectively, for the Italian andBelgian samples.

Loneliness. The Loneliness and Aloneness Scale for Children and Adolescents (LACA;original Dutch-language version by Marcoen & Goossens, 1993; Marcoen, Goossens, &Caes 1987), validated in Italy by Melotti and colleagues (Melotti, Corsano, Majorano,& Scarpuzzi, 2006), was used to measure loneliness. The LACA is typically used withpreadolescents and adolescents aged between 11 and 18 years, and uses 12 items tomeasure Loneliness in relationships with parents (e.g., “I feel left out by my parents”)and 12 items to measure Loneliness in relationships with peers (e.g., “I think I have fewerfriends than others”). In the Italian version, each item was responded to on a 5-point scaleranging from 1 (completely disagree) to 5 (completely agree). The original Dutch-languageversion uses a Likert-point scale ranging from 1 (never) to 4 (often). The LACA includesfour subscales. In this study, however, we used the Parent- and Peer-related Lonelinessscales only. Cronbach alphas were, respectively, .87 and .89 for the Italian sample, and .92and .88 for the Belgian sample.

RESULTS

Preliminary Analyses: Measurement Invariance

Any cross-cultural study should first establish measurement invariance before results arecompared across different cultures (e.g., Klimstra et al., 2011). For this purpose, confir-matory factor analyses (CFAs) are commonly used.2

In previous studies, configural invariance across the (Flemish) Belgian and the Italianculture had already been established for the DIDS (Crocetti et al., 2011) and the LACA(Melotti et al., 2006). However, the present study was the first to use the SoC-A scalein Belgium, and therefore configural invariance still needed to be established for thatinstrument. For this purpose, we ran several CFAs in Mplus 4.0 (Muthen & Muthen,2007) using maximum likelihood (ML) estimation. Specifically, we compared the fit ofa one-factor model for the SoC-A (i.e., a model representing SoC as a broad construct)to a five-factor model (i.e., a model distinguishing the different aspects of SoC that havebeen proposed in Italian research; Chiessi et al., 2010).3 For the SoC-A data, a five-factormodel, χ2 (167) = 327.734, p < .001; comparative fit index [CFI] = .916; root mean squareerror of approximation [RMSEA] = .072, yielded a better fit than a one-factor model,χ2 (167) = 654.960, p < .001; CFI = .761; RMSEA = .119, in the Belgian sample (�CFI =.155; �RMSEA = .047). Thus, like in Italy, a five-factor structure also better described

2There are several levels of measurement invariance, but in studies restricted to comparing associations betweenvariables across cultures, it suffices to establish configural invariance (i.e., examining whether the number offactors and the pattern of factor loadings is roughly equivalent in different groups or cultures) and metricinvariance (i.e., whether factor loadings are equivalent in different groups or cultures) (cf. Cheung & Rensvold,2002; Vandenberg & Lance, 2000).3For such model comparisons, the use of multiple criteria has been advocated by Vandenberg and Lance(2000), as different criteria can provide information on different sources of potential model misspecification.Because the χ2-statistic is well known to be overly sensitive to sample size and model complexity (e.g., Cheung& Rensvold, 2002), we relied on two other commonly used fit indices: the delta (�) Comparative Fit Index(CFI) and the delta (�) Root Means Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA). We concluded that there wasmeasurement equivalence if � CFI was smaller than .010 and �RMSEA was smaller than .015 (Chen, 2007).Absolute fit indices of the various models were also considered, with CFIs of .90 and larger and RMSEAs of .08and smaller considered satisfactory (Kline, 2006).

Journal of Community Psychology DOI: 10.1002/jcop

Sense of Community, Identity, and Loneliness � 421

the SoC-A scale in Belgium. This finding indicates that the SoC-A is configurally invariantacross Belgium (i.e., Flanders) and Italy.

As a second step, we tested for metric invariance of the SoC-A scale by running twomultigroup CFAs with Belgian adolescents and Italian adolescents as groups. Because thefit of a model in which factor loadings were freely estimated for the two groups, metricvariance model: χ2 (314) = 738.456 (p < .001), CFI = .911, RMSEA = .066, fitted thedata as well as a model in which these factor loadings were constrained to be equal for allgroups, metric invariance model: χ2 (329) = 774.573 (p < .001), CFI = .906, RMSEA =.066; �CFI = .005, �RMSEA = .000, we concluded that the SoC-A measure is metricallyinvariant for the two groups involved.

To make sure cross-cultural comparisons were also warranted for the two other scalesinvolved (i.e., the DIDS and the LACA), we also ran measurement invariance tests forthese two scales using a similar procedure as we did for the SoC-A scale. For both theDIDS and the LACA, results indicated that models in which factor loadings were freelyestimated for the Belgian and Italian adolescents, metric variance models: χ2 (512) =1079.619 (p < .001), CFI = .901, RMSEA = .061; and χ2 (364) = 953.873 (p < .001),CFI = .903, RMSEA = .071, respectively, fitted the data as well as models in which thesefactor loadings were constrained to be equal for both groups, metric invariance model:χ2 (532) = 1133.876 (p < .001), CFI = .895, RMSEA = .061, �CFI = .006, �RMSEA =.000; and χ2 (383) = 976.533 (p < .001), CFI = .903, RMSEA = .070, �CFI = .000,�RMSEA = −.001, respectively. Thus, associations between SoC, identity, and lonelinesscan safely be compared across the Belgian and Italian culture with the instruments usedin the present study.

SoC: Age Group and Gender Differences

Multivariate analyses of variance (MANOVAs) were conducted to determine the effects ofage group and gender on SoC scales. In the Italian sample, the overall multivariate effectof age group was significant, Wilks’ λ = .96; F(5, 408) = 3.08; p < .01, η2 = .036, but theoverall multivariate effect for gender was not. Follow-up univariate analyses for age groupindicated that older adolescents reported significantly lower levels of SCG and NS thandid younger adolescents.

The overall multivariate effect of age group was also significant in the Belgian sample,Wilks’ λ = .93; F(5, 213) = 3.41; p < .01, η2 = .074. Follow-up univariate analyses for agegroup indicated that older adolescents reported significantly lower levels of SCC than didyounger adolescents. Again, effects of gender were not significant.

Correlational Analyses

Table 1 provides all correlations among the variables. In the Italian sample, Identifica-tion with Commitment significantly positively correlated with all dimensions of SoC. Theother identity dimensions showed positive correlations especially with the subscale Op-portunities for Influence. These correlations indicate an association between the extentof “identity work,” in which youth are engaged and their feelings that they can enjoyopportunities for involvement and playing an influence in their community. Lonelinessin the relationship with parents negatively correlated with all dimensions of SoC exceptSCC, suggesting that stronger feelings of loneliness experienced in the family are associ-ated with lower SB in the larger community, as well as perceived Satisfaction of Needs andInfluence over it. Loneliness in the relationship with peers was especially correlated with

Journal of Community Psychology DOI: 10.1002/jcop

422 � Journal of Community Psychology, May 2014

Tabl

e1.

Cor

rela

tions

Am

ong

Vari

able

sin

the

Ital

ian

(n=

431)

and

Bel

gian

(n=

221)

Sam

ples

Scal

eC

MIC

EBED

RE

SCC

SCG

SBN

SI

L-P

art

IC.5

9**/

.71*

*

EB

.36*

*/.3

3**

.36*

*/.2

8**

ED

.29*

*/.4

2**

.33*

*/.5

0**

.43*

*/.5

4**

RE

−.15

**/−

.44*

*−.

11*/

−.42

**.3

5**/

.20*

*.2

8**/

.00

SCC

.10*

/.06

.19*

*/.1

1.0

3/.0

5.1

3**/

.07

−.06

/.00

SCG

.07/

.03

.21*

*/.0

5.0

4/.0

7.1

2*/.

04.0

4/.0

7.4

3**/

.59*

*

SB.0

7/.0

4.1

2*/.0

7−.

01/.

07.0

5/.0

6−.

09/.

01.5

4**/.5

0**

.43**

/.4

4**

NS

.07/

.02

.15**

/.0

6−.

03/.

14*

.09/

.08

−.11

*/.1

2.4

0**/.4

6**

.49**

/.6

3**

.48**

/.5

3**

I.1

0*/.

21**

.18*

*/.1

7*.1

7**/

.19*

*.2

0**/

.23*

*.1

4**/

.03

.33*

*/.4

0**

.42*

*/.4

5**

.33*

*/.4

7**

.35*

*/.4

6**

L-P

art

−.16

**/−

.11

−.23

**/−

.13

−.10

*/−.

16*

−.15

**/−

.12

−.03

/.10

−.08

/−.2

2**

−.15

**/−

.19*

*−.

21**

/−.3

3**

−.17

**/−

.12

−.22

**/−

.16*

L-P

eer

−.11

*/−.

04−.

17**

/−.0

9.0

8/.0

7−.

04/−

.02

.11*

/.17

**−.

04/−

.20*

*−.

35**

/−.3

1**

−.05

/−.1

9**

−.11

*/−.

21**

−.07

/−.2

3**

.30*

*/.2

7**

Not

e.C

M=

Com

mit

men

tMak

ing;

IC=

Iden

tifi

cati

onw

ith

Com

mit

men

t;E

B=

Exp

lora

tion

inB

read

th;E

D=

Exp

lora

tion

inD

epth

;RE

=R

umin

ativ

eE

xplo

rati

on;S

CC

=Su

ppor

tan

dE

mot

ion

alC

onn

ecti

onin

the

Com

mun

ity;

SCG

=Su

ppor

tan

dE

mot

ion

alC

onn

ecti

onw

ith

Peer

s;SB

=Se

nse

ofB

elon

gin

g;N

S=

Sati

sfac

tion

ofN

eeds

and

Opp

ortu

nit

ies

for

Invo

lvem

ent;

I=

Opp

ortu

nit

ies

for

Infl

uen

ce;L

-Par

t=L

onel

ines

sin

the

rela

tion

ship

wit

hpa

ren

ts;L

-Pee

r=

Lon

elin

ess

inth

ere

lati

onsh

ipw

ith

peer

s.

Journal of Community Psychology DOI: 10.1002/jcop

Sense of Community, Identity, and Loneliness � 423

the subscale SCG. This pattern indicates that difficulties in the relationships with peersaffect the more specific dimension of SoC related with the peer group community, butnot the larger territorial community. Moreover, Loneliness with Parents negatively corre-lated with both Commitment and Exploration dimensions, whereas Loneliness with Peersnegatively correlated with Commitment and positively with Ruminative Exploration.

In the Belgian sample, except for Ruminative Exploration, all identity dimensions cor-related significantly positively with Opportunities for Influence. Exploration in Breadthalso correlated significantly positively with the subscale NS, suggesting that the extent ofexploration is associated with the perception of the community as offering opportunitiesfor satisfying one’s needs. Peer-related Loneliness correlated negatively with all dimen-sions of SoC, indicating that, for Belgian youth, difficulties in the relationships with peersare also associated with a lower SB in the larger community. Parent-related lonelinesscorrelated negatively with four of the five SoC dimensions (i.e., not with NS). Finally,Parent-related Loneliness correlated negatively with Exploration in Breadth, whereasPeer-related Loneliness correlated positively with Ruminative Exploration.

Identity Clusters: Preliminary Analyses

To define identity statuses, we used a two-step cluster analysis procedure (Gore, 2000).4

Before conducting cluster analyses, scores on all five identity dimensions were standard-ized. In the first step, a hierarchical cluster analysis was conducted using Ward’s methodbased on squared Euclidian distances. The cluster centers obtained in the first step werethen used as starting values in the second step: the k-means cluster analyses. Differentcluster solutions were compared. On the basis of three criteria (i.e., theoretical meaning-fulness, parsimony, and explanatory power), we finally retained a 6-cluster solution for theItalian sample (see Figure 1) that strongly resembles solutions found in previous studiesthat used the same identity measure (Crocetti et al., 2011; Luyckx et al., 2008; Schwartzet al., 2011).

Achievement (12.5% of the sample) is characterized by high scores on all identitydimensions except for a medium-high score on Ruminative Exploration. Foreclosure(19.5%) is characterized by high scores on the Commitment dimensions and medium-low scores on the Exploration dimensions. Moratorium (16.1%) is characterized by highscores on all three Exploration dimensions and medium scores on the Commitmentdimensions. Troubled Diffusion (15.1%) is characterized by high scores on RuminativeExploration and low scores on the other four dimensions. Carefree Diffusion (15.9%) ischaracterized by low scores on all dimensions. Undifferentiated (20.9%) is characterizedby medium scores on all dimensions. No gender differences emerged among the sixclusters, χ2(5) = 5.613, ns. Significant differences were found according to age group,χ2(5) = 27.433, p < .001. The percentage of adolescents in the Carefree and Troubleddiffused identity statuses is higher in the younger group (22.7% and 19.7%, respectively)than in the older group (9.4% and 10.8%, respectively), whereas the percentage ofadolescents in the older age group (16.9%) is relatively more often classified in theAchievement status when compared to adolescents from the younger age group (7.9%).

Using the same procedure in the Belgian sample, we retained a 5-cluster solution (seeFigure 1) that strongly resembled the 6-cluster solution found in the Italian sample. The

4Because outliers can have an impact of the results of a cluster analysis, prior to conducting the analysis, weremoved 15 outliers.

Journal of Community Psychology DOI: 10.1002/jcop

424 � Journal of Community Psychology, May 2014

Figure 1. Cluster solution for the identity variables in the Italian and Belgian samples.Note. Mean Z-scores for Commitment Making (CM), Identification with Commitment (IC), Exploration inBreadth (EB), Exploration in Depth (ED), and Ruminative Exploration (RE).

only difference was that the Undifferentiated cluster we found in the Italian sample wasnot replicated in the Belgian sample.

The Achievement status (26.2% of the sample) is characterized by high scores onall identity dimensions except for a low score on Ruminative Exploration. Foreclosure(21.3%) is characterized by medium-high scores on the Commitment dimensions and low

Journal of Community Psychology DOI: 10.1002/jcop

Sense of Community, Identity, and Loneliness � 425

Table 2. Univariate ANOVAs and Post Hoc Cluster Comparisons for the Italian Sample

Clusters

Undifferent Moratorium ForeclosureCarefree

Diffusion AchievementTroubledDiffusion

Scale M (SD) M (SD) M (SD) M (SD) M (SD) M (SD) F-value η2

SCC 2.85 (.76)ab 2.64 (.78)ac 2.85 (.84)ab 2.78 (.67)abc 3.00 (.95)b 2.53 (.82)c 2.618* .031SCG 3.48 (.72)ab 3.55 (.68)ab 3.58 (.74)ab 3.41 (.67)ab 3.65 (.92)a 3.33 (.73)b 1.577 .019SB 3.35 (.77)ab 3.19 (.93)ab 3.34 (.88)ab 3.44 (.78)ab 3.46 (.93)a 3.13 (.79)b 1.566 .019NS 2.99 (.83)ab 2.97 (.95)ab 3.03 (.89)ab 3.18 (.73)a 3.21 (1.03)a 2.83 (.97)b 1.512 .018I 3.62 (.60)ab 3.75 (.78)bc 3.65 (.79)ab 3.42 (.64)a 3.97 (.76)c 3.56 (.67)ab 4.082** .047

Note. M = mean; SD = standard deviation; SCC = Support and Emotional Connection in the Community; SCG = Supportand Emotional Connection with Peers; SB = Sense of Belonging; NS = Satisfaction of Needs and Opportunities forInvolvement; I = Opportunities for Influence.η2 = partial eta squared; degree of freedom [df] = 5 and error df = 410 in all univariate tests. Means with the sameletter do not significantly differ (Duncan p < .05). Response scale from 0 = completely disagree, to 4 = completelyagree.*p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.

scores on the Exploration dimensions. Moratorium (24.9%) is characterized by mediumto high scores on the three Exploration dimensions and medium-low scores on the Com-mitment dimensions. Troubled Diffusion (22.2%) is characterized by high scores onRuminative Exploration and low scores on the other four dimensions. Carefree Diffusion(5.4%) is characterized by low scores on all dimensions. No gender differences emerged,χ2(4) = 6.743, ns. Significant differences were found according to age group, χ2(4) =10.357, p = .035, as adolescents from the older age group (33.6%) were relatively more of-ten classified in the Achievement status when compared to adolescents from the youngerage group (18.9%).

SoC and Identity Statuses

A one-way multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) was conducted to determine theeffects of cluster membership on SoC. In the Italian sample, the overall multivariate effect,Wilks’ λ = .90; F (25, 1509.725) = 1.81; p = .009, η2 = .022, was significant. Follow-upunivariate analyses are shown in Table 2. Adolescents in the Achievement identity statusscored higher on SCC than those in the Troubled Diffusion status. Moreover, adolescentsin the Achievement status scored higher on I over the community than adolescents in mostof the other groups, except for adolescents in the Moratorium status who scored equallyhigh as identity-achieved adolescents. Those in the Carefree Diffusion status scored thelowest. Post hoc tests further indicated higher scores in SCG and SB among adolescents inthe Achievement status versus the Troubled Diffused identity status. Finally, adolescentsin the Achievement and Carefree Diffusion statuses scored higher than adolescents in theTroubled Diffusion status on NS.

Similarly, a one-way MANOVA was conducted in the Belgian sample to determinethe effects of cluster membership on SoC. The overall multivariate effect, Wilks’ λ = .85;F (20, 697.441) = 1.71; p = .027, η2 = .039, was significant. Follow-up univariate analysesare shown in Table 3. Adolescents in the Carefree Diffusion identity status scored loweron SCC and NS than those in the other four statuses. A similar picture emerged for I,although the Carefree Diffused did not differ significantly from the Troubled Diffused onthis scale.

Journal of Community Psychology DOI: 10.1002/jcop

426 � Journal of Community Psychology, May 2014

Table 3. Univariate ANOVAs and Post Hoc Cluster Comparisons for the Belgian Sample

Clusters

Moratorium Foreclosure Carefree Diffusion Achievement Troubled DiffusionScale M (SD) M (SD) M (SD) M (SD) M (SD) F-value η2

SCC 2.07 (.99)a 2.03 (.75)a 1.52 (.88)b 2.07 (.88)a 2.13 (.85)a 1.227 .022SCG 1.87 (.97) 1.80 (1.00) 1.42 (1.05) 1.83 (.93) 1.87 (.86) .623 .012SB 2.54 (.87) 2.53 (.88) 2.44 (.60) 2.43 (.92) 2.12 (.84) 1.865 .034NS 1.92 (.90)a 1.79 (.85)a 1.18 (.78)b 1.83 (.89)a 1.86 (.90)a 1.789 .032I 2.27 (.79)a 2.15 (.61)a 1.73 (.76)b 2.26 (.67)a 1.99 (.72)ab 2.436* .044

Note. M = mean; SD = standard deviation; SCC = Support and Emotional Connection in the Community; SCG = Supportand Emotional Connection with Peers; SB = Sense of Belonging; NS = Satisfaction of Needs and Opportunities forInvolvement; I = Opportunities for Influence.η2 = partial eta squared; df = 4 and error df = 214 in all univariate tests. Means with the same letter do not significantlydiffer (Duncan p < .05). SCC = Support and emotional connection in the community.*p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.

SoC and Loneliness

To examine the unique contributions of Parent-related Loneliness and Peer-related Lone-liness to the five aspects of SoC, we ran a path model in Mplus 4.0 (Muthen & Muthen,2007). Because we estimated all possible regression paths between independent variables(i.e., the two loneliness subscales) and the dependent variables (i.e., the five SoC sub-scales), the correlation between the two loneliness subscales, and all possible correlationsamong the SoC subscales, this model was fully saturated. Thus, it had zero degrees offreedom. Therefore, no model fit statistics can be provided.

Significant paths for the Italian sample are shown in Figure 2a. All correlations amongindependent and dependent variables were also significant, but to keep the figure read-able, the magnitude of these correlations is not shown. Figure 2a shows that Parenty-related Loneliness was a unique, negative predictor of SB, NS, and I. Peer-related Loneli-ness was a unique, negative predictor of SCG.

Significant paths for the Belgian sample are shown in Figure 2b. All correlationsamong independent and dependent variables were significant, but to keep the figurereadable, the magnitude of these correlations again is not shown. Figure 2b shows thatParent-related Loneliness was a unique negative predictor of SB. Peer-related Lonelinesswas a unique negative predictor of SCC, SCG, NS, and I.

DISCUSSION

The present study examined young people’s appraisals of their residential communityand feelings of belonging toward it (SoC) and the relations between SoC and identityformation processes and loneliness with parents and peers. In the existing literature,limited attention has been devoted to the analysis of developmental processes in the ex-perience and construction of SoC. Moreover, the few studies examining SoC in relation toloneliness have generally treated the latter as an outcome indicator of mental health andhave not considered how loneliness within parent and peer relationships, as indicatorsof insufficient social competences for negotiating adolescents’ emotional and materialneeds, may potentially influence their appraisals and orientation toward the larger net-work of relationships within their community (Chipuer, 2001). Hypotheses were tested on

Journal of Community Psychology DOI: 10.1002/jcop

Sense of Community, Identity, and Loneliness � 427

-.19***

-.16**

-.21***

-.36***

-.36***

-.22*

-.34**

-.26**

-.27**

Loneliness Parents

SB

SCG

Loneliness Peers

SCC

NS

I

Loneliness Parents

SB

SCG

Loneliness Peers

SCC

NS

I

B

-.19***

-.16**

-.21***

-.36***

Loneliness Parents

SB

SCG

Loneliness Peers

SCC

NS

I

A

Figure 2. Path model with parent-related loneliness and peer-related loneliness as independent variables andfive sense of community subscales as independent variables for the Italian sample (Figure 2a) and the Belgiansample (Figure 2b).

Journal of Community Psychology DOI: 10.1002/jcop

428 � Journal of Community Psychology, May 2014

adolescents from two European countries to ascertain cross-national and cross-culturalreplicability, and to follow the call toward greater attention to the effect of contextualfactors on adolescent development (Crocetti et al., 2012).

First, we should mention that the instruments used to measure the key constructsinvestigated (SoC, identity, and loneliness) showed adequate validity and cross-nationalreplicability. In addition, the pattern of gender and age differences previously reportedin the literature is mostly confirmed by our data (for SoC, e.g., Chiessi et al., 2010;Cicognani, Albanesi, & Zani, 2008; for identity, e.g., Crocetti et al., 2011; for loneliness,e.g., DiTommaso et al., 2005).

SoC and Identity Formation

Results from both Italian and Belgian samples suggest that the more adolescents developfirm and sustained commitments, the more they develop positive feelings toward theresidential community and a sense of belonging toward it. Across both samples, the di-mension that was consistently correlated with identity processes is I, thus suggesting thatthe capacity to form commitments enhances adolescents’ feelings that they can poten-tially influence their community. This finding is consistent with Crocetti et al.’s (2012)results, which indicated that identity-achieved individuals displayed higher levels of civicinvolvement in the community. In the Italian sample, especially adolescents classified inthe Achieved status, showed significantly higher scores on all SoC dimensions, particularlywhen compared to those in the Troubled and Carefree Diffusion statuses.

In the Belgian sample, especially adolescents in the Diffused statuses (particularlyCarefree Diffusion, showing lowest levels in all identity dimensions) differed significantlyfrom the other groups reporting the lowest SoC scores. It seems therefore that, for Belgianyouth, it is important that identity formation processes at least start to develop a morecomplex appraisal and stronger emotional bonds toward their community, whereas Italianyouth need to reach the Achievement status to accomplish this goal. This finding resonateswith the particular condition of long-term dependence on the family typical of mostItalian youths (cf. Menniti et al. 2000). In other words, culturally shared expectations ofreliance on the family until young people reach complete autonomy (in the material andrelational sense) seem to complicate the developmental task of “breaking the umbilicalcord,” requiring youth to make choices and develop commitments toward them.

Overall, findings from both samples show that SoC with reference to the home townis lower among youth in less advanced identity statuses. In the literature, there is evidencethat the way some adolescents deal with identity formation can be associated with problembehaviors (e.g., Meeus, 2011). Even though more supportive evidence is needed, thisfinding suggests that identity formation may mediate the negative relationships betweenSoC and problem behaviors (Fisher et al., 2002).

SoC and Loneliness

Results confirmed the negative association between SoC and loneliness found in previousstudies (Pretty et al., 1996). The present study expands on these findings, as parent-and peer-related loneliness differentially predicted Italian and Belgian adolescents’ SoC.The stronger predictive role of loneliness with parents in the Italian sample indicates thatadolescents’ social competences in negotiating their emotional and material needs withinthe family enhance feelings of membership toward the community, as well as perceptionsthat they can find satisfaction of their needs and opportunities for having an influence.

Journal of Community Psychology DOI: 10.1002/jcop

Sense of Community, Identity, and Loneliness � 429

This finding is consistent with the strong importance of family relationships in the Italianculture and suggests that the family, more than peers, plays a central mediating functionin the relationship of young people with the community. For these youths, the peergroup (i.e., the more typical groups attended by youth in Italy) seems to act as a (self-centered) “container” for sharing interests and experiences, instead of a socializationagent preparing them to take on adult roles and responsibilities.

Among Belgian youth, loneliness with peers reduces SoC, indicating that adolescents’social competences to satisfy their emotional needs within peer relationships and thequality of peer relationships play a more crucial role in the construction of SB in thecommunity. This finding seems consistent with cultural expectations for adolescents,which emphasize, especially in northern countries, the development of self-reliance andautonomy, making relationships with peers and other adults (vs. parents) more crucial asa mediating structure for the development of feelings of membership toward the largercommunity. More information on the characteristics of peer groups, their activities, andorientation to the community is needed to further clarify such differential functions ofthe peer group in the two countries. In both groups, low levels of loneliness towardparents enhanced sense of belonging towards in the residential community, and lowerlevels of loneliness in relationships with peers enhanced emotional connection with thepeer group in the community. However, results also indicate a differential function ofparents versus peers in the development of SoC.

Some limitations of the study should be acknowledged. The measures used are basedon self-reports by participants: the possibility to also include other assessments of theconstructs investigated (e.g., ratings from parents and peers) would be important tostrengthen the findings. In this paper, we present cross-national comparisons based ononly two countries. Even though Italy and Belgium can be considered fairly representativeof Southern and Northern European cultures (cf, also Claes, 1998), testing the associationsamong SoC, identity, and loneliness across a larger number of coutries in Europe andbeyond, would be needed to draw firmer conclusions. Another limitation of the study is itscross-sectional approach. The differences obtained between age groups and the patternof associations between identity statuses and SoC suggest that interesting findings mightemerge by adopting a longitudinal approach, which is capable of disentangling the causalrelationships between the constructs. This would be particularly innovative because thedevelopment of SoC has not yet been examined longitudinally.

CONCLUSION

This study offers some significant and innovative contributions to the study of adoles-cent development within residential contexts by connecting previously separate lines ofresearch on SoC, identity formation, and loneliness. First, from a methodological pointof view, the study also provides evidence of the validity of the SoC-A scale in the Belgiancontext, and further confirms the cross-national factorial invariance of the DIDS and theLACA scale across the two countries. Second, it provides consistent evidence, across twonational contexts, of the relationship of SoC with both identity formation processes andloneliness toward parents and peers, shedding more light on the intersection betweendevelopmental processes and social relationships within different ecological contexts.Moreover, the differences found in the patterns of associations between the variablesfurther illuminate the role of the contexts pointing to the effect of relevant social andcultural differences between the two countries in the roles of peer groups and the family.

Journal of Community Psychology DOI: 10.1002/jcop

430 � Journal of Community Psychology, May 2014

REFERENCES

Albanesi, C., Cicognani, E., & Zani, B. (2007). Civic involvement, sense of community and socialwell being in adolescence. Journal of Community and Applied Social Psychology, 17, 387–406.doi:10.1002/casp.903.

Bosma, H. A. (1985). Identity development in adolescents: Coping with commitments. Unpublisheddoctoral dissertation. University of Groningen, The Netherlands.

Chen, F. F. (2007). Sensitivity of goodness of fit indexes to lack of measurement invariance. StructuralEquation Modeling, 14, 464–504. doi:10.1080/10705510701301834

Cheung, G. W., & Rensvold, R. B. (2002). Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for testing measurementinvariance. Structural Equation Modeling, 9, 233–255. doi:10.1207/S15328007SEM0902_5

Chiessi, M., Cicognani, E., & Sonn, C. C. (2010). Assessing sense of community on adolescents:Validating the brief scale of sense of community in adolescents (SOC-A). Journal of CommunityPsychology, 38, 276–292. doi:10.1002/jcop.20364

Chipuer, H. M. (2001). Dyadic attachments and community connectedness: Links with youths’loneliness experiences. Journal of Community Psychology, 29, 429–446. doi:10.1002/jcop.1027

Chipuer, H. M., Pretty, G. H., Delorey, E., Miller, M., Powers, T., Rumstein, O., et al. (1999). Theneighborhood youth inventory: Development and validation. Journal of Community & AppliedSocial Psychology, 9, 335–368.

Cicognani, E., Albanesi, C., & Zani, B. (2006). Il senso di comunita in adolescenza: Uno strumentodi misura [Sense of community in adolescence: a measurement instrument]. Bollettino diPsicologia Applicata, 250, 13–30.

Cicognani, E., Albanesi, C., & Zani, B. (2008). The impact of residential context on adolescents’ andyoung adults’ well being. Journal of Community and Applied Social Psychology, 18, 558–575.doi:10.1002/casp.972

Claes, M. (1998). Adolescents’ closeness with parents, siblings, and friends in three coun-tries: Canada, Belgium and Italy. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 27, 2, 165–184.doi:10.1023/A:1021611728880

Crocetti, E., Jahromi, P., & Meeus, W. (2012). Identity and civic engagement in adolescence. Journalof Adolescence, 35, 521–532. doi:10.1016/j.adolescence.2011.08.003

Crocetti, E., Luyckx, K., Scrignaro, M., & Sica, L. S. (2011). Identity formation in Italian emergingadults: A cluster-analytic approach and associations with psychosocial functioning. EuropeanJournal of Developmental Psychology, 8, 558–572. doi:10.1080/17405629.2011.576858

Crocetti, E., Schwartz, S. J., Fermani, A., Klimstra, T., & Meeus, W. (2012). A cross-national study ofidentity status in Dutch and Italian adolescents: Status distributions and correlates. EuropeanPsychologist, 17, 171–181. doi:10.1027/1016-9040/a000076

Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and theself-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11, 227–268. doi:1449618

DiTommaso, E., Brannen, C., & Burgess, M. (2005). The universality of relationship characteristics:A cross-cultural comparison of different types of attachment and loneliness in Canadian andvisiting Chinese students. Social Behavior and Personality, 33, 57–67. doi:209824438.

Eccles, J. S., & Roeser, R. W. (2011). School and community influences on human development.In M. E. Lamb & M. H. Bornstein (Eds.), Social and personality development: An advancedtextbook (pp. 361–433). New York, NY: Psychology Press.

Erikson, E. (1968). Identity, youth and crisis. New York, NY: Norton.Evans, S. D. (2007). Youth sense of community: Voice and power in community contexts. Journal

of Community Psychology, 35, 693–709. doi:10.1002/jcop.20173Fisher, A. T., Sonn, C. C., & Bishop, B. (Eds.) (2002). Psychological sense of community: Research,

applications, and implications. New York, NY: Plenum.

Journal of Community Psychology DOI: 10.1002/jcop

Sense of Community, Identity, and Loneliness � 431

Goossens, L. (2006). Emotion, affect, and loneliness in adolescence. In S. Jackson & L.Goossens (Eds.), Handbook of adolescent development (pp. 51–70). Hove, UK: PsychologyPress.

Goossens, L., Lasgaard, M., Luyckx, K., Vanhalst, J., Mathias, S., & Masy, E. (2009). Loneliness andsolitude in adolescence: A confirmatory factor analysis of alternative models. Personality andIndividual Differences, 47, 890–894. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2009.07.011

Gore, P. A., Jr. (2000). Cluster analysis. In H. E. A. Tinsley & S. D. Brown (Eds.), Handbookof applied multivariate statistics and mathematical modeling (pp. 297–321). San Diego, CA:Academic Press.

Klimstra, T. A., Crocetti, E., Hale, W. W., Fermani, A., & Meeus, W. H. J. (2011). Big five personalitydimensions in Italian and Dutch adolescents: A cross-cultural comparison of mean levels, sexdifferences, and associations with internalizing symptoms. Journal of Research in Personality,45, 285–296. doi:10.1016/j.jrp.2011.03.002

Klimstra, T. A., Hale, W. W., Raaijmakers, Q. A. W., Branje, S. J. T., & Meeus, W. H. J. (2010). Identityformation in adolescence: Change or stability? Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 39, 150–162.

Kline, R. B. (2006). Principles and practices of structural equation modeling (2nd ed.). New York,NY: Guilford Press.

Lasgaard, M., Goossens, L., Bramsen, R. H., Trillingsgaard, T., & Elklit, A. (2011). Different formsof loneliness are associated with different forms of psychopathology in adolescence. Journal ofResearch in Personality, 45, 233–237. doi:10.1016/j.jrp.2010.12.005

Leventhal, T., & Brooks-Gunn, J. (2000). The neighborhoods they live in: The effects of neighbor-hood residence upon child and adolescent outcomes. Psychological Bulletin, 126, 309–337.doi:10.1037//0033-2909.126.2.309

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

Luyckx, K., Schwartz, S. J., Berzonsky, M. D., Soenens, B., Vansteenkiste, M., Smits, I., &Goossens, L. (2008). Capturing ruminative exploration: Extending the four-dimensional modelof identity formation in late adolescence. Journal of Research in Personality, 42, 58–82.doi:10.1016/j.jrp.2007.04.004

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

Marcoen A., & Goossens, L. (1993). Loneliness, attitude toward aloneness, and solitude: Age differ-ences and developmental significance during adolescence. In S. Jackson & H. Rodriguez-Tome(Eds.), Adolescence and its social worlds (pp. 197–227). Hove, UK: Erlbaum.

Marcoen, A., Goossens, L., & Caes, P. (1987). Loneliness in pre-through late adolescence: Exploringthe contributions of a multidimensional approach. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 16, 561–576.

McMillan, D. W., & Chavis, D. M. (1986). Sense of community: A definition and theory. Journal ofCommunity Psychology, 14, 6–23. doi:10.1002/1520-6629

Meeus, W. (2011). The study of adolescent identity formation 2000–2010: A review of longitudinal re-search. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 21, 75–94. doi:10.1111/j.1532-7795.2010.00716.x

Meeus, W. H. J., Iedema, J., Helsen, M., & Vollebergh, W. (1999). Patterns of adolescent identitydevelopment: Review of literature and longitudinal analysis. Developmental Review, 19, 419–461. doi:10.1006/drev.1999.0483

Melotti, G., Corsano, P., Majorano, M., & Scarpuzzi, P. (2006). An Italian application of the LouvainLoneliness scale for Children and Adolescents (LLCA). TPM: Testing Psicometria Metodologia,13, 237–255.

Menniti, A., Misiti, M., & Savioli, M. (2000). Italian stay at home children: Attitudes and constraints.Rome, Italy: Institute for Population Research/National Research Council.

Journal of Community Psychology DOI: 10.1002/jcop

432 � Journal of Community Psychology, May 2014

Muthen, L. K., & Muthen, B. O. (2007). Mplus user’s guide (4th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Muthen &Muthen.

Pretty, G. M. H. (2002). Young people’s development of the community-minded self: Consideringcommunity identity, community attachment and Sense of Community. In T. Fisher & C. C.Sonn (Eds.), Psychological sense of community: Research, applications, and implications (pp.183–203). New York, NY: Kluwer Academic/Plenum.

Pretty, G. M. H., Conroy, C., Dugay, J., Fowler, K., & Williams, D. (1996). Sense of communityand its relevance to adolescents of all ages. Journal of Community Psychology, 24, 365–379.doi:10.1002/(SICI)1520-6629

Russell, D., Peplau, L. A., & Cutrona, C. E. (1980). The Revised UCLA Loneliness Scale: Concurrentand discriminant validity evidence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 1313–1321.

Schwartz, S. J., Beyers, W., Luyckx, K., Soenens, B., Zamboanga, B. L., Forthun, L. F., . . . Waterman,A. S. (2011). Examining the light and dark sides of emerging adults’ identity: A study ofidentity status differences in positive and negative psychosocial functioning. Journal of Youthand Adolescence, 40, 839–59. doi:10.1007/s10964-010-9606-6

Vandenberg, R. J., & Lance, C. E. (2000). A review and synthesis of the measurement invarianceliterature: Suggestions, practices, and recommendations for organizational research. Organi-zational Research Methods, 3, 4–70.

Journal of Community Psychology DOI: 10.1002/jcop