Theories of youth development often focus on the formation of identity as a central theme. In Erikson (1968[8]), a classic theory of developmental stages, for example, identity formation was highlighted as a primary indicator of puberty success (unlike role confusion, which would be an indicator of the non-success of the task of adolescence). Marcia (1966[9]) described the formation of identification at puberty as decision-making points and ideologie obligations (. B for example, religion, politics) and professions. He described four statutes of identity: silos, the dissemination of identity, the moratorium and the realization of identity. Separation occurs when a person agrees to identify himself without exploring options. Identity decryption occurs when young people are markers of identity or commit to identities. The moratorium is a country in which young people are actively looking for options but have not yet made commitments. Identity success occurs when individuals have explored different options and then made identity commitments.

Based on this work, other researchers have studied more specific aspects of identity. For example, Phinney (1989[10]) proposed a model for the development of ethnic identity, including stages of unexplored ethnic identity, ethnic identity and affected ethnic identity. Descriptible statistics, including correlations, are presented in Table 1 for parent-youth models. The correlations to order zero were in the expected directions. It is important that symptoms of youthful social anxiety and parental intrusion have been associated with parental-youth hostility in data collection waves. With respect to the problem-solving context of the parent-youth-enmity composite observational component, the most frequently discussed family topics in Grades 6, 7 and 8 were family disagreements over chores at home, children fighting with each other, and attitudes and/or respect among family members. This pattern of development and system can be edifying when young people are between the age of 12 and 13 (i.e. grade 7), in part because of changes in the transformation in young people`s aspirations for greater autonomy and a greater need for appropriate family differentiation (Laursen-Collins, 2009). For Grade 7 youth, greater parental intrusion may constitute disrespect and violations of adolescent boundaries with respect to their emotional independence (Barber et al., 2012). Adolescents are therefore likely to refuse parental intrusion, which may manifest as a growing hostility towards parents during Grade 8 (Smetana- Gaines, 1999). This finding is consistent with previous cross-sectional research that found that higher parental intrusion was associated with greater parental-youth indispacity (Hawk et al., 2009) and expressed anger (Smetana- Gaines, 1999). However, contrary to the results of the current study, Steeger and Gondoli (2013) found no significant link between intrusive parenting of mothers in 7th grade and mother-youth conflict in 8th grade.

These conflicting results may be due to differences in measurement methods and denreporters.