Like many other psychological traits, the simplest way to measure your level of identification is by assessing to what extent you agree to some strongly correlated statements.
Since overidentification is, to the best of my knowledge, a novel concept, the only correlative data to work with is that from my own experience. Naturally, this limits the test’s assessment potential, and consequently the reliability of the results.
Scoring convention
The identification test consists of 10 statements that present a particular symptom of identification (see below for a further elaboration for each statement). How often a person feels he or she identifies with that statement is expected to provide a useful quantitative measure of that person’s susceptibility to (over)identification.
Identification, as explained in my other article, is not necessarily a bad thing. It is through identification that we manifest our ability to empathize with others and to navigate ourselves successfully in a social environment. The issue arises when the identification with others persistently overrides our own feelings, and consequently our needs. Or alternatively, when we lack the ability to identify with others altogether.
The below graph illustrates the dominance of the selfconsciousness for different proportions of otherconsciousness (see the background article for an explanation of these concepts). A low degree of selfconsciousness implies a high degree of otherconsciousness and vice versa. At the middle point, the otherconsciousness is, on average, dominant just as often as the selfconsciousness.
This graph is useful, as it allows us to imagine some critical regions.
Above the middle-point, we find the region where the otherconsciousness is dominant most of the time. This means that our decisions are predominantly influenced by our construct of the other in our mind. Given that self-care should be our first priority, residing in the region would range from undesirable (near the middle-point) toward problematic or critical at the outer end.
Below the middle point, we find the space in which the selfconsciousness is dominant, but the otherconsciousness might play an (increasingly diminishing) role. At the outer end, we find another critical point. Located in this area we find the person that has very little capacity for mentally conceiving the other person’s point-of-view. Ultimately, we could imagine here the sociopath, who lacks any capacity for empathy.
Accurately defining critical regions would require extensive clinical study. However, based on the aforementioned I will conceive 5 regions of interest, shown in the graph below.
- Problematic underidentification → never identifying with others
- Undesirable underidentification → rarely identifying with others
- Desirable → sometimes identifying with others
- Undesirable overidentification → often identifying with others
- Problematic overidentification → almost always identifying with others
What discerns the undesirable from the problematic region is that in the former case, the degree of identification does not necessarily disrupt one’s life.
Questions and scores
As mentioned before I have conceived 10 statements to assess a person’s identification score. By selecting how often the respondent feels the statement applies to his or her situation, we can calculate an aggregate identification score. Here, it is assumed that for each statement, the prior scale applies, i.e.:
- Statement ‘x’ never applies: problematic
- Statement ‘x’ rarely applies: undesirable
- Statement ‘x’ sometimes applies: desirable
- Statement ‘x’ often applies: undesirable
- Statement ‘x’ almost always applies: problematic
By using multiple statements and an aggregate score, we avoid situations where an outlier in one particular statement could disproportionately affect the result.
The statements in question are the following:
I perform much worse at things I’m usually good at when people are watching.
When other people are watching you do something and you spend part of your mental capacity on conceiving how you are perceived to perform, this capacity can no longer be used to the performance itself. Hence, the quality of your performance is negatively affected.
In social situations, it feels as if I am no longer in control of what I say or do.
When you identify with someone else, your actions are dictated by what you think they want them to be. You may later look back and think: “why did I do x?” or “why didn’t I say y?” when this is what you would—in hindsight—have said or done.
I’m greatly affected by the mood of people or groups with which I interact.
When you identify with someone, you mentally put yourself in their shoes. As such, you will end up mirroring their mood.
I’m constantly trying to assess how I appear to others.
Identifying with someone means to look at yourself through the other person’s eyes. Since we virtually all have a desire to be liked, we may become obsessed with how we think we appear to others.
I tend to move to the background in social situations where many others are involved.
Social interactions, especially with multiple and unfamiliar people, are very tiring to me.
These two statements emphasize how identifying with many people at once (I) requires a lot of brain power and energy, and (II) greatly constrains your behavioral freedom—the more people you are with, the higher the chance one of them find your behavior appalling.
I tear up when someone else cries, even when it is played (e.g. in a movie).
Identification is not limited to other people in the physical realm. When you have a high degree of identification, the mirroring behavior from (3) also occurs with strong emotions of others in a movie or play.
I find it hard to access my own needs and feelings when I am with others.
Devoting mental capacity to the otherconsciousness means that you have less resources available to observe your own feelings. As such, your needs may end up being neglected.
In social situations, I become a watered-down version of who I really am.
This is basically a consequence of many of the aforementioned. When you strongly identify, you may feel stale, like you lack authenticity or identity when you’re with others.
I never feel free and loose, my body is always under some kind of tension.
A consequence of the behavior-controlling aspect of identification keeps your body in some form of captivity. This will be experienced as constant stiffness or strain.
This whole test is a work-in-progress and as of yet solely based on personal experience. Please do not hesitate to share your feedback so that clarity and accuracy can be improved!
