- Conference Theme
- Organising Committee
- Review Committee
- Conference Proceedings
- Grant & Scholarship Recipients
“Identity: Personalising & Situating Psychology”
March 22–25, 2017 | Art Center Kobe, Kobe, Japan
The study of Identity in Psychology was pioneered by Erik Erikson in his early work in the 1950s and 60s, such as Identity: Youth and Crisis and Identity and the Life Cycle. He looked at three aspects of identity – ego identity, personal identity and social identity. Developing a strong sense of ego identity, a coherent sense of who one is and isn’t, that is consistent and stable over time, is a key task in adolescence. Ego identity can also be equated with the personality level of identity. One’s personal identity is based on one’s abilities, goals and possibilities for the future and can be seen as the level of identity influenced most by one’s primary relationships while one’s social identity is formed through identification with groups or secondary relationships, and shows one’s position within the social structure.
In most societies in the past, forming an identity – a self-definition within a community – was a straightforward process. People adopted roles that were already decided for them by their family and their community. In most modern global societies today the possibilities, choices and dilemmas young people face make this process of identity formation much less simple.
This partly explains the explosion of studies on Identity in Psychology since Erikson’s day. This has happened within all areas of psychology and has also incorporated theoretical ideas from sociology. In one sense, this integration of the Identity or Self with diverse areas of psychology has helped to personalise these areas of study by focusing on the whole person with their contradictions and complexities with specific contexts and relationships.
The Organising Committee of The Asian Conference on Psychology & the Behavioral Sciences (ACP) is composed of distinguished academics who are experts in their fields. Organising Committee members may also be members of IAFOR's International Academic Advisory Board. The Organising Committee is responsible for nominating and vetting Keynote and Featured Speakers; developing the conference programme, including special workshops, panels, targeted sessions, etc.; event outreach and promotion; recommending and attracting future Organising Committee members; working with IAFOR to select PhD students and early career academics for IAFOR-funded grants and scholarships; and oversee the reviewing of abstracts submitted to the conference.
- Professor Abdulaziz Malik, University of Khartoum, Sudan
- Professor Abhishek Goel, Indian Institute of Management Calcutta, India
- Professor Frieda Mangunsong, Universitas Indonesia, Indonesia
- Dr Hui-Wen Chen, Chang Jung Christian University, Taiwan
- Dr Marco Vassallo, Council For Agricultural Research and Economics, Italy
- Dr Miyako Kimura, St. Marianna University School of Medicine, Japan
- Dr Yoshihiko Yamamoto, Shizuoka University, Japan
IAFOR's peer review process, which involves both reciprocal review and the use of Review Committees, is overseen by conference Organising Committee members under the guidance of the Academic Governing Board. Review Committee members are established academics who hold PhDs or other terminal degrees in their fields and who have previous peer review experience.
If you would like to apply to serve on the ACP Review Committee, please send your CV to firstname.lastname@example.org.
Stuart D. B. Picken Grant & Scholarship Recipient
Chulalongkorn University, Thailand
Wachrapong Foophrateepsiri is currently a postgraduate student of counselling and clinical psychology at the Faculty of Psychology, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand. He earned a bachelor’s degree in industrial engineering from Chulalongkorn University. Later, he became interested in the field of psychology and wanted to become a counselling psychologist. His research interests are in couple relationships, cognitive behavioural therapy, and existential-humanistic therapy. Currently, he is doing an internship at the Center for Psychological Wellness Services, Chulalongkorn University, the very first university-based psychological centre in Thailand.
The Relationships Among Couple Bond, Family Responsibility, and Couple Satisfaction in Thai Couples
With an increased number of couple relationship problems within Thailand, it becomes necessary to find ways to enhance these relationships. One such way is to clarify the expectation that the partners have regarding their relationships, or relationship standards. These standards are generally viewed as relevant to two domains: 1) couple bond and 2) family responsibility (Hiew, Halford, Liu & van de Vijver, 2015). Couple bond involves behaviour that facilitates emotional closeness and communicates caring within the couple, whereas family responsibility involves representing the partner’s and family’s face and maintaining relationship harmony with the partner's extended family. This research study hence aims to examine how relationship standards are associated with couple satisfaction in Thai couples. How the association is manifested in males and females will be compared. Data was collected from 260 Thai individuals who had been in intimate relationships for at least a year (aged 18–40 years). Participants responded to relevant measures. Multiple Regression Analysis was conducted. Findings suggested that, for male participants, couple bond and family responsibility are significantly and positively correlated with couple satisfaction (r=.51, p<.01 and r=.48, p<.01 respectively) and accounted for 26% of the total variance of couple satisfaction (R2=.264, p<.001). In their female counterparts, the two factors significantly and positively correlated with couple satisfaction (r=.32, p.01 and r=.74, p<.01 respectively) and accounted for 10% of its total variance (R2=.104, p<.01). Findings were discussed in terms of research contribution and clinical implication in couple relationship enhancement.