Stets and Burke - Identity Theory and Social Identity Theory 2000 PDF

Identity Theory and Social Identity Theory Author(s): Jan E. Stets and Peter J. Burke Source: Social Psychology Quarterly , Sep., 2000, Vol. 63, No. 3 (Sep., 2000), pp. 224-237 Published by: American Sociological Association Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/2695870 JSTOR is a not-for-profi...

Identity Theory and Social Identity Theory Author(s): Jan E. Stets and Peter J. Burke Source: Social Psychology Quarterly , Sep., 2000, Vol. 63, No. 3 (Sep., 2000), pp. 224-237 Published by: American Sociological Association Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/2695870 JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at https://about.jstor.org/terms American Sociological Association is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Social Psychology Quarterly This content downloaded from 154.59.124.213 on Mon, 02 Sep 2024 08:24:47 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms  Social Psychology Quarterly 2000, Vol. 63, No. 3,224-237 Identity Theory and Social Identity Theory* JAN E. STETS PETER J. BURKE Washington State University In social psychology, we need to establish a general theory of the self which can attend to both macro and micro processes, and which avoids the redundancies of separate the- ories on different aspects of the self For this purpose, we present core components of identity theory and social identity theory and argue that although differences exist between the two theories, they are more differences in emphasis than in kind, and that linking the two theories can establish a more fully integrated view of the self The core components we examine include the different bases of identity (category/group or role) in each of the theories, identity salience and the activation of identities as discussed in the theories, and the cognitive and motivational processes that emerge from identities based on category/group and on role. By examining the self through the lens of both identity theory and social identity theory, we see how, in combination, they can move us toward a general theory of the self In contrast to Hogg and his colleagues ories. The third area involves the core (Hogg, Terry, and White 1995), we see sub- processes that arise once an identity is acti- stantial similarities and overlap between vated. In this regard we discuss the cognitive social identity theory and identity theory. Weprocesses of depersonalization (in social think that this overlap ultimately will cause identity theory) and self-verification (in iden- these theories to be linked in fundamental tity theory) as well as the motivational ways, though we do not think that time has processes of self-esteem (in social identity come. To show how such a merger is possible, theory) and self-efficacy (in identity theory). we outline some important similarities For those less familiar with social identi- between the theories; at the same time we ty theory and identity theory, we begin with a note the differences in language, orientation, brief review of the concept of identity as used and coverage of the two theories as they cur- in both theories. Then we review the theories rently exist.' on the points identified above, with a focus We believe that three areas are central to on identifying the ways in which each might linking the two theories. First are the differ- reinforce and complement the other. To out- ent bases of identity in the two theories: cate- line identity in the two theories, we first dis- gories or groups for social identity theory, cuss how each theory conceptualizes the self. and roles for identity theory. A related issue is the place of person identities. The second THE CONCEPT OF IDENTITY area is the activation of identities and the In social identity theory and identity t concept of salience as used in each of the the- ory, the self is reflexive in that it can take itself as an object and can categorize, classify, * An earlier version of this paper was presented at the 1998 meetings of the American Sociological or name itself in particular ways in relation to Association, held in San Francisco. We wish to thank other social categories or classifications. This members of the Social Psychology Graduate Training process is called self-categorization in social Seminar in the Department of Sociology at identity theory (Turner, Hogg, Oakes, Washington State University for their helpful com- ments on an earlier version of this paper. Direct all Reicher, and Wetherell 1987); in identity the- correspondence to Jan E. Stets, Department of ory it is called identification (McCall and Sociology, Washington State University, Pullman, WA Simmons 1978). Through the process of self- 99164-4020; e-mail [email protected]. 1 We recognize that this goal is a moving target categorization or identification, an identity is because both theories are under active development. formed. 224 This content downloaded from 154.59.124.213 on Mon, 02 Sep 2024 08:24:47 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms  IDENTITY THEORY AND SOCIAL IDENTITY THEORY 225 In social identity theory, a social identity uals are born into an already structured soci- is a person's knowledge that he or she ety. Once in society, people derive their identi- belongs to a social category or group (Hogg ty or sense of self largely from the social and Abrams 1988). A social group is a set of categories to which they belong. Each person, individuals who hold a common social identi- however, over the course of his or her person- fication or view themselves as members of al history, is a member of a unique combina- the same social category. Through a social tion of social categories; therefore the set of comparison process, persons who are similar social identities making up that person's self- to the self are categorized with the self and concept is unique. are labeled the in-group; persons who differ In identity theory, self-categorization is from the self are categorized as the out- equally relevant to the formation of one's group. In early work, social identity included identity, in which categorization depends the emotional, evaluative, and other psycho- upon a named and classified world (Stryker logical correlates of in-group classification 1980). Among the class terms learned within a (Turner et al. 1987:20). Later researchers culture are symbols that are used to designate often separated the self-categorization com- positions-the relatively stable, morphologi- ponent from the self-esteem (evaluative) and cal components of social structure that are commitment (psychological) components in termed roles. Thus, like social identity theory, order to empirically investigate the relation- identity theory deals principally with the com- ships among them (Ellemers and Van ponents of a structured society. Persons acting Knippenberg 1997). in the context of social structure name one The two important processes involved in another and themselves in the sense of recog- social identity formation, namely self-catego- nizing one another as occupants of positions rization and social comparison, produce dif- (roles). This naming invokes meanings in the ferent consequences (Hogg and Abrams form of expectations with regard to others' 1988). The consequence of self-categoriza- and one's own behaviors (McCall and tion is an accentuation of the perceived simi- Simmons 1978; Stryker 1980). larities between the self and other in-group In identity theory, the core of an identity members, and an accentuation of the per- is the categorization of the self as an occu- ceived differences between the self and out- pant of a role, and the incorporation, into the group members. This accentuation occurs for self, of the meanings and expectations associ- all the attitudes, beliefs and values, affective ated with that role and its performance reactions, behavioral norms, styles of speech, (Burke and Tully 1977; Thoits 1986). These and other properties that are believed to be expectations and meanings form a set of stan- correlated with the relevant intergroup cate- dards that guide behavior (Burke 1991; gorization. The consequence of the social Burke and Reitzes 1981). In addition, as comparison process is the selective applica- McCall and Simmons (1978) make clear, the tion of the acceiituation effect, primarily tonaming within identity theory includes all the those dimensions that will result in self- things (including self and other) that take on meaning in relation to our plans and activi- enhancing outcomes for the self. Specifically, ties. More recently, identity theorists have one' s self-esteem is enhanced by evaluating the in-group and the out-group on dimen- drawn on this meaningful relationship sions that lead the in-group to be judged pos- between persons and things to incorporate itively and the out-group to be judged the concept of resources (things that sustain negatively. persons and interactions) as a central compo- As Hogg and Abrams (1988) make clear, nent in identity processes (Freese and Burke the social categories in which individuals place 1994). Much of the meaningful activity within themselves are parts of a structured society a role that is governed by an identity revolves and exist only in relation to other contrasting around the control of resources (Burke categories (for example, black vs. white); each 1997); this feature as much as anything, has more or less power, prestige, status, and so defines social structure. on. Further, these authors point out that the In general, one's identities are composed social categories precede individuals; individ- of the self-views that emerge from the reflex- This content downloaded from 154.59.124.213 on Mon, 02 Sep 2024 08:24:47 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms 226 SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY QUARTERLY ive activity of self-categorization or identifica- group members and out-group members are tion in terms of membership in particular enhanced and are made more homogeneous groups or roles. Thus, although the basis of by identification with the in-group (Haslam, self-classification is different in the two theo- Oakes, McGarty, Turner, Reynolds, and ries (group/category versus role), theorists in Eggins 1996). Similarly, others have found both traditions recognize that individuals view strong evidence that group identification themselves in terms of meanings imparted by influences the view of the self as prototypical a structured society (McCall and Simmons in the group (Hogg and Hardie 1992). Still 1978; Stryker 1980; Turner et al. 1987). The others have found that in-group homogene- bases of identity constitute the first area relat- ity is especially strong when no motivational ed to linking these two theories. forces exist to distinguish the self from others within the group (Brewer 1993; Simon, THE BASES OF IDENTITY Pantaleo, and Mummendey 1995).3 Along attitudinal lines, people uniformly Much of social identity theory deals with make positive evaluations of a group, when intergroup relations-that is, how people they become group members. For example, come to see themselves as members of one social identity researchers have found that group/category (the in-group) in comparison individuals who identify with the group feel a with another (the out-group), and the conse- strong attraction to the group as a whole, inde- quences of this categorization, such as ethno- pendent of individual attachments within the centrism (Turner et al. 1987). Here, however, group (Hogg and Hardie 1992). Similarly, oth- we address the view of social identity on what ers have found that in-group identification occurs when one becomes an in-group mem- leads to greater commitment to the group and ber; and later we compare this with the view to less desire to leave the group, even when of identity theory on what occurs when one the group's status is relatively low (Ellemers, takes on a role. Spears, and Doosje 1997). Having a particular social identity means Finally, people behave in concert within a being at one with a certain group, being like group with which they identify. Even in a others in the group, and seeing things from the low-status minority group, for example, indi- group's perspective.2 In contrast, having a par- viduals who use the group label to describe ticular role identity means acting to fulfill the themselves are more likely than not to partic- expectations of the role, coordinating and ipate in the group's culture, to distinguish negotiating interaction with role partners, and themselves from the out-group, and to show manipulating the environment to control the attraction to the group in their behavior resources for which the role has responsibility. (Ethier and Deaux 1994; Ullah 1987). Herein lies an important distinction between Similarly, groupthink or extreme concur- group- and role-based identities: the basis of rence in decision-making groups is much social identity is in the uniformity of percep- more likely under conditions of high social tion and action among group members, while identification (Turner, Pratkanis, Probasco, the basis of role identity resides in the differ- and Leve 1992). In addition, social identifica- ences in perceptions and actions that accom- tion is one of the prime bases for participa- pany a role as it relates to counterroles. tion in social movements (Simon, Loewy, In group-based identities, the uniformity Stuermer, Weber, Freytag, Habig, of perception reveals itself in several ways Kampmeier, and Spahlinger 1998). (Hogg and Abrams 1988; Oakes, Haslam, and In general, we find uniformity of percep- Turner 1994). These may be categorized tion and action among persons when they along cognitive, attitudinal, and behavioral take on a group-based identity. This point lines. Social stereotyping is primary among contrasts somewhat with the consequences the cognitive outcomes: researchers have found that stereotyped perceptions of in- 3 Perhaps because of the strong focus on homo- 2 Rather than continuing to use the awkward geneity, a social identity theory of intragroup differ- group/category designation, we will generally use the entiation and structure has not yet been developed term group. (Hains, Hogg, and Duck 1997). This content downloaded from 154.59.124.213 on Mon, 02 Sep 2024 08:24:47 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms  IDENTITY THEORY AND SOCIAL IDENTITY THEORY 227 of taking on a role identity. Role identity the- negotiated so that role identities are verified, orists have focused on the match between a strong attachment to the group develops. the individual meanings of occupying a par- Still other research has shown the disruptive ticular role and the behaviors that a person effects that can occur in the family when enacts in that role while interacting with - fathers begin to take on some of the role others (Burke 1980; Burke and Reitzes behaviors that traditionally are performed 1981). This match includes the negotiation of by mothers (Ellestad and Stets 1998). meanings for situations and identities, and In group-based identities, only the how they fit together to provide a situated actor's perceptions and actions are directly context for interaction. By taking on a role involved; in role-based identities, other indi- identity, persons adopt self-meanings and viduals in the group who occupy counter- expectations to accompany the role as it roles are directly involved in the role relates to other roles in the group, and then performance (Burke 1980; Burke and act to represent and preserve these meanings Reitzes 1981). In group-based identities, the and expectations (Thoits and Virshup 1997). actor need not interact with group members. The meanings and expectations vary across Indeed, the minimal group experiments in persons in the set of roles activated in a social identity theory precluded any interac- situation. tion (Turner et al. 1987). When most of the Early in the development of role identi- actors in a category hold the same percep- ty theory, McCall and Simmons (1978) dis- tions, those perceptions are mutually rein- cussed the importance of negotiation in forced, and group formation is the result working out the differential performances, (Turner et al. 1987). Acting in unison, howev- relationships, and interconnections of roles er, is the behavioral consequence for individ- within a group or interaction context. If each ual members, because they all have the same role is to function, it must be able to rely on perceptions. the reciprocity and exchange relation with In role-based identities, some form of other roles. Individuals do not view them- interaction and negotiation is usually selves as similar to the others with whom involved as one performs a role (McCall and they interact, but as different, with their own Simmons 1978). Relations are reciprocal interests, duties, and resources. Each role is rather than parallel. Different perspectives related to, but set apart from, counterroles; are involved among the persons in the group often the interests compete, so that proper as they negotiate and perform their respec- role performance can be achieved only tive roles, creating micro social structures through negotiation. within the group (Riley and Burke 1995; Evidence of negotiated roles is revealed Stets 1997; Stets and Burke 1996). Thus a in identity research. For example, research role-based identity expresses not the unifor- on leadership role identity found that when mity of perceptions and behaviors that individuals could not negotiate differential accompanies a group-based identity, but leadership performances in a group that ver- interconnected uniqueness. The emphasis is ified their identity, they became less satisfied not on the similarity with others in the same with their role and less inclined to remain in role, but on the individuality and interrelat- the group (Riley and Burke 1995). Other edness with others in counterroles in the research found that the different gender group or interaction context. By maintaining roles in marriage result in different (albeit the meanings, expectations, and resources negotiated) behaviors for men and for associated with a role, role identities main- women (husbands and wives) (Stets and tain the complex interrelatedness of social Burke 1996).4 In later work, Burke and Stets structures. (1999) showed that when different but inter- When researchers focus on the different related role behaviors and meanings are ways in which people are linked to groups, through social identities and through role identities, they conceptualize groups differ- 4Taking the role of the other seems to move indi- viduals toward the other's identity (Burke and Cast ently. Social identity theorists regard the 1997). group as a collective of similar persons all of This content downloaded from 154.59.124.213 on Mon, 02 Sep 2024 08:24:47 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms 228 SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY QUARTERLY whom identify with each other, see them- nesspersons;5 these are intergroup relations. selves and each other in similar ways, and We point out that one always and simultane- hold similar views, all in contrast to membersously occupies a role and belongs to a group, of outgroups. Identity theorists regard the so that role identities and social identities are group as a set of interrelated individuals, always and simultaneously relevant to, and each of whom performs unique but integrat- influential on, perceptions, affect, and behav- ed activities, sees things from his or her own ior.6 For this reason we cannot easily separate perspective, and negotiates the terms of role from group, either analytically or empir- interaction. ically (Deaux 1992b; Thoits and Virshup The group and the role bases of identity 1997). Although it is important to examine correspond to the organic and mechanical how a person categorizes herself or himself forms of societal integration analyzed by as a member of a group, it is also important to Durkheim ( 1984), which formed the observe the role that the person enacts while basis of much discussion and theory in soci- a member of the group. For example, group ology. People are tied organically to their belongingness may be a function not only of groups through social identities; they are tiedself-categorization (Hogg and Abrams 1988) mechanically through their role identities but also of assuming a high-status role iin the within groups. A full understanding of soci- group. ety must incorporate both the organic/group Not only can we not easily disentangle and the mechanical/role form because each group identities from role identities; we also is only one aspect of society that links to cannot easily separate the group and role individual identities in separate but related identity from the person identity. Both social ways. identity theorists and identity theorists have To illustrate, let us consider the identi- discussed the person identity, but they have ties of teacher and student. First, teacher largely failed to examine how it might be and student are roles that are defined with- incorporated into their theories. To establish in the group/organization of a school. a general theory of the self, we must under- Meanings and expectations are tied to each stand how group, role, and person identities of these roles, regarding performance and are interrelated. the relationships between these roles. At In social identity theory, the person (or the same time, teacher and student are "personal") identity is the lowest level of social categories or groups that constitute self-categorization (Brewer 1991; Hogg and (more strongly in some situations than in Abrams 1988). It is the categorization of the others) in-groups and out-groups. Here the self as a unique entity, distinct from other focus is more on membership than on per- individuals. The individual acts in terms of formance, and intergroup issues are promi- his or her own goals and desires rather than nent. Not all roles, however, are tied as a member of a group or category. The level intimately to gr6ups. For example, the roles of identity that is activated (the personal or of husband and wife within the family are the social) depends on factors in the situa- accompanied by meanings and expecta- tion, such as social comparison or normative tions, but the social categories of husband fit, which make a group identity operative and wife only occasionally constitute an and override the personal identity. in-group/out-group pair. Deaux (1992a) attempts to link the per- Whether one is a teacher or wife, she is sonal identity to the social identity. She at once in a role and in a social category. In argues that some features of social identities focusing on the role, we consider the group (school or family) and the relationships 5Whether one makes the comparison with students among the different roles within that group; or businesspersons depends on the context. This rais- these are intragroup relations. In focusing es the issue of salience, which we address later. 6 As we shall see, however, when we focus on one on the categorical aspect, we look at the aspect or the other (role or group), certain features group of teachers, for example, in terms of become relevant for understanding cognition, emo- what they have in common in relation to tions, and behavior; these features have been empha- other groups such as students or busi- sized by one theory or the other, but seldom by both. This content downloaded from 154.59.124.213 on Mon, 02 Sep 2024 08:24:47 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms  IDENTITY THEORY AND SOCIAL IDENTITY THEORY 229 are consensually based and will be expressed integrate these different identity bases and along normative lines, whereas other aspects show how they operate simultaneously in a may be based on personal feelings and values situation, we can address the degree to which and will be expressed along those lines. Thus, individuals are constrained by structural idiosyncratic characteristics (one's personal expectations (tied to group and role identi- identities) are added to normative character- ties) or have some choice in their enactment istics of social identities. Although Deaux (through person identities). Further, we can indicates that particular personal identities examine how individuals resolve the distress may be linked to specific social identities, cre- that occurs when the meanings tied to differ- ating unique ways of expressing membership ent identities (group, role, or person) inter- in particular groups, she also suggests that fere with or contradict one another. Finally, some personal identities may represent a we can investigate the degree to which some general view of the self and therefore may identities are more malleable than others: for pervade all the membership groups to which example, people may be more likely to adjust one belongs. their person identities to adapt to situations Identity theorists conceptualize the per- than to modify more structurally constrained son identity in a manner similar to social role or group identities. We also can ex-plore identity theorists. The person identity is the the direction of influence of the different set of meanings that are tied to and sustain identities. For example, person identities may the self as an individual; these self-meanings influence role and group identities when they operate across various roles and situations in are first taken on. Once a role or group iden- the same way as Deaux believes that some tity becomes established, however, person person identities pervade all the member- identities may have little impact. ship groups to which one belongs (Stets 1995; Stets and Burke 1996). Stets (1995) THE ACTIVATION OF IDENTITIES attempts to link person identities to role AND IDENTITY SALIENCE identities by arguing that the two may be related through a common system of mean- The second area related to linking identi- ing: the meanings of role identities may over- ty theory with social identity pertains to the lap with the meanings of person identities. activation of identities and the concept of For example, a masculine gender (role) iden- salience as used in each theory. How and tity is linked to the mastery (person) identity when do identities become activated in a sit- ("I am a competent person") through the uation? Social identity theorists originally shared meaning of control. Therefore, when used the term salience to indicate the activa- one person acts to control another, this tion of an identity in a situation. A salient action is peformed in the service of both a social identity was "one which is functioning role and a person identity. Stets observes that psychologically to increase the influence of when the meaniings and expectations associ- one' s membership in that group on percep- ated with role identities conflict with the tion and behavior" (Oakes 1987:118). In meanings of person identities, individuals identity theory, salience has been understood may act without regard to the role identities as the probability that an identity will be acti- so as to maintain person identities. Thus, vated in a situation (Stryker 1980). When "while role identities need to be maintained, both definitions are considered in probability person identities also need to be maintained. terms, it appears that social identity theory An individual cannot simply be guided by uses only the probabilities of 0 and 1, while role identities and have person identities identity theory uses the full range of proba- unaffected by them. Overall, people need to bilities. We discuss each in turn. balance the demands of role identities with In social identity theory, although a the demands of person identities" (Stets salient identity is an activated identity, schol- 1995:143). ars have been concerned with understanding Person identities penetrate role and what makes a particular social categorization group identities in the same way as role iden- of the self (or other) relevant in a situation. tities infiltrate group identities. If we can As Oakes (1987) points out, salience is not This content downloaded from 154.59.124.213 on Mon, 02 Sep 2024 08:24:47 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms 230 SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY QUARTERLY about attention-grabbing properties of social individuals to accomplish their personal stimuli, but about the psychological signifi- and/or social goals. It seems ironic, however, cance of a group membership. Early work on that despite the focus on the activation of a salience focused on the separateness and the group identity, the source of such activation is clarity of the categories. This emphasis later left to individual and situational variability was translated into a question about the dis- and apparently does not depend on social tinctiveness of social categories. For example, structural characteristics. minority status (McGuire, McGuire, Child, In identity theory, scholars have been and Fujioka 1978) or relative numbers concerned more about understanding the (Abrams, Thomas, and Hogg 1990) might effect of persons' positions in the social struc- make a category distinctive. In either form, ture on the likelihood that those persons will however, this conception of what influences activate one identity rather than another, and the salience of a social category did not take less about the impact of the particular situa- into account any of the realities of the social tion on that process. In connection with this context. Those realities were general percep- concern, the idea of commitment to an iden- tual biases; they were not functionally related tity was introduced into identity theory. to the situation nor to the individual's behav- Commitment has two aspects (Stryker,and ior, goals, and motives. Serpe 1982, 1994). The first is quantitative- Borrowing from Bruner (1957), Oakes the number of persons to whom one is tied (1987) discusses the notion that salience is a through an identity. The more persons one is product of accessibility and fit. Accessibility tied to by holding an identity (i.e., the greater is the readiness of a given category to the embeddedness of the identity in the become activated in the person. It is a func- social structure), the more likely it is that the tion of the person's current tasks and goals, identity will be activated in a situation. In and of the likelihood that certain objects or brief, the stronger the commitment, the events will occur in the situation. As an exam- greater the salience. The second component ple, Oakes states that the "taxi" category is of commitment is qualitative-the relative accessible if one is in a hurry to get some- strength or depth of the ties to others. where (goal) and if a taxi stand is nearby (sit- Stronger ties to others through an identity uational object).7 Fit is the congruence lead to a more salient identity. When salience between the stored category specifications is made to focus on its probabilistic nature, it and perceptions of the situation. Fit has both becomes a characteristic of the identity, not comparative and normative aspects. A social of the situation. category has comparative fit when an individ- Employing this view, identity theorists ual perceives within-group differences to be distinguish between the probability that an less than between-group differences (the identity will be activated (salience) and that meta-contrast principle) (Turner et al. 1987).an identity actually will be played out in a sit- A social category has normative fit when anuation (activation). In contrast, social identi- individual perceives that the content of the ty theorists have tended to merge the category is defined along stereotypical, nor- concepts of activation and salience, and to mative lines as held in the culture. equate them. By separating activation from It is assumed that social groups are real salience, identity theorists can investigate for individuals who identify with these groups factors such as context (for example, the exis- to accomplish particular personal and social tence of an appropriate role partner), which goals. Oakes's extension thus makes salience activate an identity in the situation, separate- more than a cognitive-perceptual feature; it is ly from factors such as commitment, which also tied to the social requirements of the situ- influence the probability that an identity will ation, and results from an interaction between be played out across situations. individual and situational characteristics. The In another way as well, social identity activation of an identity in a situation allows theorists and identity theorists have differed in their views of salience. In identity theory, 7The source of an individual's goals and purposes salience has often been discussed in a relative has generally not been considered. way: two or more different identities have This content downloaded from 154.59.124.213 on Mon, 02 Sep 2024 08:24:47 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms  IDENTITY THEORY AND SOCIAL IDENTITY THEORY 231 been examined in light of the different social In social identity theory, salience per- structural positions held by an individual and tains to the situational activation of an iden- the possible impact of each on that person's tity at a particular level. A particular identity performance (Thoits 1983, 1986, 1992). This becomes activated/salient as a function of notion, known as a salience hierarchy, the interaction between the characteristics of addresses which role a person will enact in a the perceiver (accessibility) and of the situa- situation when more than one role may be tion (fit). There has been little or no discus- appropriate (Stryker 1968). sion about identities' creating or modifying Stryker also goes beyond the immediate situations so as to guide behavior. situation by hypothesizing that people will Although these two theories have viewed seek out opportunities to enact a highly salience in different ways, the different ways salient identity. Thus it is not a matter of an are not mutually exclusive. Indeed, they may identity being activated by a situation, but complement each other. Identity theory rather of a person invoking an identity in a focuses on social structural arrangements and situation and thereby creating a new situa- the link between persons; social identity theo- tion. For example, Stryker and Serpe (1987) ry focuses on characteristics of situations in found that first-year college students tended which the identity may be activated; both.the- to decorate their rooms in the same fashion ories acknowledge the importance of the indi- as they had done at home, thus reminding vidual's goals and purposes. Thus an themselves and others of their identity. This understanding of the conditions for the prob- agentive character of an identity has always ability of and the actual activation of an iden- been prominent in identity theory (McCall tity can be found. Both theories agree that an and Simmons 1978; Tsushima and Burke identity has no effect without activation. To 1999). The identities at the top of the salience examine the likelihood that an identity will be hierarchy are more likely to be activated activated across many situations, researchers must consider factors such as the fit of the independent of situational cues. When acti- identity to the situation (the stimuli present in vated, they act on the situation to accomplish the situation that fit the characteristics of the self-verification; in the process they create a identity), which has been emphasized in new situation. social identity theory, as well as the individ- In social identity theory, identities also ual's structural embeddedness or commit- are considered in a relative way because dif- ment, as emphasized by identity theory. ferent identities are organized in a hierarchy of inclusiveness. Three levels are generically COGNITIVE AND MOTIVATIONAL involved: a superordinate level such as PROCESSES "human," an intermediate level such as "American," and a subordinate level such as The third area related to merging identi- "southerner." The levels are floating and ty theory with social identity theory involves contextual, and depend on the salience of the core processes identified in each of the theo- different classifications (Turner et al. 1987). ries. The central cognitive process in social At the lowest level, for example, an individ- identity theory is depersonalization, or seeing ual may see herself as a member of a sorori- the self as an embodiment of the in-group ty executive board, in contrast to other prototype (a cognitive representation of the members of the sorority. At the next higher social category containing the meanings and level she may see herself as a sorority mem- norms that the person associates with the ber, in contrast to other sororities in the uni- social category; Hogg et al. 1995) rather than versity. At a still higher level she may see as a unique individual (Turner et al. 1987).8 herself as at the "University of X," in con- Activation of a social identity is sufficient to trast to students from another university in a result in depersonalization. In this process, particular community or state. Different the person perceives normative aspects of identities become active as the situation changes and as relevant stimuli for self-cate- 8 Depersonalization also denotes seeing the other gorization change. as an embodiment of the out-group prototype. This content downloaded from 154.59.124.213 on Mon, 02 Sep 2024 08:24:47 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms  232 SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY QUARTERLY group membership in the prototype and then the self into line with the abstract proto- acts in accordance with those norms (Reicher type/identity standard (Freese and Burke 1987, 1996; Terry and Hogg 1996). 1994; Hogg, et al. 1995; Stryker 1980). Depersonalization is the basic process under- In regard to the motivational underpin- lying group phenomena such as social stereo- nings of an identity, social identity theory typing, group cohesiveness, ethnocentrism, holds that when a group identity is activated, cooperation and altruism, emotional conta- people behave so as to enhance the evalua- gion, and collective action (Turner et al. tion of the in-group relative to the out-group 1987). and thereby to enhance their own self-evalu- Similar to depersonalization in social ation as group members (Turner et al. 1987). identity theory, a central cognitive process in This process is the maintenance and identity theory is self-verification, or seeing enhancement of self-esteem. The self-esteem the self in terms of the role as embodied in motive initially was thought to be the basis of the identity standard (the cognitive represen- in-group favoritism and ethnocentrism as tation of a role containing the meanings and well as of hostility toward the out-group. norms that the person associates with the Although this idea was central to the initial role; Burke 1991; McCall and Simmons formulation and development of social iden- 1978). When an identity is activated, self-ver- tity theory (Abrams 1992), it has received ification occurs. In this process, the person mixed empirical support and thus has been behaves so as to maintain consistency with downplayed in more recent work (Abrams the identity standard (Burke 1991; Swann 1992; Abrams and Hogg 1990).9 1983). Self-verification underlies behavioral As a substitute for the self-esteem processes such as roletaking, rolemaking, and motive, other motives have been suggested, group formation as the person acts to portray including a collective self-esteem motive the identity (Burke and Cast 1997; Burke and (Crocker and Luhtanen 1990), a self-knowl- Stets 1999; Turner 1962). edge motive, a self-consistency motive, a self- The processes of depersonalization and efficacy motive, (Abrams and Hogg 1990), an self-verification show us that membership in uncertainty reduction motive (Hogg and any social group or role includes two impor- Mullin 1999), and a self-regulation motive tant aspects: one's identification with a cate- (Abrams 1992, 1994). Any of these motives gory (emphasized more strongly in the can be brought into play when the identity is depersonalization process), and the behav- activated and depersonalization occurs. With iors that we associate with the category respect to the self-regulation motive, for (underscored more strongly in self-verifica- example, Abrams argues that when a social tion). Both identification with a social cate- identity is salient (activated) and attended to, gory and role behavior refer to and reaffirm responses are deliberate and self-regulated. social structural arrangements. People know Group members act to match their behavior the structural categories and relationships, to the standards relevant to the social identi- and act in accordance with that knowledge. ty, so as to confirm and enhance their social When we identity with the social categoriesidentification with the group. All of these that structure society, and when we behave suggestions are new; as Hogg and Abrams according to the expectations tied to our (1988) suggest, more research is needed to examine the efficacy of each in the context of identification, we are acting in the context of, referring to, and reaffirming social structure social identity theory. (Thoits and Virshup 1997). In this way, a com- In earlier formulations of identity theory, bination of the two theories would recognize motivation was tied to commitment and that the self both exists within society, and is salience. The greater the commitment to an influenced by society, because socially identity and the greater the salience of the defined shared meanings are incorporated identity, the more effort would be put into into one's prototype or identity standard. In enacting the identity (Stryker 1980; Stryker addition, it would recognize that the self influences society, because individual agents 9 Below we suggest an alternative formulation of act by changing social arrangements to bring the sources of self-esteem in social identification. This content downloaded from 154.59.124.213 on Mon, 02 Sep 2024 08:24:47 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms  IDENTITY THEORY AND SOCIAL IDENTITY THEORY 233 and Serpe 1982). Self-esteem was implicated We argue that identities referring to as a motivator: insofar as an individual had a groups or roles are motivated by self-esteem, salient role identity, the evaluation of his or self-efficacy, self-consistency, and self-regula- her performance would influence feelings of tion. Indeed, recent research in social identity self-esteem (Stryker 1980). If the role was theory and in identity theory appears to be evaluated positively, the person's self-esteem moving in common directions: both are con- would be higher (Hoelter 1986); if the person sidering multiple motives that lead one to act performed well in the role, he or she would in keeping with that which most clearly rep- feel good, given the appraisals by others and resents the group or role. In considering mul- their approval (Franks and Marolla 1976). tiple sources of motivation, we may find, for Self-efficacy also was implicated as a motiva- example, that the self-esteem motive is tied tor, however: a person who performed well in more closely to identification or membership a role gained a sense of control over the envi- in groups, while self-efficacy is associated ronment (Franks and Marolla 1976; Gecas more closely with the behavioral enactment and Schwalbe 1983). These ideas are con- of identities. Individuals may categorize firmed in recent research in identity theory, themselves in particular ways (in a group or a showing that self-esteem and self-efficacy are role) not only to fulfill the need to feel valu- increased by the self-verification which able and worthy (the self-esteem motive) but occurs through performing a role well also to feel competent and effective (the self- (Burke and Stets 1999). efficacy motive) (Cast, Stets, and Burke 1999; Recent extensions of identity theory Stets 1997). have added consideration of the internal The increase in self-worth that accompa- dynamics of identity processes and have nies a group-based identity, however, may included motivational elements of self-con- come not simply from the act of identifying sistency and self-regulation (Burke 1991; with the group, but from the group's accep- Burke and Stets 1999; Stets 1997). Similar to tance of the individual as a member (Ellison the mechanisms underlying perceptual con- 1993). This point may partially explain the trol theory (Powers 1973), affect control the-mixed support for self-esteem effects in ory (Heise 1979), self-verification theory social identity theory (Abrams 1992; Abrams (Swann 1983), and self-discrepancy theory and Hogg 1990). A social identity based on (Higgins 1989) is the idea that people act to membership in an abstract category may not keep perceptions of themselves in the situa- yield the support and acceptance provided by tion consistent with their identity standard. a social identity based on membership in an They take actions to modify the situation so actual group of interacting persons. The that perceptions of the self are consistent strongest confirmation that one is a group with the standard in spite of situational dis- member may come from acceptance by oth- turbances caused by others, prior actions of ers in the group. Further, enhancement of the self, or other situational influences one's self-worth through group membership (Burke and Stets 1999). may involve acting so as to promote accep- As long as the identity is activated, the tance through appropriate behavioral enact- process described above is constant and ments; such behavior has implications for ongoing, linking the individual to the situa- fulfilling the need to feel competent. tion, and it has been viewed as part of the self-verification process (Burke and Stets CONCLUSIONS 1999; Swann 1983). Two different manifesta- tions of self-verification exist. First, when dis- We began with an assertion that identity turbances change the situation such that theory and social identity theory possess individuals perceive situated self-meanings similarities that make the linking of the two and expectations of themselves as different theories worth consideration. Such a merger from their identity standard, they act to coun- would prevent redundancies in separate the- teract the disturbance. Second, when no dis- ories and would be a basis for establishing a turbances occur, individuals act consistently general theory of the self. To this end we have with the meanings held in their standards. considered three areas of central concern: the This content downloaded from 154.59.124.213 on Mon, 02 Sep 2024 08:24:47 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms 234 SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY QUARTERLY different bases of identity (group, role, per- At the microlevel, an analysis of the son), the different foci in examining activa- group, the role, and the person may help us to tion and salience of an identity, and the understand more clearly such motivational cognitive and motivational underpinnings of processes as self-esteem, self-efficacy, and the two theories. authenticity. It is possible that people largely In spite of their differences in origins as feel good about themselves when they associ- well as in language, orientation, and cover- ate with particular groups, typically feel con- age, the two theories have much in common. fident about themselves when enacting In most instances, the differences are a mat- particular roles, and generally feel that they ter of emphasis rather than kind. For the are "real" or authentic when their person most part, the differences originated in a identities are verified. view of the group as the basis for identity Yet, although the group, role, and person (who one is) held by social identity theory identities provide different sources of mean- and in a view of the role as a basis for identi- ing, it is also likely that these different identi- ty (what one does) held by identity theory ties overlap. Sometimes they may reinforce (Thoits and Virshup 1997). We suggest that who one is; at other times they may constrain being and doing are both central features of the self. The conditions under which each one's identity. A complete theory of the self occurs are important topics for future would consider both the role and the group research. bases of identity as well as identities based in the person that provide stability across REFERENCES groups, roles, and situations. We think that a merger of identity theory Abrams, Dominic. 1992. "Processes of Social with social identity theory will yield a Identification." Pp. 55-99 in Social stronger social psychology that can attend to Psychology of Identity and the Self-Concep edited by Glynis M. Breakwell. London: macro-, meso-, and micro-level social Surrey University Press. processes. Such a theory would address. 1994. "Social Self-Regulation. Special agency and reflection, doing and being, Issue: The Self and the Collective." behaviors and perceptions as central aspects Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin of the self. It also would provide a stronger 20:473-83. integration of the concepts of the group, the Abrams, Dominic and Michael A. Hogg. 1990. role, and the person. At the macro-level, for Social Identity Theory: Constructive and example, we might want to examine whether Critical Advances. London: Harvester- participation in social movements increases Wheatsheaf. as one identifies with the group, is committed Abrams, Dominic, Joanne Thomas, and Michael A. Hogg. 1990. "Numerical Distinctiveness, to the role identities within the group in com- Social Identity and Gender Salience." British parison with other identities one claims, and Journal of Social Psychology 29:87-92. sees the group as corresponding closely to Brewer, Marilynn B. 1991. "The Social Self: On the important dimensions along which one Being the Same and Different at the Same defines oneself. In other words, participation Time." Personality and Social Psychology may be highest when individuals are linked at Bulletin 17:475-82. all three levels of abstraction (the group, the. 1993. "Social Identity, Distinctiveness, role, and the person). and In-Group Homogeneity." Social At the mesolevel, we might want to study Cognition 11:150-64. inter- and intragroup relations. The different Bruner, Jerome S. 1957. "On Perceptual Readiness." Psychological Review 64:123-52. roles that one assumes in a group may Burke, Peter J. 1980. "The Self: Measurement increase or reduce identification with the Implications From a Symbolic Interactionist group, depending on (for example) power Perspective." Social Psychology Quarterly and status. In addition, the roles defined as 43:18-29. more important to the group may influence 1. 991. "Identity Processes and Social hostility toward out-group members more Stress." American Sociological Review strongly than do roles defined as less impor- 56:836-49. tant to the group.. 1997. "An Identity Model for Network This content downloaded from 154.59.124.213 on Mon, 02 Sep 2024 08:24:47 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms  IDENTITY THEORY AND SOCIAL IDENTITY THEORY 235 Exchange." American Sociological Review Involvement and Self Perception Among 62:134-50. Black Americans." Social Forces 71:1027-55. Burke, Peter J. and Alicia D. Cast. 1997. "Stability Ethier, Kathleen A. and Kay Deaux. 1994. and Change in the Gender Identities of "Negotiating Social Identity When Contexts Newly Married Couples." Social Psychology Change: Maintaining Identification and Quarterly 60:277-90. Responding to Threat." Journal of Burke, Peter J. and Donald C. Reitzes. 1981. "The Personality and Social Psychology Link Between Identity and Role 67:243-51. Performance." Social Psychology Quarterly Franks, David D. and J. Marolla. 1976. "Efficacious 44:83-92. Action and Social Approval as Interacting Burke, Peter J. and Jan E. Stets. 1999. "Trust and Dimensions of Self-Esteem: A Tentative Commitment Through Self-Verification." Formulation Through Construct Validation." Social Psychology Quarterly 62:347-66. Sociometry 39:324-41. Burke, Peter J. and Judy Tully. 1977. "The Freese, Lee and Peter J. Burke. 1994. "Persons, Measurement of Role/Identity." Social Identities, and Social Interaction." Pp. 1-24 Forces 55:881-97. in Advances in Group Processes, edited by Cast, Alicia D., Jan E. Stets, and Peter J. Burke. Barry Markovsky, Karen Heimer, and Jodi O'Brien. Greenwich, CT: JAI. 1999. "Does the Self Conform to the Views Gecas, Viktor and Michael L. Schwalbe. 1983. of Others?" Social Psychology Quarterly "Beyond the Looking-Glass Self: Social 62:68-82. Structure and Efficacy-Based Self-Esteem." Crocker, Jennifer and Riia Luhtanen. 1990. Social Psychology Quarterly 46:77-88. "Collective Self-Esteem and Ingroup Bias." Hains, Sarah C., Michael A. Hogg, and Julie M. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology Duck. 1997. "Self-Categorization and 58:60-67. Leadership: Effects of Group Prototypicality Deaux, Kay. 1992a. "Focusing on the Self: and Leader Stereotypicality." Personality Challenges to Self-Definition and Their and Social Psychology Bulletin 23:1087-99. Consequences for Mental Health." Pp. Haslam, S. Alexander, Penelope J. Oakes, Craig 301-27 in The Social Psychology of Mental McGarty, John C. Turner, Katherine J. Health: Basic Mechanisms and Applications, Reynolds, and Rachael A. Eggins. 1996. edited by Diane N. Ruble, Philip R. "Stereotyping and Social Influence: The Costanzo, and Mary Ellen Oliveri. New Mediation of Stereotype Applicability and York: Guilford. Sharedness by the Views of In-Group and. 1992b. "Personalizing Identity and Out-Group Members." British Journal of Socializing Self." Pp. 9-33 in Social Social Psychology 35:369-97. Psychology of Identity and the Self-Concept, Heise, David R. 1979. Understanding Events: edited by Glynis M. Blackwell. London: Affect and the Construction of Social Action. Surrey University Press. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Durkheim, Emile. 1984. The Division of Press. Labor, translated by George Simpson. New Higgins, E. Tory. 1989. "Self-Discrepancy Theory: York: Free Press. What Patterns of Self-Beliefs Cause People Ellemers, Naomi, Russell Spears, and Bertjan to Suffer?" Advances in Experimental Social Doosje. 1997. "Sticking Together or Falling Psychology 22:93-136. Apart: In rGroup Identification as a Hoelter, Jon W. 1986. "The Relationship Between Psychological Determinant of Group Specific and Global Evaluations of the Self: Commitment Versus Individual Mobility." A Comparison of Several Models." Social Journal of Personality and Social Psychology Psychology Quarterly 49:12941. 72:617-26. Hogg, Michael A. and Dominic Abrams. 1988. Ellemers, Naomi and Ad van Knippenberg. 1997. Social Identifications:A Social Psychology of "Stereotyping in Social Context." Pp. 208-35 Intergroup Relations and Groucp Processes. in The Social Psychology of Stereotyping and London: Routledge. Group Life, edited by Russell Spears, Hogg, Michael A. and Elizabeth A. Hardie. 1992. Penelope J. Oakes, Naomi Ellemers, and S. "Prototypicality, Conformity and Alexander Haslam. Cambridge, MA: Depersonalized Attraction: A Self- Blackwell. Categorization Analysis of Group Ellestad, June and Jan E. Stets. 1998. "Jealousy and Cohesiveness." British Journal of Social Parenting: Predicting Emotions From Psychology 31:41-56. Identity Theory." Sociological Perspectives Hogg, Michael A. and Barbara A. Mullin. 1999. 41:639-68. "Joining Groups to Reduce Uncertainty: Ellison, Christopher G. 1993. "Religious Subjective Uncertainty Reduction and This content downloaded from 154.59.124.213 on Mon, 02 Sep 2024 08:24:47 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms 236 SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY QUARTERLY Group Identification." Pp. 249-79 in Social Interaction." Social Psychology Quarterly Identity and Social Cognition, edited by 60:185-217. Dominic Abrams and Michael A. Hogg. Stets, Jan E. and Peter J. Burke. 1996. "Gender, Oxford: Blackwell. Control, and Interaction." Social Psychology Hogg, Michael A., Deborah J. Terry, and Katherine Quarterly 59:193-220. M. White. 1995. "A Tale of Two Theories: A Stryker, Sheldon. 1968. "Identity Salience and Critical Comparison of Identity Theory With Role Performance." Journal of Marriage and Social Identity Theory." Social Psychology the Family 4:558-64. Quarterly 58:255-69. 1980. Symbolic Interactionism: A Social McCall, George J. and J. L. Simmons. 1978. Structural Version. Menlo Park, CA: Identities and Interactions. New York: Free Benjamin Cummings. Press. Stryker, Sheldon. 1987. "The Interplay of Affect McGuire, William J., C.V. McGuire, P. Child, and T. and Identity: Exploring the Relationships of Fujioka. 1978. "Salience of Ethnicity in the Social Structure, Social Interaction, Self, and Spontaneous Self-Concept as a Function of Emotion." Presented at the annual meetings One's Ethnic Distinctiveness in the Social of the American Sociological Association. Environment." Journal of Personality and Stryker, Sheldon and Richard T. Serpe. 1982. Social Psychology 36:511-20. "Commitment, Identity Salience, and Role Oakes, Penelope. 1987. "The Salience of Social Behavior: A Theory and Research Categories." Pp. 117-41 in Rediscovering the Example." Pp. 199-218 in Personality, R6les, Social Group, edited by John C. Tirner. New and Social Behavior, edited by William Ickes York: Basil Blackwell. and Eric S. Knowles. New York: Springer- Oakes, Penelope J., S. Alexander Haslam, and John Verlag. C. Turner. 1994. Stereotypes and Social. 1994. "Identity Salience and Reality. Oxford: Basil Blackwell. Psychological Centrality: Equivalent, Powers, William T. 1973. Behavior: The Control of Overlapping, or Complementary Con- Perception. Chicago: Aldine. cepts?" Social Psychology Quarterly Reicher, Stephen D. 1987. "Crowd Behaviour as 57:16-35. Social Action." Pp. 171-202 in Rediscovering Swann, William B., Jr. 1983. "Self-Verification: the Social Group, edited by John C. Thrner. Bringing Social Reality Into Harmony With New York: Basil Blackwell. the Self." Pp. 33-66 in Psychological. 1996. "The Battle of Westminster: Perspectives on the Self, edited by Jerry Developing the Social Identity Model of and Anthony Greenwald. Hillsdale, NJ: Crowd Behaviour in Order to Explain the Erlbaum. Initiation and Development of Collective Terry, Deborah J. and Michael A. Hogg. 1996. Conflict." European Journal of Social "Group Norms and the Attitude-Behavior Psychology 26:115-34. Relationship: A Role for Group Identi- Riley, Anna and Peter J. Burke. 1995. "Identities fication." Personality and Social Psychology and Self-Verification in the Small Group." Bulletin 22:776-93. Social Psychology Quarterly 58:61-73. Thoits, Peggy A. 1983. "Multiple Identities and Simon, Bernd, Michael Loewy, Stefan Stuermer, Psychological Well-Being." American Ulrike Weber, Peter Freytag, Corinna Habig, Sociological Review 49:174-87. Claudia Kampmeier, and Peter Spahlinger.. 1986. "Multiple Identities: Examining 1998. "Collective Identification and Social Gender and Marital Status Differences in Movement Participation." Journal of Distress." American Sociological Review Personality and Social Psychology 51:259-72. 74:646-58.. 1992. "Identity Structures and Simon, Bernd, Giuseppe Pantaleo, and Amelie Psychological Well-Being: Gender and Mummendey. 1995. "Unique Individual or Marital Status Comparisons." Social Interchangeable Group Member? The Psychology Quarterly 55:236-56. Accentuation of Intragroup Differences Thoits, Peggy A. and Lauren K. Virshup. 1997. Versus Similarities as an Indicator of the "Me's and We's: Forms and Functions of Individual Self Versus the Collective Self." Social Identities." Pp. 106-33 in Self and Journal of Personality and Social Psychology Identity: Fundamental Issues, edited by 69:106-19. Richard D. Ashmore and Lee Jussim. New Stets, Jan E. 1995. "Role Identities and Person York: Oxford University Press. Identities: Gender Identity, Mastery Identity, Tsushima, Teresa and Peter J. Burke. 1999. and Controlling One's Partner." Sociological "Levels, Agency, and Control in the Parent Perspectives, 38:129-50. Identity." Social Psychology Quarterly. 1997. "Status and Identity in Marital 62:173-89. This content downloaded from 154.59.124.213 on Mon, 02 Sep 2024 08:24:47 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms  IDENTITY THEORY AND SOCIAL IDENTITY THEORY 237 Turner, John C., Michael A. Hogg, Penelope J. on Groupthink." Journal of Personality and Oakes, Stephen D. Reicher, and Margaret S. Social Psychology 63:781-96. Wetherell. 1987. Rediscovering the Social Turner, Ralph H. 1962. "Role-Taking: Process Versus Conformity." Pp. 20-40 in Human Group: A Self-Categorization Theory. New Behavior and Social Processes, edited by York: Basil Blackwell. Arnold M. Rose. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. Turner, Marlene E., Anthony R. Pratkanis, Preston Ullah, Philip. 1987. "Self-Definition and Probasco, and Craig Leve. 1992. "Threat, Psychological Group Formation in an Ethnic Cohesion, and Group Effectiveness: Testing Minority." British Journal of Social a Social Identity Maintenance Perspective Psychology 26:17-23. Jan E. Stets is Associate Professor of Sociology at Washington State University. She is currently using recent developments in identity theory to study people's emotional reactions to (in)justice in a series of lab experiments (NSF SES-9904215). Recent publications include "Trust and Commitment through Self-Verification" (with Peter A Burke) in Social Psychology Quarterly and "Does the Self Conform to the Views of Others?" (with Alicia D. Cast and Peter J. Burke) in Social Psychology Quarterly. Peter J. Burke is Professor and Research Scientist at Washington State University and Chair of the ASA Social Psychology Section. His current work extends identity theory into areas of emo- tion, group relations, and social learning. Recent publications include "Where Forward-looking and Backward-looking Models Meet" (with L. Gray) in Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, "Levels, Agency, and Control in the Parent Identity" (with T Tsushima) in Social Psychology Quarterly, 1999, and "Trust and Commitment through Self-Verification (with J. Stets) in Social Psychology Quarterly, 1999. This content downloaded from 154.59.124.213 on Mon, 02 Sep 2024 08:24:47 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms