Three Faces of Identity

SO36CH23-Smith-Lovin ARI 3 June 2010 1:46
ANNUAL
REVIEWS Further Three Faces of Identity
Click here for quick links to
Annual Reviews content online,
including: Timothy J. Owens,1 Dawn T. Robinson,2
• Other articles in this volume and Lynn Smith-Lovin3
• Top cited articles
• Top downloaded articles 1
Department of Sociology, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana 47907;
• Our comprehensive search email: towens@purdue.edu
Annu. Rev. Sociol. 2010.36:477-499. Downloaded from www.annualreviews.org
2
Department of Sociology, University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia 30520;
email: sodawn@uga.edu
3
Department of Sociology, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina 27708;
by Utrecht University on 09/09/13. For personal use only.
email: smithlovin@soc.duke.edu
Annu. Rev. Sociol. 2010. 36:477–99 Key Words

First published online as a Review in Advance on self, group, situation, social movement
April 20, 2010
The Annual Review of Sociology is online at Abstract

soc.annualreviews.org
We review three traditions in research on identity. The first two tra-
This article’s doi: ditions, which stress (a) the internalization of social positions and their
10.1146/annurev.soc.34.040507.134725
meanings as part of the self structure and (b) the impact of cultural
Copyright c 2010 by Annual Reviews. meanings and social situations on actors’ identities, are closely inter-
All rights reserved
twined. The third, the burgeoning literature on collective identity, has
0360-0572/10/0811-0477$20.00 developed quite independently of the first two and focuses more on
group-level processes. Unlike previous reviews of identity, which have
focused on the sources of internalized identity (e.g., role relationship,
group membership, or category descriptor), we focus here on the the-
oretical mechanisms underlying theories of identity. We organize our
review by highlighting whether those mechanisms are located in the in-
dividual’s self-structure, in the situation, or in the larger sociopolitical
context. We especially attempt to draw connections between the social
psychological literature on identity processes and the distinct, relatively
independent literature on collective identity.
477
INTRODUCTION its roots in classic sociological constructs like

Durkheim’s collective consciousness, Marx’s
Most reviews of research on identity organize
class consciousness, Weber’s Verstehen, and
their presentation around the sources of the
Tonnies’s Gemeinscaft. Here, we draw out
identity (e.g., Thoits & Virshup 1997, Owens
the connections between this fast-growing
2003). Identities that guide social action can
literature (located primarily in the study of
come from role relationships, affiliation with
politics, social movements, and culture) and the
social groups, identification with social cate-
more social psychological theories of identity
gories, or personal narratives. Here, we take a
in the microsociological literature (see Owens
different tack. We highlight the theoretical pro-
& Aronson 2000, Stryker et al. 2000). Since
cesses that are the central mechanisms in the
the collective identity literature only fleet-
major treatments of identity. These theoretical
ingly refers to the more social psychological
mechanisms operate across the identities that
treatments, we attempt to identify areas where
come from the sources listed above.
those connections can enrich both subfields.
We first draw a distinction between iden-

Before reviewing our three faces of the iden-
tity theories that focus on internalization of so-
tity literature, we illustrate how the concept of
cial positions within a self-structure and those
identity is nested in the broader concepts of self
that focus on how consensual, cultural identity
and self-concept. Identity occupies an interest-

meanings are implemented within situations
ing position vis-à-vis these broader concepts. It
that evoke them. The former theories (e.g.,
is both a nested component of the more general
Stryker’s and Burke’s Identity Theory) focus on
self-structures, yet also refers to social positions
how stable, internalized aspects of social identi-
that exist outside the individual actor that are
ties are formed and how they affect behavior as
available to be ascertained, enacted, and poten-
the social actor moves from one situation to the
tially internalized. This dualism motivates the
next. Implicitly, these internalization theories
organization of our review.
assume a socialization process through which
repeated social interactions lead to the develop-
ment of personalized identity meanings; these SELF, SELF-CONCEPT, AND
meanings then become incorporated into a sta- IDENTITY: NESTED CONCEPTS
ble, trans-situational self-concept. The latter For theorists who emphasize the internalized
theories (e.g., Tajfel’s Social Identity Theory nature of identity within the context of a sta-
and Heise’s Affect Control Theory) emphasize ble self-structure, the concept of identity is
how social contexts elicit certain identities and nested within the more inclusive concepts of the
shape their meanings. These theories focus on self and the self-concept. As specified by Mead
how consensual cultural meanings associated (1934), the self is a phenomenon of the human
with identities are imported by actors into local mind born out of reflexive action, stemming
interactions and how situational environments primarily from a person’s interactions with oth-
shape the localized meanings of the situation- ers. Mead especially stressed the ability to imag-
ally relevant identities. The situation and the ine oneself from the standpoint of another per-
culture within which it is embedded are more son. The self consists of two components: the
central than any internalized aspect of the actor. “I” and the “me” (Mead 1934). The “I” (or
After developing this (somewhat subtle) subject) is the dynamic, novel, spontaneous as-
distinction between personal, internalized pect of the self that constitutes the individual
identity theories and situational, culturally as knower and actor. The “me” (or object) is
based identity theories, we then examine a all the learned perspectives a person takes to-
literature that places the concept of identity at ward him- or herself and the attitudes that the
the group level. Cerulo (1997) reviewed this “I” assumes toward one’s own person, especially
literature on collective identity, emphasizing when taking the role of the other. The vast
478 Owens · Robinson · Smith-Lovin

majority of work in sociology is on the “me” as- Third Army during World War II; I was born
pect of the self, which includes the self-concept in Robeson County Hospital at 3:14 PM; my
and the identities that are incorporated into it. mother had a cousin named Edna; I drove
Once the self emerges in the human or- the school bus during my junior year in high
ganism, a nascent self-concept soon follows. school. Although personal identity consists of
Rosenberg (1979) defined self-concept as the unique identifiers and an individual narrative,
totality of a specific person’s thoughts and it is social and institutional in origin. As such,
feelings toward him- or herself as an object of soldiers are identified and differentiated from
reflection. The self-concept (or the “me”) can other soldiers by their names, ranks, and serial
be thought to consist of three broad classes numbers; academics by their names, ranks,
of individual attributes (Rosenberg 1979, departmental affiliations, and the institutions
pp. 15–17): self-referring dispositions, physical from which their highest degree was awarded.
characteristics, and identities. Self-referring These distinctions are created and organized
dispositions denote the abstract categories by the institutions within which they occur.
people develop over their life courses and As individualized as it is, one’s personal iden-
then use to shape their response tendencies, tity information is the basis for one’s other
including attitudes such as liberalism, traits identities. “If an individual could not be recog-
such as altruism, values such as patriotism, nized from one occasion to another as the same
and abilities such as athletic skill. Thoits & person, no stable social relationships could be
Virshup (1997) refer to these elements as one’s constructed” and no other identities could be
individual identity because they represent ways formed (McCall & Simmons 1966, p. 65). We
to differentiate oneself from others (as opposed distinguish between these individuated narra-
to representing communalities with others tives in personal identities and what Thoits
through roles or group membership). & Virshup (1997) termed “individual iden-
Physical characteristics include one’s exter- tity.” They defined individual identity as self-
nal attributes such as being obese, deaf, or tall. ideas abstracted from one’s biographical details
These physical characteristics become socio- and framed in terms of broader social cate-
logically interesting when they are also incor- gories such as working class, Midwesterner, di-
porated into a person’s self-image and thus have abetic, snowbird, or progressive. When such
the potential to shape one’s behavior or one’s abstracted self-categorizations are internalized,
social and psychological well-being. They also, they often correspond to group or categorical
of course, have an external character that influ- identities as described below.
ences how others respond to us, shaping their Identities based on role relationships are
internalization into the self-concept. the most central in the theories that stress
The third component of Rosenberg’s internalization of identity meaning into the
self-concept is the focus of our review here: self-structure. We define role-identity as a so-
identity. There are four key sources of iden- cial position a person holds in a larger social
tity characterizations: personal or individual structure,1 considers self-descriptive, and en-
identity, role-based identity, category-based acts in a role relationship with at least one
identity, and group membership–based iden- other person (Thoits 1995). Because it is self-
tity. Personal identity is the most elementary descriptive and internalized, it becomes part
type of identity, defined here as the social of one’s self-concept. Role-identities are pred-
classification of an individual into a category icated on recurrent interactions between role
of one (Rosenberg 1979). It denotes a unique
individual with self-descriptions drawn from
1
one’s own biography and singular constellation Here we adopt Stryker’s (2008) definition of social structure
as socially patterned interactions and relationships noted for
of experiences. Examples include: I am Roy their regularity, resistance to change, and capacity to repro-
Smith, Pat Smith’s spouse; I served in Patton’s duce themselves.
www.annualreviews.org • Three Faces of Identity 479

partners and provide the self with meaning be- tion among the sources is blurry and has little
cause they carry recognized role expectations, relationship to how theorists believe that iden-
whether complementary (teacher-pupil), com- tities organize and motivate action within social
peting (union negotiator–business executive), contexts (Smith-Lovin 2007, Burke 2004).
or counter (detective-criminal) (e.g., Hogg et al. Second, identities are elements of both the so-
1995, Weinstein et al. 1966). cial structure and the individual self-structures
McCall & Simmons (1966) tended to ascribe that internalize them. While individuals may
more individual volition to the crafting of one’s incorporate meanings associated by social po-
role-identity than do most identity theorists. sitions and distinctions into their view of them-
To McCall & Simmons, role-identity entailed selves, the menu from which they choose to
the “character and the role that an individual do so is created by a larger social environment.
devises for himself as an occupant of a particu- Therefore, some theories of identity operate
lar social position,” including “his imaginative at levels other than the self-structure. In par-
view of himself as he likes to think of himself be- ticular, this is true of the identity theories that
ing and acting as an occupant of that position” emphasize situational or contextual elements
(p. 67; emphasis in the original). Their concep- (our second section here) and the literature on
tualization illustrates clearly the internalized, collective identity (our third section). Before
individuated nature of identity meanings, even turning to these aspects of identities theories,
those identities that arise from social structural however, we begin with a review of the
positions. more traditional theories that emphasize
The two final bases of identity are formed the internalization of identity meanings into
by similarities that we see between ourselves the self-structure.
and others, rather than the role relationships
with another actor. Identities can be based on
perceived membership in a socially meaningful THEORIES EMPHASIZING
category (e.g., Arab or American) or on actual INTERNALIZED
membership in a bounded, interconnected ROLE-IDENTITY MEANINGS
social group (e.g., a Girl Scout or a member of One has no identity apart from society; one has no
Earth First). The distinction between the two individuality apart from identity.
bases is blurred because of the homophilous —Nelson N. Foote (1951, p. 21)
structure of interactions (McPherson et al.
2001, 2006): We are much more likely to The fact that we internalize how others see
interact with those actors with whom we us is a core insight of classic symbolic interac-
share salient characteristics. So, being an Arab tion (Mead 1934, Cooley 1902). At least since
American may be an identity that comes from Foote’s (1951) classic article on identification as
a category of people, but is likely reinforced a basis for motivation, sociological researchers
by interactions within mosques or ethnically have focused on how the social positions that
identified churches, ethnic neighborhood people occupy become stable, internalized
enclaves, and other culturally meaningful aspects of their self-concepts. In this section,
group activities. we examine the class of theories that emphasize
Our summary of these bases on which iden- identities that are attached to and internalized
tities are formed makes clear why we choose to by individuals, particularly, but not necessarily,
organize this review around theoretical mech- in structured role relationships. The theories
anisms and the distinct intellectual traditions covered in this section are Role-Identity
that they create, rather than the more common Theory (McCall & Simmons 1966), Identity
classification around the source of identity Theory (Stryker 1968, 1980), Identity Accu-
(e.g., personal/individual, role based, social mulation Theory (Thoits 1983), and Identity
category based, group based). First, the distinc- Control Theory (Burke 1991). However,

before discussing the specific theories, we character that individuals devise for themselves
briefly address motivation as it generally when occupying specific social positions. And
applies to these internalization theories. as discussed earlier, they saw role-identities as
Nearly six decades ago, Foote (1951) at- stemming from the preferred perceptions that
tempted to clarify role theory by using a so- one has of oneself as one occupies various so-
cial psychology of motivation that both rejected cial positions. In this case, role-identities in-
biological determinism (“the person impelled fluence people’s everyday lives by serving as
from within”) and cultural determinism (“the their primary source of personal action plans.
person driven from without”) (p. 21). Foote’s The theory has a view of people capable of cre-
theory of situated motivation is based upon ativity and improvisation in the performance of
symbolic interactionist notions of language and their roles, yet within the overall requirements
identification. Specifically, language is central and restrictions of their social position(s). This
to motivation because it helps shape behavior commingling of individuality, idiosyncrasy, and
by enabling individuals to meaningfully under- impulsiveness with behavior constrained by so-
stand and label their past actions in order to for- cial convention occurs through a dialog be-
mulate present and future outcomes. Through tween the “I” and the “me” bounded by the
identification, people appropriate and commit broad dictates of one’s role-identity.
to particular identities. People have multiple Because people have multiple and often
identities, and their identities give their behav- competing role-identities, which also come and
ior meaning and purpose. However, because go during one’s life course, an important theo-
people also perform roles that are attached to retical problem in McCall & Simmons’s theory
particular identities, the role/identity nexus is is to explain which role-identities people value
also an important ingredient in motivation and most and will thus attempt to perform. They
choice. Indeed, the very notion of identity in argue that a person’s various role-identities
symbolic interactionism connotes an intimate get organized into a hierarchy of prominence,
linkage between self and role (Burke & Tully where a role-identity’s prominence reflects the
1977) such that human beings are confronted relative value it has for his or her overall concep-
regularly with choices between alternative com- tion of one’s ideal self.2 In this way, one’s promi-
mitments and actions. nence hierarchy is equivalent to one’s ideal self
Two influential mid-range identity theories (McCall & Simmons 1966, pp. 76–80, 264).
were developed in the 1960s to represent the Prominence itself is predicated on many factors.
ways in which structural role positions and their First, people must assess the degree of commit-
internalizations guided choices that actors make ment they have to a particular role-identity and,
in social interaction. Both McCall & Simmons by extension, how much their self-esteem is
(1966) and Stryker (1968) attempted to link the bound to its successful activation. That is, com-
structural-functional insights about role rela- mitment signifies how deeply a person stakes
tionships and their functions in larger sociology who he or she is by virtue of his or her role-
that dominated the mainstream sociology of the identity and its performance. This conceptu-
day with the dynamic, processual insights about alization is directly relevant to James’s (1890)
self that dominated microsociological thinking. definition of self-esteem as the ratio of one’s
The result was a remarkably fruitful theoretical perceived success in a particular role-identity
tradition that grew out of these two similar per- to one’s desired level of success.
spectives on identity.
2
Their concept of ideal self, which traces back to Horney
Role-Identity Theory (1945), is part wish and part obligation with regard to an
individual’s most personal aspirations and wants for him- or
McCall & Simmons (1966) defined role- herself (e.g., to be a distinguished professor, a loving mother,
identity in dramaturgical language as the a successful businessperson).

Second, when considering their ideal selves at Time 2, whereas Time 2 student-identity
vis-à-vis particular role-identities, people eval- salience impacted contemporaneous commit-
uate how their prior actions generally comport ment to that identity. This pattern suggested
with their role-identity performances and how that commitment precedes salience. However,
much they are living up to their ideal selves. the degree of structural freedom students had
Third, as a sign of the importance of reflected in choosing one role-identity over another
appraisals, people try to determine how their (i.e., coursework versus dating) was key. Only
significant others will evaluate and appraise the situations involving choice showed the pattern.
role when and if it is activated. Fourth, indi- More recently, Owens & Serpe (2003) found
viduals assess the rewards they may or may not that behavioral and affective commitment were
have received from the prior activation of a role- both significantly related to family identity
identity, a notion consistent with social learning salience for Hispanics, but only behavioral
theory (e.g., Bandura 1977). commitment was predictive of family-identity
salience for Anglos and blacks. They argued
that the significance of affective commitment

Identity Theory for Hispanics was heightened by the family’s
Stryker’s Identity Theory (1968, 1980, 2008) particular importance for this group.
has been the dominant perspective on self and Finally, Stryker et al. (2005) recently
identity within structural symbolic interaction- discussed an ongoing problem in Identity
ism for the past four decades. Since Stryker Theory—how multilevel social structures fa-
(2008) recently offered a focused treatment of cilitate or constrain one’s opportunity for,
his theory in the Annual Review of Sociology, we and the strength of, commitment to particu-
only review its basic form here (see also Owens lar role-identities (i.e., family, work, and vol-
2003). Identity Theory sees a multifaceted self unteerism). They show that intermediate-level
composed of multiple identities arranged hier- social structures (e.g., neighborhood or school)
archically in an identity salience structure. The influenced commitment most by fostering in-
more salient an identity, the higher is the prob- group identity-based relationships. Proximal-
ability of its being invoked in an interactional level social structures, though important, had
situation that allows some agency or choice. less impact than intermediate structures. The
The salience itself is based on two dimensions of proximal-level represents social embeddedness
one’s commitment to the identity: interactional in multiple networks of social relations (e.g.,
and affective. Interactional commitment is the number of workmates who are also one’s rela-
extensiveness of the interactions a person has tives). Finally, large-scale stratification systems
in a social network through a particular iden- (e.g., gender, race, socioeconomic status) had
tity (e.g., the number of persons one interacts the least impact on commitment to a particular
with based on the identity). Affective commit- identity.
ment is a person’s emotional investment in re-
lationships premised on the identity (e.g., how
emotionally close others in the role relation- Identity Accumulation Theory
ship are to the individual). Note that Stryker’s Thoits (1983, 1986, 2003) drew heavily on
use of the term “commitment” is more multidi- Role-Identity Theory (McCall & Simmons
mensional and less psychological than the use of 1966) and Identity Theory (Stryker 1968, 1980,
the same concept label in McCall & Simmons’s 2008) in her formulation of Identity Accumula-
Role-Identity Theory above. tion Theory, her description of the importance
In an early empirical test of the theory, that multiple role-identities can have for a per-
Serpe (1987) showed that college students’ son’s psychological and emotional well-being.
commitments to their student-related identities Her theory asserts that multiple role-identities
at Time 1 impacted those identities’ saliences can be psychological resources that help reduce

emotional distress (depression) and foster Americans and Japanese age 60 and over. She
global self-esteem in complex selves. Under- found that role accumulation (spouse, parent,
pinning Identity Accumulation Theory are two and community volunteer) benefited older
key assumptions. The first, an essential aspect Americans’ mental health, but any role beyond
of symbolic interactionism, is that identities being either a spouse or a parent had no impact
provide individuals with meaning and purpose on well-being for older Japanese. Theoretical
by answering the question: Who am I? Second, understanding of these varying patterns in
roles give individuals structure and organiza- different racial, ethnic, and age groups is still
tion by answering the question: What should needed.
I do? By extension, multiple role-identities A common thread running through many
provide the person with an orientation toward studies of multiple identities, including the
life situations that help foster well-being. As work above on Identity Accumulation Theory,
Ahrens & Ryff (2006) point out, more roles is the importance of Stryker’s Identity Theory
also are associated with beneficial individual in the framing of the empirical research. Few,
resources, such as social connections, power, however, actually employ Stryker’s conceptions
and prestige. The more options one has to of role interactional and affective commitment
obtain these resources, the better the outcome. in their empirical analyses. Even among those
Numerous recent empirical studies support who try to hew closely to Stryker’s theoreti-
the hypothesis linking multiple role-identities cal conceptualizations, differences in the way
to lower levels of psychological distress salience and commitment are operationalized
(Kikuzawa 2006, Sachs-Ericsson & Ciarlo help explain empirical inconsistencies in the re-
2000, Wethington et al. 2000), fewer physical lationship between multiple role-identities and
health problems ( Janzen & Muhajarine 2003), well-being.
or both (Barnett & Hyde 2001). Conversely, Serpe (1987) and Thoits (2003) may offer an
Brook et al. (2008) cited other studies in- important piece missing in Identity Accumula-
dicating that multiple role-identities can tion Theory: assessing the degree of choice peo-
actually increase or prolong depression when ple have in enacting their many role-identities.
role-identity demands are incompatible with If multiple role-identities are a resource, then
other behavioral expectations or when the role- the most consequential for well-being should
identity claims too much of a person’s time and be the identities a person has some freedom
drains her energy. Brook et al. (2008) claimed to choose. For example, the mother role and
that the key to understanding the difference worker role are more constraining because they
between positive and negative benefits of mul- offer less choice in enacting than the freedom
tiple roles is the mediating effect of positive or to choose the PTA role and church choir role.
negative emotions on the interactions between
the number of identities a person holds, their
subjective importance to the person, and how Identity Control Theory
harmoniously they interact with each other. Whereas Stryker’s Identity Theory focused
Jackson (1997) added an important status on identity choices, Burke developed an
dimension involving race and ethnicity to elaboration of the theory to specify how
Identity Accumulation Theory and showed internalized meanings guided action after an
that the multiple role-identities were associated identity was adopted within an institutional
with lower depression and greater happiness context (Stryker & Burke 2000). Burke’s (1991,
among non-Hispanic white and Mexican Burke & Reitzes 1991) theoretical develop-
American men and women but not African ments are often known as Identity Control
Americans. Kikuzawa (2006) added a person’s Theory to distinguish them from Stryker’s
location in the life course to race/ethnicity in more structural focus on commitment and
a cross-cultural study of depression levels for identity enactment. Burke built on the work

of Powers (1973) to represent the relationship This feature of the theory allows it to describe
between internalized identity meanings and how actors respond creatively to circumstances
perceptions of an interactional situation as a other than normal role performances.
control system or cybernetic feedback loop Identity Control Theory is thoroughly
[Robinson (2007) provides a recent review of reviewed in Burke & Stets (2009). Here we
control theorizing in sociology]. Meanings describe only a few studies as exemplars of
are typically measured using bipolar semantic this research tradition. In one of the initial
differential scales (Osgood et al. 1957, 1975). statements of the theory, Burke (1991) posed
The dimensions on which meanings vary are a challenge to prevailing views of social stress
assessed in each institutional context and then by positing that disruption of the otherwise
measured at the level of the individual actor. continuous identity process and the inability to
Consistent with the other internalization close the gap between disapproving reflected
identity theories summarized above, Identity appraisals and an identity standard will result
Control Theory emphasizes the importance of in distress. Burke & Stets (1999) show how
understanding identity not just as a state or self-processes can influence social structure,
trait characteristic of the individual, but as a while Stets & Tsushima (2001) have extended
continuous process of affirmation and reaffir- the theory to an examination of the moderating
mation in social situations. “An identity pro- influence of group-based identities and role-
cess,” according to Burke & Reitzes (1991), “is based identities on how people experience and
a continuously operating, self-adjusting, feedback cope with the potent emotion of anger. More
loop: individuals continually adjust behavior to recently, Burke et al. (2007) combined Identity
keep their reflected appraisals congruent with Control Theory, Status Characteristics Theory
their identity standards or references” (p. 840, (discussed briefly at the end of the next section),
emphasis in the original). Furthermore, Burke and Legitimacy Theory in an experiment on
and associates follow mainstream symbolic in- how gender factors into leader and subordinate
teractionism by viewing an identity as a set of identity verification. They studied task-
meanings applied to the self in a social role oriented groups of four people (two women
[although later presentations of the theory ex- and two men) when leadership is conferred by a
plicitly expand its scope to consider identities higher, legitimate authority (the experimenter).
that come from group or category membership Among their findings are that female leaders
(e.g., Burke 2004, Burke & Stets 2009)]. These (who were legitimated by the experimenter
meaning-sets act as a standard or reference for when the group was formed) and males (who
understanding who one is in a given situation were not legitimated) both had higher levels
and what are the expectations in order to main- of identity verification than others. This study
tain that identity in the eyes of self and others. illustrates an interesting new theme in Identity
When an identity is brought into play in an Control Theory—the relevance of resources to
interaction situation, a feedback process ensues the ability of an actor to verify his or her identity
via reflected appraisals. That is, a cybernetic (see Burke & Stets 2009, pp. 79–82, 229–33).
control process balances any identity discrep- This emphasis on a larger structure brings the
ancies that may arise when a particular identity theory closer to the situational/cultural empha-
standard (the internalized meanings of self in sis of the theories reviewed in the next section.
role, group, or category) is compared to the
identity’s situated meaning via a comparator.
It is hypothesized that people behave so as to THEORIES EMPHASIZING
counter and reduce any discrepancy that arises CULTURE AND SITUATIONAL
from interaction. Since actions are generated CONTEXT
to reduce discrepancies, they can vary in Presumably, a “definition of the situation” is al-
quality, depending on the disturbing events. most always to be found, but those who are in

the situation ordinarily do not create this defini- undermined it than with the underlying char-
tion, even though their society can be said to do so; acter of the “self ” that was being presented [see
ordinarily, all they do is to assess correctly what Hochschild (1983, appendix A) for a related
the situation ought to be for them and then act discussion]. Similar intellectual movements
accordingly. were afoot in psychology, as Heider’s (1946,
—Erving Goffman (1974, pp. 1–2) 1958) Balance Theory drew attention to config-
urations of interaction and their implications.
The theories of internalized identity meanings
reviewed in the previous section build on the
foundational insight of Mead and Cooley that Situated Identity Theory
we incorporate the social positions that we oc- An early attempt to develop a formal, empir-
cupy into our cognitive image of ourselves as ically testable theory based on this situational
people. Here, we shift attention to theories that focus was Alexander’s Situated Identity The-
give priority to situational, social structural, and ory (Alexander & Knight 1971; summarized in
cultural elements that lie outside the individ- Alexander & Wiley 1981). Building on Heider
ual. We caution that our categorization here and Goffman, Alexander conceptualized situ-
does not imply competition or contradiction. ated identities not as properties possessed by
Instead, theories (and the conceptualizations persons or as features located in some exter-
embedded within them) necessarily simplify re- nal environmental structure. Instead, the situ-
ality by focusing on some elements to the exclu- ated identity defined the relationship between
sion of others. So the theories described here do an individual and the environment (especially
not reject the idea that social roles, group mem- the other actors within it) at a given time.
berships, and category memberships are incor- Like many situational theories that followed,
porated into the self-image. Rather, they em- Alexander focused initially on relatively sim-
phasize how the elements of situations in which ple situations in which actors were assumed to
actors are involved shape their behavioral, cog- have similar perspectives; he restricted his ex-
nitive, and emotional reactions, rather than fo- perimental work to situated activities that met
cus on the intraindividual features of identity in that consensus criterion. In his most cited study
the self-structure that are carried from situation (Alexander & Knight 1971), he replicated a clas-
to situation. sic cognitive dissonance experiment, showing
This tradition of emphasizing the impor- that the desirability of the situated identity as-
tance of situational context for social action sociated with an outcome predicted whether
began to develop in its modern form during people chose that outcome, often in violation
the 1950s and early 1960s. It was partially a of cognitive dissonance predictions. Although
response to the sense that symbolic interac- this research tradition is not currently very ac-
tionism, and sociological social psychology tive, it was a groundbreaking effort to consider
more generally, had lost its connection to the systematically the impact of situational cues on
structural focus of the larger discipline (Stryker identity occupancy and social conduct flowing
2008). Foote’s (1951) influential theory of situ- from that identity. It also pioneered the use
ated motivation, discussed above, was published of experimental methods in this domain within
in this period, using the concept of identity to sociology.
focus attention on the actor-situation nexus. We now move to a review of currently
Goffman (1959, 1963) emphasized that actors active theories that emphasize the impact of sit-
presented themselves to others in a manner uational and cultural features on social interac-
that served to maintain certain images. His tion. We discuss two traditions in sociology and
Presentation of Self in Everyday Life was con- psychology—Affect Control Theory and Social
cerned more with the interactional presentation Identity Theory—that conceptualize the so-
of self and how situational context supported or ciocultural environment in very different ways.

We then briefly discuss Status Characteristics a paradigm developed by Gollob, Heise com-
Theory. Although this theoretical research bined identity labels and social behaviors into
program is not based in the identity tradition, simple event sentences (e.g., the mother slaps
its findings have some important connections the child) to study how the initial meanings of
to the phenomena that we explore here. the event elements (a mother, slapping some-
one, a child) would be transformed by their
combination in the event (what do you think—
Affect Control Theory on the three dimensions of affective meaning—
To make the connection between the inter- of a mother who has slapped a child?).
nalized and situational/cultural conceptions of The third element of the theory is the
identity clear, we begin our discussion of the control system, adapted from Powers (1973),
more situational/cultural conception of identity which it shares with Identity Control Theory.
with Affect Control Theory (Heise 1979, 2007), When social interaction deflects meanings away
which shares many elements with Burke’s Iden- from their stable, culturally determined values,
tity Control Theory. Both theories drew di- Affect Control Theory proposes that actors try
rectly on Powers’s (1973) insight that much of to create new events to bring the transitory,
human processing of stimuli from the environ- situated meanings back into line with the sta-
ment was described by a control system rather ble, cultural meanings. Deflection of meanings
than a direct translation of inputs into outputs. is defined mathematically, by the summed ab-
But even given this shared control imagery, the solute differences between transient, situated
subtle differences between the theories are an meanings for event elements (actor, behavior,
excellent demonstration of the distinction that and object-person) and the culturally given ref-
we make here between personal and social the- erence values for each of those elements. The
ories of identity. They also illustrate the danger search for a new event that, when enacted, will
of making this categorization seem too rigid. minimize that deflection then becomes a search
Affect Control Theory was developed by for a three-number profile: the evaluation, po-
Heise (1979) by combining two psychological tency, and activity of a behavior (what could X
research programs—Osgood’s work on the do next to remedy the situation?), a new label
measurement of affective meaning (Osgood for the actor (what kind of a person would do
et al. 1957, 1975) and Gollob’s (1968) work such a thing?), or a new label for the object-
on impression formation—with Powers’s new person (what kind of a person would deserve to
ideas about control systems. The resulting have that happen to them?). Once the profile is
theory had three elements. First, it used found, one can search a cultural “dictionary” of
Osgood’s work to create a measurement affective meanings to find qualitative labels that
system in which meanings were concep- fit the affectively appropriate response.
tualized on three dimensions of affective The contrast between Affect Control The-
meaning—evaluation (good-bad), potency ory and the more recently developed Iden-
(powerful-powerless), and activity (lively- tity Control Theory is described extensively
quiet). Measuring meaning on just these three in Smith-Lovin & Robinson (2006). The
dimensions missed some nuances but allowed theories differ in their approaches to measure-
all the elements of a social event (the actor, the ment, formalization, and emotional response.
social action, the object-person at whom the Here we emphasize only the differences in per-
action is directed, and later emotions, setting, sonal versus situational focus that are key to our
nonverbal behaviors, status characteristics, etc.) discussion.
to be mapped into the same three-dimensional The first contrast between the theories is the
space. The second element of the theory was an reference level that is being maintained by the
empirical framework for describing how events control system in each theory. Identity Con-
changed the meanings within a situation. Using trol Theory’s reference level is the internalized

meanings that an actor incorporates into the not core to an actor’s self-structure. Smith-
self-structure. In Affect Control Theory, peo- Lovin (2007) reported an experiential sampling
ple try to maintain meanings associated with study that found we actually spend most of our
the entire situation—their own identities, the time in such noncore identities. In fact, Affect
identities of others, actions, and behavior set- Control Theory had no real conceptualization
tings (Smith-Lovin 1979). A second difference of a stable, organized self-structure during the
flows directly from the first. In Affect Con- first three decades of its development (Heise
trol Theory, the actions of others are explicitly 1979, Smith-Lovin & Heise 1988, MacKinnon
considered as possible remedies for meaning- 1994); it was a theory about roles, identities, and
deflecting events. In personal identity theories, situated action.
the assumption is that people operate to main- Recent developments, however, make clear
tain their own identities. Affect Control The- that the boundary between personal and so-
ory explicitly considers how a situation in which cial identity theories is indistinct and ever-
meanings have been disrupted can be repaired changing. MacKinnon & Heise (2010) develop
by any of the actors that are copresent in a situ- a control theory of the self that is based on Affect
ation, even those who were not involved in the Control Theory. The theory has two elements.
deflecting event. First, actors use a “cultural theory of people”—
Finally, the theories differ somewhat in their the collection of categories and logical implica-
assumptions about the stability of meaning. tions among them—as a menu of possibilities
Since Identity Control Theory focuses on per- for self-identification and understanding oth-
sonal, internalized identity meanings, much of ers. Second, when self-identity meanings are
this research program looks at how these mean- deflected in one situation (and if those deflec-
ings shift as a result of interactions over a tions cannot easily be behaviorally resolved),
period of sustained interactions (e.g., Stets & then actors seek out other possible identities
Burke 2005). In Affect Control Theory, mean- in situations that, when maintained, will resolve
ings are assumed to be quite stable and acquired the deflection at the level of the self. Therefore,
through long-term socialization processes from although it uses the mathematical control sys-
the culture at large. Most extreme dislocations tem from Affect Control Theory, this new iden-
of meaning that cannot be resolved behaviorally tity theory clearly moves back into the realm of
are resolved through relabeling a person or ac- internalized, personal identity theories by con-
tion. Since both theories share the core control centrating on how people maintain a stable self-
imagery of Powers (1973), much research that image over a series of situational encounters. In
supports Affect Control Theory could support this case, they do so by agentically entering sit-
either theory (e.g., Robinson & Smith-Lovin uations that place them in different identities
1992, 1999), as well as self-consistency theories and lead to the experience of self-relevant situ-
from psychology. Work that is more distinc- ated meanings. Notice the similarity to the ba-
tive to this theoretical tradition looks at fea- sic question posed (and answered) by Stryker’s
tures other than the central actor. For example, Identity Theory: How do people choose which
one series of studies examines how emotion dis- identities to enact, when they have a choice?
plays (which signal transient meanings and de- MacKinnon and Heise give a more formal an-
flections from identity) lead to labeling after a swer to this question than Stryker, but they are
deviant act (e.g., Robinson et al. 1994). Another definitely building in his domain.
looks at how people work to manage the iden- Having discussed how two very similar the-
tities of others, even at some cost to their own ories differ in their emphasis on personal versus
self-image (C.L. Rogalin, D.T. Robinson, L. social/cultural focus, we now turn to a perspec-
Smith-Lovin, submitted manuscript). tive that focuses on how contextual elements
Since Affect Control Theory focuses on the affect self-meanings that are derived from cat-
situation, it often deals with identities that are egory memberships. Social Identity Theory

deals with cognitions about categories of in- than it is for achieved categorizations (e.g., ed-
groups and out-groups (Tajfel & Turner 1979). ucational degree status, membership on sports
Therefore, it would seem to be the prototype of teams), especially if the higher status is within
an intrapersonal identity theory. However, the reach. Therefore, it is the social environment
mechanisms described by the theory actually and, in particular, the relevant group contrasts
center on the impact of the social environment within that environment that determine
on those cognitions, placing this theory in the what dimensions of self-perception, other-
situational/cultural category for our treatment stereotyping, and intergroup competition/
here. We emphasize those contextual elements discrimination occur. If I think of myself as an
of the theory in our description of it.3 American and I am in a social context where
the British are my out-group, I might think
of my American self as egalitarian (as opposed
Social Identity Theory to the class-oriented British). But if I am (still)
Social Identity Theory has its roots in work by an American and I am comparing myself to
Tajfel during the late 1950s and 1960s on the an Italian, I might think of myself as orderly
social factors that influence perception. It was and institution-upholding (as opposed to the
further developed with Turner in the 1970s and unsettled, fractious Italians). The hypotheses
1980s (Tajfel & Turner 1979, Turner & Tajfel of Social Identity Theory typically focus on
1982; see also Hogg 1992). Like all the the- how variations in the social situation (the
ories we review here, Social Identity Theory relevant out-groups, the beliefs about the
sees social actors as having multiple identities degree of mobility and social change possible,
that get activated by different social contexts. etc.) influence the content of the operative
Here, the emphasis is on category memberships meanings for the in-group (i.e., situated self
(e.g., being a Muslim or an Australian). When meanings) and the out-group (stereotypes and
a category membership becomes salient (rele- discrimination).
vant to the social context), self-perception and Notice that in Social Identity Theory, the
conduct become in-group normative. Percep- concept of salience has a very different meaning
tions of other groups become out-group stereo- from that in Identity Theory. In Stryker’s Iden-
typical. Depending on the nature of the rela- tity Theory, identity salience is a stable part of
tionship between the groups (e.g., whether it is the self—a result of commitment (frequent and
competitive or status-ranked), self- and other- affectively valued relationships to others). It is
perceptions can shift toward different types of something that actors carry from situation to
perceptual discrimination. situation. In Social Identity Theory, salience is
Unlike the control theories of identity conceptualized as the impact of the situation on
reviewed above, Social Identity Theory self-categorizations. I might be an American in
assumes a self-enhancement motive. After Paris, but at a Civil War reenactment, I am a
self-categorization occurs in the context of a Southerner, and in the American Sociological
situation, actors are motivated to make compar- Association, I am a professor and a social
isons that favor the in-group (and sometimes psychologist. And in each of these venues,
disparage the out-group). The strength of this I might have different meanings for those
tendency varies, depending on the potential for categorical identities, depending on the salient
mobility—it is stronger for immutable ascribed out-group at the time. In comparing Tajfel’s
categorizations (e.g., race, gender, nationality) Social Identity Theory and Stryker’s Identity
Theory, Hogg et al. (1995, p. 263) noted
that Tajfel’s theory put more emphasis on
3
social context for identity and their meanings,
Other treatments (e.g., Stets & Burke 2000) have empha-
sized points of overlap between Social Identity Theory in whereas the sociological Identity Theory
psychology and Identity Theory in sociology. focused on self-structure for motivating the

enactment of identities and long-term social determined by the situation, not by an internal
experience for the internalized meanings. self-structure. And both provide a generative
To end our section on situational/cultural account of how action unfolds in the situation,
theories of identity, we turn to a theory that given these meanings. The fact that Status
is not considered an identity theory at all—the Characteristics Theory is frequently now
Status Characteristics Theory branch of the ex- applied outside of its scope conditions of col-
pectation states theoretical research program. laborative, jointly rewarded task orientation—
We include the theory in this review not to which nullifies the exchange mechanism—
cover all of its rich contributions to microso- makes it closer to a situationally based identity
ciology, but to highlight the elements of the theory than the status-exchange theory of its
theory that deal with the relationships among origins. Researchers in both the Affect Control
identity and interaction. The increasing use of Theory and the Identity Control Theory tradi-
the theory outside of its scope conditions by tions have used the theory to discuss how status
identity researchers justifies its placement here. meanings organize action within social situa-
tions (Ridgeway & Smith-Lovin 1994, Rashotte

& Smith-Lovin 1997, Stets 1997, Stets &
Status Characteristics Theory Harrod 2004, Cast et al. 1999). For example,
The intellectual roots of Status Characteristics Stets & Harrod (2004) find that actors in
Theory are not in symbolic interaction, but in higher-status positions have interactional
the exchange tradition (Correll & Ridgeway resources that allow them to sustain their
2003). When people work together on a task identity meanings within situations, avoiding
and will be rewarded jointly for its successful negative emotions that come with lack of
completion (the scope conditions of the the- identity maintenance.
ory), actors are motivated to assess who will Having reviewed the systematically devel-
contribute most effectively to the task comple- oped theories of identity and action that
tion. The actors for whom task expectations emphasize internalized meanings and situa-
are the highest are given action opportunities, tional/cultural elements, respectively, we now
receive positive evaluations, and have other in- turn to a body of literature on collective iden-
teractional advantages. Actors’ characteristics tity that has a very different emphasis. In-
(e.g., gender, race) become important within deed, a review of this literature a decade ago
a situation when those characteristics are (Cerulo 1997) barely mentions social psycho-
evaluated by self and others, and are perceived logical theories. Here, we try to summarize
(either implicitly or explicitly) to be relevant the differing emphasis of this substantial lit-
to expectations about task performance. The erature on collective identity and to draw out
theory’s core mechanism is that group mem- connections between its treatment of identity
bers will exchange deference within the group and the social psychological literature reviewed
interaction for the high-expectation actors’ above.
contributions to the task (resulting in higher
benefits for all group members, including the
lower-expectation ones). COLLECTIVE IDENTITY
Note, however, the similarities between The solidarity that derives from similarities is at its
Status Characteristics Theory and Affect Con- maximum when the collective consciousness com-
trol Theory (Ridgeway & Smith-Lovin 1994). pletely envelopes our total consciousness, coinciding
Both theories posit that largely consensual with it at every point.
cultural meanings are imported into a situation —Emile Durkheim (1893)
to organize action within that setting. Both
theories suggest that the identities (and, there- The sociological literature on collective iden-
fore, cultural meanings) that are relevant are tity is less organized around distinct midrange

theories than are the literatures on personal Psychologists working in the social identity
identity and situated identity. Rather, it is a and self-categorization theoretical traditions
wide-ranging literature coming out of a num- refer to the “collective self ” as nearly inter-
ber of traditions, including cultural sociol- changeable with “social identity” as used in
ogy, social movements theory, feminist soci- those theories (Brewer & Gardner 1996) and
ology, and cognitive sociology. Consequently, thus focus largely on its consequences for
this section of our review is organized around self-definition and interpersonal judgment.
concepts and process rather than around spe- Sociological use of the term collective identity
cific theoretical traditions. We attempt to draw focuses more on its consequences for mobiliz-
connections between this vibrant literature ing joint action. This is closer to what Heise
and the midrange microsociological theories (1998) referred to as empathic solidarity. Heise
reviewed above. (1998, p. 197) defines empathic solidarity as
The internal and situational identity pro- “a reciprocated sense of merged consciousness
cesses reviewed in the section above can lead and alliance, with faith in others’ commitments
identities to serve as an organizational force, to shared purposes.” Heise argues that when
binding us to those with commonalities of in- people take on the same identity, experience
terest and providing a social glue that can serve the same reality, and observe one another’s
as a foundation for mobilizing joint action. Col- parallel emotions and collateral behaviors,
lective identities should not be seen as a third a sense of common destiny and empathic
type of identity as much as an attempt by this connection arises. It is this phenomenon,
literature to highlight another set of identity- operating at the group level, that makes the
related dynamics at the group level. Both inter- sociological literature on collective identity
nalized identities and situational identities can distinctive from the microsociological identity
underpin the sense of connection and shared literature that we review above.
destiny requisite for collective identification.
Indeed, Nagel (1995, p. 21) refers to the col-
lective variant of ethnic identity as “a dialec- Collective Identity and the
tic between internal identification and external New Social Movements
ascription.” A concern with understanding what mobilizes
Most definitions of collective identity joint action motivates much of sociology’s at-
include a notion of identification with shared tention to collective identity. Collective iden-
features along with a recognition of shared tity is a central organizing concept in the lit-
opportunities and constraints afforded by those erature on new social movements. New social
features (Melucci 1989). Taylor & Whittier movement theory (Laraña et al. 1994; Melucci
(1999, p. 170) define collective identity as the 1989, 1994; Offe 1985; Turner 1969) juxtaposes
“shared definition of a group that derives from modern (post-1960s) movements with earlier
members’ common interests, experiences, and social movements, arguing that contemporary
solidarity.” A sense of we-ness, or connection movements are less about Marxist-style con-
to other members of the group/category, is flict over material interests and more concerned
an essential component of collective identity, with identity meanings and other symbolic re-
but the concept goes far beyond that. Prentice sources. For example, Turner (1969) related
et al. (1994) specifically distinguish between protest participation to identity dynamics and
group identities based on common bonds referred to the emerging number of “identity
(attachments to individual group members) seeking” movements. The identity dynamics
and those based on common identities (at- described by Turner focused on personal iden-
tachments directly to the group or category). tities and the identification/disidentification
The latter form of attachment is necessary to with various groups. Later researchers refined
produce a collective identity. the notion of collective identity as a group-level

phenomenon (Melucci 1989, 1994) central to United States. Her work suggests that bound-
giving a group or category the coherence and ary work around collective identities operates
energy necessary to mobilize its constituents multidimensionally and that the relative promi-
into collective action. Nearly a decade ago, nence of those dimensions can vary between
Polletta & Jasper (2001) reviewed the literature cultural settings (echoing some themes in Social
on collective identity and social movements, re- Identity Theory). Her analysis distinguished
vealing how identity processes are deeply re- between three types of symbolic boundaries:
lated to all aspects of social movements, includ- moral, socioeconomic, and cultural. According
ing (a) movement emergence, (b) recruitment to Lamont’s research, French social and cul-
and participation, (c) movement strategy, and tural specialists draw stronger cultural bound-
(d) interpretation of outcomes (see Stryker et al. aries, while social and cultural specialists in
2000). the United States attend more to economic
boundaries. More specifically, Lamont found
Boundary Work that boundary-drawing activities in the United
States vary with the degree to which they are

Taylor & Whittier (1999) describe three factors
embedded in occupational structures that are
that contribute to the development of a collec-
dependent on profit-making. U.S. social and
tive identity capable of motivating group-level

cultural specialists in the nonprofit sector felt
action: (a) the creation of social boundaries,
more similar to, and connected with, other non-
(b) the development and recognition of social
profit workers than to other social and cul-
criteria that account for a group’s structural po-
tural specialists who were dependent on profit-
sition, and (c) negotiation of intergroup and in-
making. In contrast, French social and cultural
tragroup meanings. Boundaries identify who is
specialists identified more with the intellectual
and is not a member of a collective, but it is
and cultural boundaries around their vocations
group consciousness that gives significance to a
and less with the economic aspects.
collectivity (Taylor & Whittier 1999, p. 179).
The boundary work literature focuses
In the case of mobilizing collective conscious-
primarily on the strategies and practices that
ness in response to a dominant group or oppres-
groups use to construct collective identities
sive understanding, this significance takes the
and to manage the symbolic boundaries around
form of what Morris (1999) calls oppositional
those identities. However, theorists have also
consciousness. Strategies and practices used by
attended to how external structures create
collectives to create, maintain, and transform
and constrain the emergence and salience of
cultural categories are collectively referred to
collective identities. Again, this work picks
as boundary work (Nippert-Eng 2002).
up some themes emphasized in the socio-
Gamson (1995) points out that fixed cate-
cultural/situational theories of identity in
gories are the basis for both oppression and
microsociology.
political power. Consequently, boundary work
regarding collective identities such as race,
gender, and sexuality can sometimes vacillate Competition and Contact
between taking on the goal of deconstruct- Two opposing logics guide the theoretical lit-
ing boundaries (e.g., Lorber 2006) and tak- erature regarding the impact of external forces
ing on the goal of fixing the boundaries to on the salience of collective identity boundaries
mobilize on the basis of them (e.g., Jenson and the strength of collective identity bonds.
1995). One is that direct competition strengthens
Within this theoretical tradition, Lamont group boundaries and mobilizes collective
(1992) offered an in-depth analysis of the sym- identity-based conflict. Competition theory
bolic boundaries people draw when categoriz- (Olzak 1994) argues that when economic and
ing self and others in her comparative study of demographic changes lead to a breakdown in
upper-middle-class culture in France and the labor market segmentation, the increase in

intergroup interaction and the intensification salient and pan-ethnic collective action is sup-
of competition for scarce resources strain in- pressed.
tergroup relations and, consequently, increase
collective identification—particularly ethnic
identification. Olzak and colleagues have Nested Identities
amassed considerable support for the idea that As Okamoto’s work highlights, boundary work
increased economic competition leads to surges by collectives is not simply a matter of sharpen-
in ethnic protests and collective action (Olzak ing contrasts between competing groups or em-
et al. 1994, 1996; Soule 1992). Nagel (1995), phasizing distinctiveness from a larger oppres-
on the other hand, found that cultural renewal sive culture. At times collective identification
among Native Americans has taken place under is a process of crystallizing subgroup bound-
exactly the kinds of conditions that are thought aries that fractionalize a larger whole, or meld-
to produce cultural decline. One argument is ing subgroups into larger, cohesive collectives.
that positive economic conditions set the stage Green (1999) describes four groups of sectarian
for this renewal. According to Nagel, structural evangelical Protestants whose efforts animated
externalities such as successful land claims, the first wave of a Christian Right movement,
increases in federal spending, and minority but whose intergroup conflicts ultimately con-
set aside programs have increased the sym- tributed to the decline of the movement. The
bolic and material value of Native American success of a second wave of the Christian Right
identity. movement, according to Green, was facilitated
In contrast to the idea that increased by the development of a new collective identity
interaction and competition foster collective for these groups.
identification, the cultural division of labor Similarly, in her study of the emergence of
theory proposes that group solidarity and a pan-tribal Native American identity, Nagel
collective identity arise when groups are (1995) described the process by which sub-
distinctively positioned in an occupational groups can join to form a larger common iden-
structure on the basis of cultural markers tity. She referred to ethnic renewal as the
(Hechter 1978, 2000). Occupational segrega- process by which new ethnic identities are
tion increases intragroup interaction relative built/rebuilt out of historical social and sym-
to intergroup interaction and consequently bolic systems. Among Native Americans, a
increases commonality of interests and futures. shared history of discrimination and oppres-
Thus, when cultural and economic boundaries sion, combined with some of the positive eco-
overlap, collective identity will arise on the basis nomic externalities described above, created a
of cultural, rather than economic, similarity. common fate among ethnic groups with oth-
Okamoto (2003) extended and synthesized erwise distinctive cultural histories. These de-
these contrasting arguments into a theory about velopments facilitated the collective processes
the shifting, layered nature of ethnic identi- (e.g., institution building via the establishment
ties. In a study of the relationship between of new organizations and religions) and cultural
economic competition, cultural division of la- practices (development of new shared rituals
bor, and pan-Asian identity, Okamoto found and symbols) involved in ethnic renewal.
that the collective identity boundaries tracked
the patterns of occupational segregation: When
Asian ethnic groups occupy a shared place in Identity, Emotions, and Mobilization
the occupational market, pan-Asian identities Close on the heels of renewed attention to
are more likely to emerge and mobilize pan- the role of identity in social movements has
ethnic collective action. When separate Asian been a revival of interest in how emotions
ethnic groups are segregated into different oc- mobilize joint action. Scholars have recently
cupations, the separate ethnic identities remain become more focused on how emotions create

solidarity and energize collective bonds (Britt collective identity. The conventional argument
& Heise 2000, Collins 1990, Gould 2004, is that social and institutional complexity of
Heise 1998, Jasper 1998). Britt & Heise (2000) late modernity (Giddens 1991) or postmoder-
point out that shared emotion is not enough nity (Gergen 1991) has fractionalized the con-
to generate collective identification and action. temporary self. Wimmer (2002) speaks to this
Using arguments from Affect Control Theory, idea in his study of nationalism and ethnicity,
Britt & Heise (2000) argued that negative emo- but argues for the opposite relationship. Ac-
tions that are low energy and low potency (e.g., cording to Wimmer, contemporary notions of
shame and depression) are not useful for activat- identity are responsible for the emergence of
ing collective bonds or motivating joint action. modernity. Wimmer distinguishes three posi-
In contrast, negative emotions that are higher tions on the issue of nationalism and ethnicity.
in energy and potency (e.g., anger) can motivate The first is that nations and ethnic groups are
individual participation in collective actions— truly modern phenomena. Second, nations and
from mild protests to large-scale conflict. To ethnic groups as we currently understand them
truly energize a mobilized collective identity, are transitory—what he refers to as “birth pains
however, requires both energy and a positive of modernity.” Third, national and ethnic iden-
sense of connection within the collective. Such tities are perennial and basic to human social
mobilization is facilitated, according to Britt organization. Wimmer then presents what he

& Heise, by positive, powerful, and energetic describes as a radical modern argument: that
emotions like pride. Britt & Heise argued that ethnicity nationalism produced modernity as
certain emotion transformations (e.g., shame to we understand it. According to Wimmer, it was
pride) are difficult to make without transition- the fusion of three notions of peoplehood that
ing between more affectively similar emotions resulted in the modern politicization of ethnic-
along the way. They illustrated how aspects ity: (a) the notion of the people as a sovereign
of participation in the gay rights movement entity—with power by means of political (such
could be seen as efforts to transform shame to as democratic) procedures; (b) the notion of
fear to anger to pride in an effort to construct people as citizens—with rights and responsibil-
a solidary and energized collective identity. ities; and (c) the notion of people as an ethnic
In a participant observation study of political community bound by common political destiny
avoidance in several volunteer organizations, and shared cultural features. The commingling
Eliasoph (2002) examined the complement to of these notions translated into three mod-
this process. Eliasoph studied how political dis- ern political principles: democracy, citizenship,
engagement is socially produced in interaction. and national self-determination. Wimmer fur-
Her analysis focused on how individuals bal- ther argues that nations differ in the rela-
anced ideas of citizenship with feelings of pow- tive salience of these principles. According to
erlessness. She described the process of “culture Wimmer, the French and Swiss emphasize
work” done by volunteers working to address democracy and rely on the concept of democ-
political avoidance by transforming feelings of racy to derive the principles of citizenship and
powerlessness into expansion of self-interest. In nationalism. In contrast, Wimmer argues that
this way, Eliasoph showed how emotion trans- Germany, Greece, and Israel stress nationality
formation in an effort to protect personal iden- and from it derive the principles of democracy
tity can also inhibit activation and mobilization and citizenship.
of a collective identity. While social movement theorists focus
on both aspects of collective identity—
common interests/fate and common symbolic
Collective Identity and Modernity meanings—there is a strong thread in the
Much has been written about the relationship modernity/postmodernity literature that
between modernity and contemporary loci of documents a shift over time in the relative

importance of these two aspects in shaping with a richer set of resources for mobilizing
category-based action. Pre-1960s movements effective collective action (Heckathorn 1993,
are presumed to be motivated more by more Lichterman 1999, Oliver & Marwell 1988,
structural, ascriptive category memberships Richards 2004). Moreover, just as multiple
and jointness of interest, whereas post-1960s identities within self-structures can sometimes
movements are thought to be driven more lead to identity conflict, competing or lay-
by meaning-based bonds (Laraña et al. 1994, ered identities within collectives can create
Melucci 1994, Offe 1985). This argument about opportunities for conflict and fractionalization.
the trend away from the importance of struc- Richards (2004) illustrates this point with
turally defined group identities toward more her examination of the delicate balancing act
personally and culturally defined group iden- required to mobilize and maintain collective
tities parallels the findings in social psychology identity in the ethnically and economically di-
about the transition (over a similar historical verse women’s movements in Chile. She studied
period) from more structural/institutional def- the relationships between the poor, working-
initions of self to more personal/dispositional class pobladoras, the indigenous Mapuche, and
definitions of self (Turner 1976). the National Women’s Service (SERNAM).
Nested class and ethnic identities set the stage
for potential fractures among these various

Fractal Organization groups involved in the women’s movement.
of Identity Dynamics Both the pobladoras and the Mapuche describe
Collective identities are to groups what so- being left out of the programs implemented by
cial identities are to individuals (Owens 2003, SERNAM. Pobladoras identified gender as im-
p. 227). Therefore, collective identity processes portant in explaining their activism—yet ini-
can sometimes mirror the processes described tially organized around roles as wives and
by the theories about internal and situational mothers. Richards describes how the pobladoras’
identity dynamics reviewed above. The process self-views became transformed through par-
of boundary work, often fueled by competition ticipation in the movement. Meanwhile, the
or contact, can lead to the development of an Mapuche claims of difference and disadvan-
identity, making it available for members of a tage conflicted with SERNAM’s goal of equal-
category to see themselves as having a common ity/sameness, causing schisms in both discourse
set of interests or fate. Sometimes new labels and agendas. Richards’s work showed how
are developed and added to a culture’s “cultural members of the women’s movement navigate
theory of people” (MacKinnon & Heise 2010), the danger of fragmentation by suppressing the
making them available for individuals to adopt separate identities in the superordinate collec-
and incorporate into a self-structure. Further, tive. This careful negotiation of a coherent,
intergroup dynamics can lead to situations that integrated collective identity echoes the find-
allow groups and/or individuals to adopt differ- ings of Lichterman’s (1999) study of a sexual
ent identity orientations at different moments minority activist group as it attempted to cre-
in a political/social process. ate and maintain a solidary collective identity
While identity accumulation theory (Thoits as a coalition-building network. Lichterman
1983, 2003) and self-complexity theory found that compared to some of its con-
(Linville 1987) argue that having access to stituent groups, the LGBT coalition-building
multiple role-identities can provide the self group actively avoided reflective discourse and
with resources that help provide a buffer engaged in more unified talk carefully de-
against stress, the social movement literature signed not to raise the specter of difference
reveals that collective identities with layers or to activate potentially schismatic organizing
of nested identities can provide a movement processes.

CONCLUSIONS AND internalized, idiosyncratic meanings over a

OPPORTUNITIES definition of situation that is institutionally
This review, with its unusual structure and its imposed.
coverage of the relatively disconnected litera- Connections between the microsociological
tures on identity within the microsociology and literature and the group-level treatment of col-
social movements areas, is designed to allow lective identity are more challenging. The obvi-
readers to see opportunities for enriching both ous point of departure is that the people who are
traditions. We deal first with the opportunity motivated by collective identities toward politi-
for connections within the microlevel traditions cal or social action are undergoing the processes
and then with potential for enrichment across already well described by the microsociological
the two distinct literatures. theories. This fact alone might provide some
The relatively subtle distinction that we leverage for determining when recruitment, re-
have drawn between theories that emphasize framing of a social situation, and mobilization
might succeed or fail. More interesting are the
how self-structures and internalized meanings

organize social life, on the one hand, and how ways in which the collective identity literature
we import cultural meanings and shape them can suggest new topics for microsociological re-
within the context of situated interaction, on search. Much of this literature focuses on the
the other, points to a need for two types of new structural conditions under which new options
research. While much of the microsociological are created for a definition of the situation. The
literature has used either surveys (to study definition of the situation is a central process
self-structure and internalized meanings) or in microsociological identity theories, but it is
experiments (to study situated meanings and rarely studied explicitly. The collective identity
how they shift in context), we may need new literature’s use of Goffman’s framing concept,
study of naturally occurring situations to fully and its attention to the inter- and intragroup
exploit the linkages between internalized struc- processes that successfully motivate actors to
ture and situated action. Some insights from view a contested situation in a new way, could
Stryker’s Identity Theory could be linked to the point to a useful exploration of these key pro-
fast-growing literature on networks to develop cesses at the microlevel. A second area of po-
the linkage between commitment and salience tential enrichment comes from the collective
more fully and to explore how it impacts situ- identity focus on the group as a unit that gen-
ated action. The new work by MacKinnon & erates social action. As we noted above, there
Heise (2010; see also Moore & Robinson 2006) is a parallel between processes at the individual
about how people use movement from one and group levels, both in defining situations and
situation to another to maintain fundamental in generating action. Although theorists should
sentiments toward the self could be linked avoid loose analogies, the processes by which
to Thoit’s work on identity accumulation to groups manage multiple, nested, layered iden-
show how situated action accomplishes mental tities and use particular identities (and the emo-
health benefits (or, among some categories of tional responses associated with them) to moti-
people, fails to do so). Exploring the few com- vate organized collective action may mirror the
peting theoretical predictions from Identity process of managing nested identity structures
Control Theory and Affect Control Theory within individual selves. An exploration of this
(Smith-Lovin & Robinson 2006) might allow process might require a refocusing of attention
us to assess the relative value of emic, indi- on group-level studies in microsociology. We
vidualized meaning measurement (as used in have excellent midlevel theories of group pro-
Burke’s work) and mathematical formalization cess in sociological social psychology, and they
(as used by Heise). It might also reveal some are becoming increasingly connected intellec-
scope conditions for when people privilege tually to the issue of identity [see, for an excel-
lent example, Lawler et al.’s (2009) new book

on affective commitments to groups]. We need organize actions vis-à-vis other outside group-
to push these developments to see how groups level interests.
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
The authors are not aware of any affiliations, memberships, funding, or financial holdings that
might be perceived as affecting the objectivity of this review.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
We thank Tiffani Everett, Steven Foy, Robert Freeland, Elizabeth Hordge-Freeman, Christopher
D. Moore, Victor Ray, Kim Rogers, Daniel B. Shank, and Allison Wisecup for helpful comments
on an earlier draft of this review.
LITERATURE CITED
Ahrens C, Ryff C. 2006. Multiple roles and well-being: sociodemographic and psychological moderators. Sex
Roles 55:801–15
Alexander CN Jr, Knight GW. 1971. Situated identities and social psychological experimentation. Sociometry
34:65–82
Alexander CN Jr, Wiley MG. 1981. Situated activity and identity formation. In Social Psychology: Sociological
Perspectives, ed. M Rosenburg, RH Turner, pp. 269–82. New York: Basic Books
Bandura A. 1977. Social Learning Theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall
Barnett RC, Hyde JS. 2001. Women, men, work, and family. Am. Psychol. 56:781–96
Brewer MB, Gardner WL. 1996. Who is this “we”? Levels of collective identity and self representations.
J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 71:83–93
Britt L, Heise DR. 2000. From shame to pride in identity politics. See Stryker et al. 2000, pp. 252–71
Brook AT, Garcia J, Fleming M. 2008. The effects of multiple identities on psychological well-being. Personal.
Soc. Psychol. Bull. 34:1588–600
Burke PJ. 1991. Identity processes and social stress. Am. Sociol. Rev. 56:836–49
Burke PJ. 2004. Identities and social structure: the 2003 Cooley-Mead Award address. Soc. Psychol. Q. 67:5–15
Burke PJ, Reitzes DC. 1991. An identity theory approach to commitment. Soc. Psychol. Q. 54:239–51
Burke PJ, Stets JE. 1999. Trust and commitment through self-verification. Soc. Psychol. Q. 62:347–66
Burke PJ, Stets JE. 2009. Identity Theory. New York: Oxford Univ. Press
Burke PJ, Stets JE, Cerven C. 2007. Gender, legitimation, and identity verification in groups. Soc. Psychol. Q.
70:27–42
Burke PJ, Tully JT. 1977. The measurement of role/identity. Soc. Forces 55:880–97
Cast AD, Stets JE, Burke PJ. 1999. Does the self conform to the views of others? Soc. Psychol. Q. 62:68–82
Cerulo KA. 1997. Identity construction: new issues, new directions. Annu. Rev. Sociol. 23:385–409
Collins R. 1990. Stratification, emotional energy, and the transient emotions. In Research Agendas in the Sociology
of Emotions, ed. TD Kemper, pp. 27–57. Albany: SUNY Press
Cooley CH. 1902. Human Nature and the Social Order. New York: Scribner
Correll SJ, Ridgeway CL. 2003. Expectation states theory. In Handbook of Social Psychology, ed. J Delamater,
pp. 29–51. New York: Kluwer
Durkheim E. 1893 (1984). The Division of Labor in Society. Transl. WD Halls. New York: Free Press
Eliasoph N. 2002. “Close to Home”: the work of avoiding politics. In Cultural Sociology, ed. L Spillman,
pp. 130–40. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press
Foote NN. 1951. Identification as the basis for a theory of motivation. Am. Sociol. Rev. 16:14–21
Gamson WA. 1995. Constructing social protest. In Social Movements and Culture, ed. H Johnston,
B Klandermans, pp. 85–106. New York: Routledge
Gergen KJ. 1991. The Saturated Self: Dilemmas of Identity in Contemporary Life. New York: Basic Books

Giddens A. 1991. Modernity and Self-Identity: Self and Society in the Late Modern Age. Stanford, CA: Stanford
Univ. Press
Goffman E. 1959. The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. Garden City, NJ: Doubleday
Goffman E. 1963. Stigma: Notes on the Management of Spoiled Identity. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall
Goffman E. 1974. Frame Analysis: An Essay on the Organization of Experience. New York: Harper & Row
Gollob HF. 1968. Impression formation and word combination in sentences. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 10:341–53
Gould DB. 2004. Passionate political processes: bringing emotions back into the study of social movements.
In Rethinking Social Movements: Structure, Meaning and Emotion, ed. J Goodwin, JM Jasper, pp. 155–75.
Lanham, MD: Roman & Littlefield
Green JC. 1999. The spirit willing: collective identity and the development of the Christian right. In Waves
of Protest: Social Movements Since the Sixties, ed. J Freeman, V Johnson, pp. 153–68. Oxford: Oxford Univ.
Press
Hechter M. 1978. Group formation and the cultural division of labor. Am. J. Sociol. 84:293–318
Hechter M. 2000. Containing Nationalism. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press
Heckathorn DD. 1993. Collective action and group heterogeneity: voluntary provision versus selective incen-
tives. Am. Sociol. Rev. 58:329–50

Heider F. 1946. Attitudes and cognitive organization. J. Psychol. 21:107–12
Heider F. 1958. The Psychology of Interpersonal Relations. New York: Wiley
Heise DR. 1979. Understanding Events: Affect and the Construction of Social Action. Cambridge, UK/New York:
Cambridge Univ. Press. 197 pp.
Heise DR. 1998. Conditions for empathic solidarity. In The Problem of Solidarity: Theories and Models, ed.
P Doreian, T Fararo, pp. 197–212. Amsterdam: Gordon & Breach
Heise DR. 2007. Expressive Order: Confirming Sentiments in Social Actions. New York: Springer. 163 pp.
Hochschild AR. 1983. The Managed Heart: Commercialization of Human Feeling. Berkeley: Univ. Calif. Press.
307 pp.
Hogg MA. 1992. The Social Psychology of Group Cohesiveness: From Attraction to Social Identity. Hemel Hempstead,
UK: Harvester Wheatsheaf
Hogg MA, Terry DJ, White KM. 1995. A tale of two theories: a critical comparison of identity theory with
social identity theory. Soc. Psychol. Q. 58:255–69
Horney K. 1945. Our Inner Conflicts: A Constructive Theory of Neurosis. New York: Norton
Jackson PB. 1997. Role occupancy and minority mental health. J. Health Soc. Behav. 38:237–55
James W. 1890. The Principles of Psychology. New York: Henry Holt
Janzen BL, Muhajarine N. 2003. Social role occupancy, gender, income adequacy, life stage and health: a
longitudinal study of employed Canadian men and women. Soc. Sci. Med. 57:1491–503
Jasper JM. 1998. The emotions of protest: affective and reactive emotions in and around social movements.
Sociol. Forum 13:397–424
Jenson J. 1995. What’s in a name? Nationalist movements and public discourse. In Social Movements and
Culture, ed. HJB Klandermans, pp. 107–26. New York: Routledge
Kikuzawa S. 2006. Multiple roles and mental health in cross-cultural perspective: the elderly in the United
States and Japan. J. Health Soc. Behav. 47:62–76
Lamont M. 1992. Money, Morals, and Manners. Univ. Chicago Press
Lawler EJ, Thye SR, Yoon J. 2009. Social Commitments in a Depersonalized World. New York: Russell Sage
Found.
Laraña E, Johnston H, Gusfield JR. 1994. New Social Movements: From Ideology to Identity. Philadelphia: Temple
Univ. Press
Lichterman P. 1999. Talking identity in the public sphere: broad visions and small spaces in sexual identity
politics. Theory Soc. 28:101–41
Linville PW. 1987. Self-complexity as a cognitive buffer against stress-related illness and depression. J. Personal.
Soc. Psychol. 52:663–76
Lorber J. 2006. Shifting paradigms and challenging categories. Soc. Probl. 53:448–53
MacKinnon NJ. 1994. Symbolic Interactionism as Affect Control. Albany: SUNY Press
MacKinnon NJ, Heise DR. 2010. Self, Identity, and Social Institutions. New York: Palgrave MacMillan

McCall GJ, Simmons JL. 1966. Identities and Interactions. New York: Free Press
McPherson M, Smith-Lovin L, Cook J. 2001. Birds of a feather: homophily in social networks. Annu. Rev.
Sociol. 27:415–44
McPherson M, Smith-Lovin L, Brashears ME. 2006. Social isolation in America: changes in core discussion
networks over two decades. Am. Sociol. Rev. 71:353–75
Mead GH. 1934. Mind, Self, and Society from the Standpoint of a Social Behaviorist. Chicago: Univ. Chicago
Press
Melucci A. 1989. Nomads of the Present. Philadelphia: Temple Univ. Press
Melucci A. 1994. A strange kind of newness: What’s new in new social movements? See Laraña et al. 1994,
pp. 101–32
Moore CD, Robinson DT. 2006. Selective identity preferences: choosing from among alternative occupational
identities. Adv. Group Process. 23:253–81
Morris AD. 1999. A retrospective on the civil rights movement: political and intellectual landmarks. Annu.
Rev. Sociol. 25:517–39
Nagel J. 1995. American Indian Renewal: Red Power and the Resurgence of Identity and Culture. Oxford: Oxford
Univ. Press
Nippert-Eng CE. 2002. Boundary work: sculpting work and home. In Cultural Sociology, ed. L Spillman,
pp. 79–86. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press
Offe C. 1985. New social movements: challenging the boundaries of institutional politics. Soc. Res. 52:817–68
Okamoto DG. 2003. Toward a theory of panethnicity: explaining Asian American collective action. Am. Sociol.
Rev. 68:811–42
Oliver PE, Marwell G. 1988. The paradox of group size in collective action: a theory of the critical mass. II.
Am. Sociol. Rev. 53:1–8
Olzak S. 1994. The Dynamics of Ethnic Competition and Conflict. Stanford, CA: Stanford Univ. Press
Olzak S, Shanahan S, McEneaney EH. 1996. Poverty, segregation, and race riots: 1960 to 1993. Am. Sociol.
Rev. 61:590–613
Olzak S, Shanahan S, West E. 1994. School desegregation, interracial exposure, and antibusing activity in
contemporary urban America. Am. J. Sociol. 100:196–241
Osgood CE, May WH, Miron MS. 1975. Cross-Cultural Universals of Affective Meaning. Urbana: Univ. Ill.
Press
Osgood CE, Suci GJ, Tannenbaum PH. 1957. The Measurement of Meaning. Urbana: Univ. Ill. Press
Owens TJ. 2003. Self and identity. In Handbook of Social Psychology, ed. JD Delamater, pp. 205–32. New York:
Kluwer
Owens TJ, Aronson PJ. 2000. Self-concept as a force in social movement involvement. See Stryker et al. 2000,
pp. 132–51
Owens TJ, Serpe R. 2003. The role of self-esteem in family identity salience and commitment among African-
Americans, Latinos, and whites. In Advances in Identity Theory and Research, ed. PJ Burke, TJ Owens,
R Serpe, PA Thoits, pp. 85–104. New York: Kluwer
Polletta F, Jasper JM. 2001. Collective identity and social movements. Annu. Rev. Sociol. 27:283–305
Powers WT. 1973. Behavior: The Control of Perception. Chicago: Aldine
Prentice DA, Miller DT, Lightdale JR. 1994. Asymmetries in attachments to groups and to their members:
distinguishing between common-identity and common-bond groups. Personal. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 20:484–
93
Rashotte LS, Smith-Lovin L. 1997. Who benefits from being bold: the interactive effects of task cues and
status characteristics. Adv. Group Process. 14:235–55
Richards P. 2004. Pobladoras, Indigenas, and the State: Conflicts over Women’s Rights in Chile. New Brunswick,
NJ: Rutgers Univ. Press
Ridgeway C, Smith-Lovin L. 1994. Structure, culture and interaction: comparing two generative theories.
Adv. Group Process. 11:213–39
Robinson DT. 2007. Control theories in sociology. Annu. Rev. Sociol. 33:157–74
Robinson DT, Smith-Lovin L. 1992. Selective interaction as a strategy for identity maintenance: an affect
control model. Soc. Psychol. Q. 55:12–28

Robinson DT, Smith-Lovin L. 1999. Emotion display as a strategy for identity negotiation. Motiv. Emot.
23:73–104
Robinson DT, Smith-Lovin L, Tsoudis O. 1994. Heinous crime or unfortunate accident? The effects of
remorse on responses to mock criminal confessions. Soc. Forces 73:175–90
Rosenberg M. 1979. Conceiving the Self. New York: Basic Books
Sachs-Ericsson N, Ciarlo JA. 2000. Gender, social roles, and mental health: an epidemiological perspective.
Sex Roles 43:605–28
Serpe RT. 1987. Stability and change in self: a structural symbolic interactionist explanation. Soc. Psychol. Q.
50:44–55
Smith-Lovin L. 1979. Behavior settings and impressions formed from social scenarios. Soc. Psychol. Q. 42:31–43
Smith-Lovin L. 2007. The strength of weak identities: social structural sources of self, situation and emotional
experience. Soc. Psychol. Q. 70:106–24
Smith-Lovin L, Heise DR, eds. 1988. Analyzing Social Events: Advances in Affect Control Theory. New York:
Gordon & Breach
Smith-Lovin L, Robinson DT. 2006. Control theories of identity, action and emotion: in search of testable
differences between affect control theory and identity control theory. In Purpose, Meaning and Action:
Control Systems Theories in Sociology, ed. K McClelland, T Fararo, pp. 163–88. New York: MacMillan
Soule SA. 1992. Populism and black lynching in Georgia, 1890–1900. Soc. Forces 71:431–49
Stets JE. 1997. Status and identity in marital interaction. Soc. Psychol. Q. 60:185–217
Stets JE, Burke PJ. 2000. Identity theory and social identity theory. Soc. Psychol. Q. 63:224–37
Stets JE, Burke PJ. 2005. Identity verification, control, and aggression in marriage. Soc. Psychol. Q. 68:160–78
Stets JE, Harrod MM. 2004. Verification across multiple identities: the role of status. Soc. Psychol. Q. 67:155–71
Stets JE, Tsushima TM. 2001. Negative emotion and coping responses within identity control theory.
Soc. Psychol. Q. 64:283–95
Stryker S. 1968. Identity theory and role performance. J. Marriage Fam. 30:558–64
Stryker S. 1980. Symbolic Interactionism: A Social Structural Version. Menlo Park, CA: Benjamin Cummings
Stryker S. 2008. From Mead to a structural symbolic interactionism and beyond. Annu. Rev. Sociol. 34:15–31
Stryker S, Burke PJ. 2000. The past, present, and future of an identity theory. Soc. Psychol. Q. 63:284–97
Stryker S, Owens TJ, White RW, eds. 2000. Self, Identity, and Social Movements. Minneapolis: Univ. Minn.
Press
Stryker S, Serpe RT, Hunt MO. 2005. Making good on a promise: the impact of larger social structures on
commitments. Adv. Group Process. 22:93–124
Tajfel H, Turner JC. 1979. The Psychology of Intergroup Relations. Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole
Taylor V, Whittier NE. 1999. Collective identity in social movement communities: lesbian feminist mobi-
lization. In Waves of Protest: Social Movements Since the Sixties, ed. J Freeman, V Johnson, pp. 169–94.
Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press
Thoits PA. 1983. Multiple identities and psychological well-being: a reformulation and test of the social
isolation hypothesis. Am. Sociol. Rev. 48:174–87
Thoits PA. 1986. Social support as coping assistance. J. Consult. Clin. Psychol. 54:416–23
Thoits PA. 1995. Identity-relevant events and psychological symptoms: a cautionary tale. J. Health Soc. Behav.
36:72–82
Thoits PA. 2003. Personal agency in the accumulation of multiple role-identities. In Advances in Identity Theory
and Research, ed. PJ Burke, TJ Owens, RT Serpe, PA Thoits, pp. 179–94. New York: Kluwer
Thoits PA, Virshup LK. 1997. Me’s and we’s: forms and functions of social identities. In Self and Identity:
Fundamental Issues, ed. RD Ashmore, L Jussim, pp. 106–33. New York: Oxford Univ. Press
Turner JC, Tajfel H. 1982. Social Identity and Intergroup Relations. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
Turner RH. 1969. The public perception of protest. Am. Sociol. Rev. 34:815–31
Turner RH. 1976. The real self: from institution to impulse. Am. J. Sociol. 81:989–1016
Weinstein EA, Wiley MG, DeVaughn W. 1966. Role and interpersonal style as components of social inter-
action. Soc. Forces 45:210–16
Wethington E, Moen P, Glasgo N, Pillemer K. 2000. Multiple roles, social integration, and health. In Social
Integration in the Second Half of Life, ed. K Pillemer, P Moen, E Wethington, N Glasgo, pp. 48–71.
Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins Univ. Press
Wimmer A. 2002. Nationalist Exclusion and Ethnic Conflict. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press

SO36-FM ARI 2 June 2010 4:38
Annual Review
of Sociology
Contents Volume 36, 2010
Frontispiece
John W. Meyer p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p xiv
Prefatory Chapter
World Society, Institutional Theories, and the Actor

John W. Meyer p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 1
Theory and Methods

Causal Inference in Sociological Research
Markus Gangl p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p21
Causal Mechanisms in the Social Sciences
Peter Hedström and Petri Ylikoski p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p49
Social Processes
A World of Standards but not a Standard World: Toward a Sociology
of Standards and Standardization
Stefan Timmermans and Steven Epstein p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p69
Dynamics of Dyads in Social Networks: Assortative, Relational,
and Proximity Mechanisms
Mark T. Rivera, Sara B. Soderstrom, and Brian Uzzi p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p91
From the Sociology of Intellectuals to the Sociology of Interventions
Gil Eyal and Larissa Buchholz p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 117
Social Relationships and Health Behavior Across the Life Course
Debra Umberson, Robert Crosnoe, and Corinne Reczek p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 139
Partiality of Memberships in Categories and Audiences
Michael T. Hannan p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 159
v
SO36-FM ARI 2 June 2010 4:38
Institutions and Culture

What Is Sociological about Music?
William G. Roy and Timothy J. Dowd p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 183
Cultural Holes: Beyond Relationality in Social Networks and Culture
Mark A. Pachucki and Ronald L. Breiger p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 205
Formal Organizations
Organizational Approaches to Inequality: Inertia, Relative Power,
and Environments
Kevin Stainback, Donald Tomaskovic-Devey, and Sheryl Skaggs p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 225
Political and Economic Sociology

The Contentiousness of Markets: Politics, Social Movements,

and Institutional Change in Markets
Brayden G King and Nicholas A. Pearce p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 249
Conservative and Right-Wing Movements
Kathleen M. Blee and Kimberly A. Creasap p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 269
The Political Consequences of Social Movements
Edwin Amenta, Neal Caren, Elizabeth Chiarello, and Yang Su p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 287
Comparative Analyses of Public Attitudes Toward Immigrants
and Immigration Using Multinational Survey Data: A Review
of Theories and Research
Alin M. Ceobanu and Xavier Escandell p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 309
Differentiation and Stratification

Income Inequality: New Trends and Research Directions
Leslie McCall and Christine Percheski p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 329
Socioeconomic Disparities in Health Behaviors
Fred C. Pampel, Patrick M. Krueger, and Justin T. Denney p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 349
Gender and Health Inequality
Jen’nan Ghazal Read and Bridget K. Gorman p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 371
Incarceration and Stratification
Sara Wakefield and Christopher Uggen p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 387
Achievement Inequality and the Institutional Structure of Educational
Systems: A Comparative Perspective
Herman G. Van de Werfhorst and Jonathan J.B. Mijs p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 407
vi Contents
SO36-FM ARI 2 June 2010 4:38
Historical Studies of Social Mobility and Stratification

Marco H.D. van Leeuwen and Ineke Maas p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 429
Individual and Society

Race and Trust
Sandra Susan Smith p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 453
Three Faces of Identity
Timothy J. Owens, Dawn T. Robinson, and Lynn Smith-Lovin p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 477
Policy
The New Homelessness Revisited

Barrett A. Lee, Kimberly A. Tyler, and James D. Wright p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 501
The Decline of Cash Welfare and Implications for Social Policy

and Poverty
Sandra K. Danziger p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 523
Indexes
Cumulative Index of Contributing Authors, Volumes 27–36 p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 547

Cumulative Index of Chapter Titles, Volumes 27–36 p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 551
Errata
An online log of corrections to Annual Review of Sociology articles may be found at

http://soc.annualreviews.org/errata.shtml
Contents vii

Three Faces of Identity

Uploaded by

Document Informationclick to expand document information

Document Informationclick to expand document information

Copyright:

Available Formats

Three Faces of Identity

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Three Faces of Identity

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

SO36CH23-Smith-Lovin ARI 3 June 2010 1:46

Annu. Rev. Sociol. 2010. 36:477–99 Key Words

The Annual Review of Sociology is online at Abstract

INTRODUCTION its roots in classic sociological constructs like

We ﬁrst draw a distinction between iden-

and self-concept. Identity occupies an interest-

478 Owens · Robinson · Smith-Lovin

www.annualreviews.org • Three Faces of Identity 479

480 Owens · Robinson · Smith-Lovin

www.annualreviews.org • Three Faces of Identity 481

that the signiﬁcance of affective commitment

482 Owens · Robinson · Smith-Lovin

www.annualreviews.org • Three Faces of Identity 483

484 Owens · Robinson · Smith-Lovin

www.annualreviews.org • Three Faces of Identity 485

486 Owens · Robinson · Smith-Lovin

www.annualreviews.org • Three Faces of Identity 487

488 Owens · Robinson · Smith-Lovin

tions (Ridgeway & Smith-Lovin 1994, Rashotte

www.annualreviews.org • Three Faces of Identity 489

490 Owens · Robinson · Smith-Lovin

States vary with the degree to which they are

tive identity capable of motivating group-level

www.annualreviews.org • Three Faces of Identity 491

492 Owens · Robinson · Smith-Lovin

mobilization is facilitated, according to Britt organization. Wimmer then presents what he

www.annualreviews.org • Three Faces of Identity 493

for potential fractures among these various

494 Owens · Robinson · Smith-Lovin

CONCLUSIONS AND internalized, idiosyncratic meanings over a

how self-structures and internalized meanings

www.annualreviews.org • Three Faces of Identity 495

496 Owens · Robinson · Smith-Lovin

tives. Am. Sociol. Rev. 58:329–50

www.annualreviews.org • Three Faces of Identity 497

498 Owens · Robinson · Smith-Lovin

www.annualreviews.org • Three Faces of Identity 499

Contents Volume 36, 2010

John W. Meyer p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p xiv

World Society, Institutional Theories, and the Actor

Theory and Methods

Institutions and Culture

Political and Economic Sociology

The Contentiousness of Markets: Politics, Social Movements,

Differentiation and Stratification

Historical Studies of Social Mobility and Stratiﬁcation

Individual and Society

The New Homelessness Revisited

The Decline of Cash Welfare and Implications for Social Policy

Cumulative Index of Contributing Authors, Volumes 27–36 p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p 547

An online log of corrections to Annual Review of Sociology articles may be found at

You might also like