Further Conceptualizing Ethnic and Racial Identity Research: The Social Identity Approach and Its Dynamic Model

Abstract

This article proposes a further conceptualization of ethnic and racial identity (ERI) as a fundamental topic in developmental research. Adding to important recent efforts to conceptually integrate and synthesize this field, it is argued that ERI research will be enhanced by more fully considering the implications of the social identity approach. These implications include (a) the conceptualization of social identity, (b) the importance of identity motives, (c) systematic ways for theorizing and examining the critical role of situational and societal contexts, and (d) a dynamic model of the relation between ERI and context. These implications have not been fully considered in the developmental literature but offer important possibilities for moving the field forward in new directions.

Toward a New Understanding of Ethnic‐Racial Settings for Ethnic‐Racial Identity Development

“…While there are a variety of models of ERI (see Umaña-Taylor et al, 2014;Verkuyten, 2016), Phinney's (1990) developmental model of ERI continues to be highly influential in the field. The developmental model reflects a confluence of two major identity theories: Marcia's (1966) identity status model (an interpretation of Erikson's [1968] theory of identity), and social identity theory (Tajfel & Turner, 1986).…”

An integrated developmental model for studying identity content in context.

“…The extant literature also includes quite varied definitions of identity content, ranging from broad cultural-ideological belief systems or values to small-scale behavioral manifestations of identity. Theorists and researchers have tackled the complexity of identity development related to many aspects or domains of identity (as an example of this type of sophisticated theorizing, see Verkuyten's (2016) analysis of ethnic identity situated within social context). All of these approaches provide valuable insights into conceptualizations of content, but they also signal the depth and richness of the construct of identity content that cannot be captured with a simplistic model.…”

Advancing the cultural study of personality and identity: models, methods, and outcomes

“…Returning to McAdams and Pals' (2006) definition of personality provided earlier, it should be clear that identity is a much more specific aspect of the self, and therefore can be subsumed within the multi-level personality system. Almost any psychological definition of identity involves a conscious awareness of the self, involving some degree of reflection or personal salience about who one is, was, will be, and ought to be (e.g., Ashmore, Deaux, & McLaughlin-Volpe, 2004;Umaña-Taylor et al, 2014;Verkuyten, 2016;Way, Santos, Niwa, & Kim-Gervey, 2008). Additionally, any definition of identity involves change or situational variability as a central component of the construct -suggesting that identity is distinct from personality traits, which are relatively stable 1 .…”

“…This research has been predominantly cross-sectional, examining the structure of identity at a given point in time, or short-term longitudinal, examining changes in these processes over 2-5 years (Kroger, Martinussen, & Marcia, 2011;Meeus, 2011). Similarly, social psychological approaches to identity favor situational salience, or how certain contexts lead to the awareness of social group memberships and the subsequent behaviors that awareness engenders (Ashmore et al, 2004;Verkuyten, 2016). This work is not about integrative meaning but rather situational meaning, and how identities become relevant for immediate or near-term thoughts, feelings, and actions.…”