Upload
paula-amador-cardona
View
213
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
8/20/2019 cote-2006-i
1/24
IDENTITY: AN INTERNATIONAL JOURNA L O F THEORY A ND RESEA RCH, 6(1), 3-25
Copyright © 2006, Lawrence Erlbaum A ssociates, Inc.
Identity Studies: How Close Are We
to Developing
a
Social Science
of Identity?—An Appraisal
of
the Field
James Cote
epartment of Sociology
University of
Western
Ontario
This article presents
a
tree-tops overview
of
the field
of
Identity Studies with
an
eye
to
identifying
(a) the
com mon alities that stimulate scholars
to
organize their
work around the concept
of
identity as w ell as (b) the cleavag es that have crea ted var-
ious camps within
the
field. Given the fact that Identity Studies
is
one
of
the fastest
growing areas
in the
social sc iences,
it is
argued that there
is an
urgent need
to de-
velop a comm on taxonom y that attends to the multidimensionality represented by the
various approaches sharing
the
term
identity
After proposing
a way to
understand
these com mo nalities and cleavages as a basis
for
this taxonom y, the qu estion
of
what
is
to
be gained by
a
common purpose
in a
social science
of
identity
is
explored.
It is
further proposed that,
in
searching
for
this common purpose, scholars need
to
focus
not only
on
what they
can
recommend
to
individuals looking
for
direction
in
their
lives,
but
also
on
what practicable frameworks they
can
provide policymakers
who
are in positions to ameliorate social and econom ic conditions that underm ine the for-
mation and maintenance
of
viable ego, personal,
and
social identities.
Identity Studies is reputedly one of the fastest-growing areas in the social sciences.
In the mid-1990s, Hall (1996) referred to the discursive explosion around the con-
cept of identity (p. 1); more recently, Bauman (2001) wrote about the thriving in-
dustry of Identity Studies.
These claims are not idle exaggerations. For example, using the referencing da-
tabase PsychlNFO, the number of entries accessible with the keyword identity has
8/20/2019 cote-2006-i
2/24
COTE
6,901,
and 15,106 h its, respectively. In the first 5 years of the 2000s a lone, there are
over 12,000
hits,
suggesting that another decade-spanning d oubling of interest
is
in
progress. Similarly, using the Sociological Abstracts electronic database SocAbs,
there is only one hit for the keyword (rfennfy in the 1940s and5 1 for the 1950s, but
for the 1960s, 2,844 sources are accessible; the hits jump to
9 098
for the 1970s,
15,080 for the 1980s, and 32,139 for the 1990s. There are 18,587 for the first 5
years of the 2000s. Although there is a substantial amount of overlap between
these two databases, it is clear that the number of publications using
identity
as a
keyword is now in the tens of thousands per decade.
The few publications on iden tity in the early 1900s concerned themselves
mainly with personality aberrations like multiple personalities (e.g., Sidis &
Goodhart, 1904) from the perspective of psychiatry and psychoanalysis. Based on
the previous citation analysis, however, something apparently happened in the
1950s to draw interest to the concept. Erikson's (1963, 1968) work on identity is
widely acknowledged as being groundbreaking during this time in generating in-
terest in the use of th concept in social scientific analyses by providing a reason -
ably value-neutral and interdisciplinary term (e.g., W eigert, Teitge, & Teitge,
1986, p. 29). At the same time, there w as a palpable increase in anxiety among so-
cial scientists about the rise of m ass society, with its decline in comm unity, the as-
cendance of anonymous bureaucratic control along with the technological trans-
formation of human activities, and a consequent rise in problems of personal
definition.
A volume documenting this anxiety, appropriately titled
Identity and Anxiety
Survival of th Person in Mass Society
(Stein, Vidich, & W hite, 1960), was pub-
lished in 1960 with Erikson's essay The Problem of Ego Identity as the lead, and
organizing, chapter. Selections in this landmark book w ere drawn from the various
social sciences and attempted to account for what are now seen as commonly expe-
rienced problems of social integration and personal meaning (e.g., Beck, 1992;
Beck & Beck-Gernsheim, 2002; Gergen, 199 1, 20 01 ; Giddens, 1991).
Over the decades following the 1950s, these concerns about identity problems
rooted in mass society morphed into several approaches, based on assumptions
about the nature of society, that constitute the basis of contemporary Identity
Studies. The term mass society has been generally replaced by the concepts of
post-mod ernity and late modernity, although many of the same problematic
societal conditions remain as likely sources of identity problems. In add ition, a de-
velopmental psychology has emerged that norm alizes identity problems in inad-
equate ontogenetic development rather than problematic societal conditions. It is
8/20/2019 cote-2006-i
3/24
IDENTITY STUD IES: AN APPRAISAL 5
ars are comp letely re-evaluating the nature of the life cou rse in these societies, in-
cluding the proposition that there is now a new life stage characterized by pro-
tracted identity exploration—"emerging adulthood" (Arnett, 2000). At the same
time, exactly what it means to have an "adult identity" is increasingly unclear as
the very nature of "ad ulthood" loses its meaning for m ore and m ore people. I have
discussed this topic in detail (Cote, 2000), including the emergence of alternative
adulthoods and a new phase of "youthh ood " replacing adulthood entirely for an in-
creasing proportion of the population.
The emb eddedness of problematic identity issues in an increasing portion of the
life course is now so pervasive that it is no longer unusua l for full-grown peop le to
continue to ponder issues that were once resolved early and decisively. For exam-
ple,
after being quoted in
ime
magazine with respect to the causes for the prolon-
gation of youth (Grossman, 2005), I received a number of e-mails from people in
their 20s telling me their stories. One was from a woman in her late 20s who was
enrolled in a doctoral program , but who was still living with her parents. Although
she knew that she was good at school, she was anxious that she was not well pre-
pared for "work." In spite of her advanced education, which for previous genera-
tions surely would have provided most people with a sense of a promising and ex-
citing future, this woman implied that she had little intemal sense of meaning and
direction and was fearful of her future. Indeed, she asked whether I had any sur-
veys or questionnaires for her to fill out that would "dec ide her path in life" for her
Perhaps this person just had life too easy and w as conditioned to follow oppor-
tunity structures and reward contingencies, but her sense of identity as related to
social integration and personal meaning seems to be far different from that of those
in past generations w ho were at the top of the educational ladder. Although Marga-
ret Mead was exceptional even for her gene ration, I am reminded of her biography,
which included finishing her PhD in her early 20s, conducting pioneering field
work in a remote part of the world, and publishing a best-selling book in her late
20s based on her findings (C ote, 1994; M ead, 1928). The lesson here is that a ma-
turity of identity is no longer guaranteed by educational achievements; rather, such
achievements may now be devoid of secure agentic and existential underpinnings
and merely reflect the bureaucratized opportunities created by others. Under these
conditions, identity "explorations" can be em pty and w ithout any underlying logic
and, therefore, endless (cf. C ote & Lev ine, 1992, for
study of various motivations
that academics have for pursuing their career, including as a "calling").
8/20/2019 cote-2006-i
4/24
COTE
does this leave us? On the one hand, we should be encouraged because we have
likely come a long way in coming to terms w ith the puzzle of human existence. On
the other hand, it leaves us in a state of confusion about exactly what identity is
because there are so many different uses of the term (cf. Brubaker & Cooper,
2000).
Accordingly, unless efforts are made to rectify this confusion, the field may
simply becom e ano ther Tower of Babel of the social sciences. If this happens, the
success of this field could be its own undoing , and our attempts to fit the puzzle of
human existence together will be stymied.
It appears that, in recent years, identity has becom e such a rubber sheet
concept that it has been used in ways that make it synonymous with cultu re (e.g.,
as with concerns that such-and-such cultural group is losing its iden tity as a re-
sult of globalization), language (e.g., with claims that French Canadians will
lose their identity unless English-language signs remain banned from the Prov-
ince of Quebec), and simple in-group allegiances (e.g., that some high school stu-
dents will lose their identity unless they are allowed to dress in ways that reflect
their affiliation with ska teboarders, Goths , etc. ). It is not that any of these usages is
wro ng, so much as they are overextended, as I argue following (see also Stryker,
2000).
Others have argued that identity represents only certain aspects of human
self-definition. For example, those who wish to emphas ize the conflictual nature of
human interaction define identity as differance —that people define themselves
against wh at they are not (e.g., Derrida, 1982; Sokefeld, 1999). To emp hasis
only this aspect of identity is imperialistic, however, if w are to maintain any sem -
blance of cooperation in the use of languag e, given that the basic definition of iden
tity that made it appealing to social scientists in the first place was reference to
sameness over tim e as well as difference from others (e.g., Erikson , 1968). For
a thing (or unit) to be the sam e over time, by definition that thing has to be dif-
ferent from other things that are themselves the same over time. Hence, to insist
on difference over sameness as the key to identity is to ignore half of the m eaning
of the concept.
Finally, most people in the field have a tendency to use the unmodified term
identity to refer to all levels and manifestations of identity, when it would be more
accurate to use specific terms like social identity nd personal identity in specific
instances. Although the use of short forms is natural and accep table in casual con-
versations, in formal, analytic discussions, it can simply confound attempts at a
precise intersubjectivity among speakers. Thus, the consistent use of more specific
and precise terms would not only help people be clearer in their writings, but it
8/20/2019 cote-2006-i
5/24
IDENTITY STUDIES: AN APPRAISAL 7
will have a social (objective) identity as defined by those interacting with the per-
son. Som e of those using the identity status paradigm employ this expression to re-
fer to an intem al, self-constructed, dynamic organization of drives, abilities, be-
liefs, and individual history (Marcia, 1980, p. 159). Although this usage is fine
where its specific meaning is made explicit and its context clearly delimited, it
only serves to add confusion to a field where more general mean ings of iden tity
are employed, as among n eo-Eriksonians. For examp le, Erikson (e.g., 1963) con-
sistently argued that the sense of sameness and continuity—ego identity—is im-
portant regardless of whether the identity structure is self-constructed, and he
pointed this out in his many cross-cu ltural stud ies. Moreover, in differentiating ego
identity from person al identity, Erikson (1968) defined
ego identity
as
the
awareness of the fact that there
is a
self-sameness and continuity
to the
ego's syn-
thesizing methods, the style of
one s
individuality, and that this style coincides with
the sameness and continuity of one's meaning for others in the immediate commu-
nity, (p. 50)
Thus, for Erikson , everyone has some subjective sense of who they are ; prob-
lems arise for the person when a subjective sense of sameness and continuity di-
minishes below a certain po int or is otherwise comprom ised (as in the first case of
this that Erikson, 1963, witnessed—nam ely, shell shock or what we now call
Post-Traumatic Stress Syndrome). This issue is thus one of degree rather than
kind.
Unfortunately, the net result of the previous tendencies to use the identity con -
cept in overextended, limited, or exclusive ways is that it has become quite fuzzy
for m any people (Brubaker & Cooper, 2000), especially those outside the field or
who are new to it. For exam ple, at a recent meefing of the Society for Research on
Adolescence, there were dozens of papers presented using the keyword identity
but in listening to them , I was hard-pressed to recognize a comm on meaning of the
term or something to link the papers with what I recognize in my own work after
almost 30 years in the field. Some presentations even operationalized the term ac-
cording to basic demograph ic variables like age and sex. Th is is not a step forward
for the field.
The Identity Studies field is not alone in this dilemma. In the closely related
field of self studies, a similar problem has emerged, as discussed in an edito-
rial note in a recently launched journal that has been attempting to lend order to
8/20/2019 cote-2006-i
6/24
8 COTE
lar writer means by it, but I sometimes begin to despair that it means anything at
all (Leary, 2004 , p. 1).
I do not think that the identity field has as serious a problem as the self field, in
part because the word
self has
a longer history of gen eric uses (e.g., with all of the
compound words using
self-
as a prefix or its use as a synonym
for person
and
personality .
However, it may only be a matter of time for the identity field unless
social scientists lay a firmer claim to the use of the term identity. Leary (2004) was
also doubtful that there will ever be a consensus about what the self
really
is (p.
2, italics add ed), but I am more op timistic for the identity field so long as we all ac-
know ledge that iden tity is multifaceted, and it is not simply one thing.
A field of study can end a period of confusion when a common taxonomy is
adopted (cf. Hem pel, 1965 ,196 6). Identity S tudies is at the tipping point wh ere, if
this
is
not
done,
the
field
will simply becom e another area
in
which a comm only used
term has virtually no shared, precise meaning or m eaning s, as in the case of the con-
cept of culture (e.g., Swidler, 1986). I have made recommendations for the basis of
this taxonomy elsewhere (Cote Levine,
2002;
see also efforts by Brubaker Coo-
per, 2000) based on a theory of the multidimensionality of identity, representing
manifestations of identity at three levels of analysis: the subjectivity of the individ-
ual, behavior pa tterns specific to the person , and the individu al's m embership in so-
cietal groups (see also S. Schwartz, 2005 ). Here, I add to these taxonomic recom-
mendations by giving attention to the differences among social scientists in terms of
their metatheoretical assumptions concerning social reality.
MET THEORETIC L SSUM PTIONS
Table
1
presents a cross-tabulation of the three dimensions represen ting different
metatheoretical assumptions that I postulate to be at the heart of the major cleav-
ages in the field. Of course, as with all typologies, a number of individual cases
will lie outside of the hypothesized cells to the extent that these cases com bine the
dimensions idiosyncratically. This does not mean, however, that the typology does
not provide rules of classification that apply in most case s.
I begin discussion of this table with the dimension that is most straightforward
to explain, as it involves the differing focus taken by those adopting psych ological
and sociological perspectives, the two dominant perspectives in the field. As one
would expect, psychologists tend to take an individual focus and tend to put more
emphasis on the mental traits, states, and dispositions of the person in predicting
8/20/2019 cote-2006-i
7/24
IDENTITY STUD IES: AN APPRAISAL 9
TABLE 1
Identity Studies Approaches: Fundamental Assumptions Regarding
the Nature of Social Reality Social Order and Psychosocial Focus
Epistemology
Objectivist
Subjectivist
Individual Focus
Status Quo
Identity status
paradigm
Self-psychology
Life history and
narrative
approaches
(e.g.,
McAdams,
Chandler)
Critical
Contextual
Critical and
cultural
psychologies
(e.g., Cushman,
Baumeister,
Kurtines)
Postmodernism
(psychological
variant; e.g..
Gergen)
Social Focus
Status Quo
Structural
symbolic
interactionism
(e.g., Stryker,
Burke)
Symbolic
interactionism
(interpretive
approach—e.g.,
Goffman,
Weigert)
Critical
Contextual
Late-modernism
(e.g., Beck)
Critical social
psychology (e.g..
Wexler)
Postmodernism
(sociological
variant; Baum an;
Rattansi &
Phoenix)
early sytnbolic ititeractionist (SI) and pragmatic approaches in sociology (e.g.,
Hewitt, 2000). Accordingly, for them, identity is not a property of the person so
much as a property of interaction. In this way, iden tity is relational in the sense
that it is embedded in interpersonal relationships.
A number of disagreements in the field concerning what constitutes identity
(ontology), and how to study it (methodology), can be understood as stemming
from this difference in focus and, therefore, difference in emphasis. A solution
to these disagreements lies in the recognition that iden tity depends on both
sources: It needs to have some sort of storage of experiences and habituated
thoughts in mem ory (in the person), and it needs to be actualized in behav iors and
social activities (in interaction). Of course , the long-standing disciplinary disputes
between psychologists and sociologists stand in the way of an easy truce of this
dispute, but the common ground in social psychology does hold promise as a plat-
form for more cooperative relations in the future (e.g.. House , 1977). Moreover, if
we can specify a common cause for such cooperation, as I explore following, we
may witness a return to the earlier days in the social sciences before the emergence
of these rigid disciplinary disputes (cf.
Sherif
1958).
The dimension rep resenting the rows in Table 1 pertains to the rather
8/20/2019 cote-2006-i
8/24
10 C6TE
psychology, it can be found in the long-standing disputes between (a) those who
emphasize the study of experience (subjectivism) and those who insist on the study
of behavior (objectivism; W ertheimer, 1972), as well as (b) the related dispute be -
tween humanism and scientism (e.g., Coan, 1979; Kasner & Houts, 1984).
Epistemological disputes are usually intractable by their very nature, but one
potential avenue of resolution of that dispute in Identity Studies might reflect the
very nature of the beast itself—namely, that "identity" can be demonstrated in
terms of both manifestations of reality. That is, some realities are more fixed
than others, just as some aspects of identity are more fixed than others. For ex-
ample, my social identity as a professor is more fixed (having a life of 20 years
already) than, say, my personal identity as a media celebrity (which had a life of
about 15 min ). Similarly, the emergent experiences and personal constructions
of my subjective (ego) identity as the President of the Society for Research on
Identity Formation (SRIF) were varied over my tenure of that position, but my
social identity associated with that position had an objective life of 2 years. No
amount of subjective reappraisal on my part will alter that objective fact. Thus,
some realities are simply more fixed (e.g., psychological traits, social facts) than
others (e.g., transitory situations, like the verbal version of this Presidential Ad-
dress delivered at the 2005 SRIF meetings). Manifestations of identity at the
level of subjective experience and interactional discourse are especially emer-
gent and transitory and should be studied as such with the appropriate (in-depth,
qualitative) methods. When the validity of these differing manifestations is ac-
knowledged, an acceptance of the application of differing methods to differing
realities should follow.
Finally, the third dimension represented in Table pertains to the fundamental
assum ptions that researchers hold toward the existing social order, whether it is ac-
cepted as
is ,
and therefore inevitable, or whether the existing social order
is
viewed
critically or as one of many potential contexts for different types of identity forma-
tion (cf. Burrell & Morgan's, 1979, distinction between the "sociology of regula-
tion" and the "sociology of radical chan ge"). The first, the status-quo approach, as-
serts implicitly or explicitly that the existing order represents universal processes,
and therefore, research stem ming from it looks to the "susta ining " influence of de-
velopment for self and social order. In contrast, the critical/contextual researcher
looks to "transformative" influences for self and social order based on either the
critical posture taken toward the existing order or the argument that identity pro-
cesses are contextual, and therefore, no one form or content can be assumed to be
an ideal (cf. Schuller, Preston, Hammond, Brassett-Grundy, & Bynner, 2004, for
8/20/2019 cote-2006-i
9/24
IDENTITY STUDIES: AN APPRAISAL 1 1
The resulting eight cells formed by the cross-tabulation of these three dimen-
sions (treated as binaries for illustration purposes) allow us to locate the various
long-standing and new ap proaches in Identity Studies. For examp le, the m ost pop-
ular psychological approaches in the field (the identity status paradigm and
self-psychology) take an individual focus, adopt objectivist epistemological as-
sum ptions, and have a status-quo orientation. In contrast, if w move to the oppo-
site side of Table 1, across the three dimen sions, we locate the sociological variant
of the postmodern approach, exemplified in the work of scholars such as Bauman
(2001) and Rattansi and Phoenix (1997). This approach adopts a social focus,
holds subjectivist epistemological assumptions, and takes a critical or contextual
orientation. Accordingly, iden tity is located by those taking this approach (a) in
the interactional realm as people engage in their day-to-day social engagem ents;
(b) as a manifestation that is best understood in terms of its emergent and transitory
properties; and (c) as varying by the specific context in which the interaction takes
place, some of which can be transformative, some sustaining, and some de-
bilitating.
A recent special issue
of dentity
(Vol. 5, Issue 2 , 2005) dealt with these two in-
herently opposing ap proaches by using Rattansi and Ph oenix's (1997) work on the
nature of youth identity formation as an exemplar of the postmodern approach,
particularly with its explicit critique of the prevailing developmental paradigm
(i.e.,
the neo-Eriksonian, identity status paradigm). Leading figures from the
Erikson ian-M arcian tradition were invited to comment on the critique of the de-
velopmental paradigm , as were scholars who w ere from outside that tradition. The
result of the exchange appears to have been productive, although I am sure that
more will be w ritten about it. Hopefully, however, the mere fact of putting the is-
sues on the tab le in this way will make for future cooperative relations.
To briefly describe the other cells in Table 1, the remaining three that take an in-
dividual focus constitute marginal or minority approaches in developmental psy-
chology. Each attempts to capture elements of identity missed by the dominant
identity status and self-psychology approaches: (a) Narrative and life-history ac-
counts of people's identity formation and maintenance issues, which, by their na-
ture, require a sensitivity to the emergent expressions of th various senses of iden-
tity that can only be captured using qualitative methods (represented in the work of
scholars like Chandler, 20 01 ; M cA dam s, 1993); (b) psychological variants of the
postmodern approach, led by Gergen (1991, 20 01), which examine the contexts in
which certain societal conditions create a fragmentation of identity and an erosion
of the sense of a unified core, resulting in the emergence of certain personality
8/20/2019 cote-2006-i
10/24
12 COTE
does not represent unified group of scholars, but these tendenc ies in taking a criti-
cal approach to the psychology of identity can be found in the work of scholars like
Baumeister and Muraven (1996), Cushman (1995), Kurtines (1999, 2003), and
Waterman (2004).
On the social focus side of Table 1, there is not a dom inant approach as
there is on the individual focus one, although the status-quo approach has a
longer history in the SI tradition. The two factions of the status-quo approach
represent the primary division in SI stemming from differing interpretations of
the seminal work of George Herbert Mead. The fact of this division, which dates
back at least to the 1950s (e.g., Kuhn & McPartland, 1954), testifies to the
long-standing nature of divergence on this epistemological dimension. Structural
SI adopts an explicit quantitative methodology based on the assumption that the
manifestations of identity are both observable and measurable (e.g., Stryker,
1987).
In contrast, the interpretative approach to SI, represented in the work of
scholars like Goffman (1959, 1963) and Weigert (Weigert & Gecas, 2005;
Weigert et al., 1986), adopts an explicit qualitative approach (ethnographies) de-
signed to capture the qualities of identities as they emerge through on-going
interactional processes in day-to-day naturalistic settings. Structural SI investi-
gates phenomena related to role playing, role salience and hierarchy, role con-
flict, and the like, whereas interpretive SI explores how people engage in role
making and other spontaneous forms of interaction associated with impression
management and the presentation of self
The critical approaches with a social focus tend to be more macrohistorical in
orientation, providing a critical contrast of contemporary societal conditions in
reference to past conditions, when the role-bases for identities were far different.
The late-modernist approach points to the ascriptive nature of identities in
premodem societies, where social solidarity was greater, but freedom of choice
was constricted (Furlong & Cartmel, 1997). Accordingly, the focus is on the indi-
vidualization process in late modernity, which emphasizes compulsory choice
making in the absence of normative guidance. The work of Beck (1992; Beck &
Beck-Gernsheim, 2002) exemplifies the European approach to late-modernity,
whereas that of Wexler (1983, 1992) represents a North American approach to
critical social psychology, which probiematizes identity processes in con tempo-
rary social contexts. Beck's work is best known in terms of his formulations of the
increased risks in late-modern societies, in the sense that both fortunes and misfor-
tunes are now more individualized than collectively shared. For example, the haz-
ards that people face are now more likely to be a result of their individual lifestyles
8/20/2019 cote-2006-i
11/24
IDENTITY STUDIES: AN APPRAISAL 1 3
Finally, the sociological variant of the postmodernist approach emphasizes the
multiplicity, fluidity, and context-dependent ope ration (Rattansi & Phoenix,
1997,
p. 121) of identities, especially among the youth population. It is important
for these postm odem ists to see identity as decentered and de-essentialized in
contemporary contex ts, meaning that iden tity is not primarily a property of per-
sons,
but rather of interactional processes, which are now inherently unstable. The
key difference between the late-modernist and postmodernist approaches is with
the view of agency and the potential for individuals to direct their own develop-
ment by anchoring their ego identity, as opposed to being buffeted about by contra-
dictory societal forces. Late-modemists argue that people are capable of
agentically directing their behaviors from a stable psychological base; in fact, they
stress that it is now paramount that people do so because late-modern societies
have lost much of the normative structure that once guided people in their choices
and provided them with default op tions that made agentic functioning less cru-
cial. In rejecting the possibility of a stable psychological base, postmodemists
have removed the logical and theoretical connection to the source of individual
agency. Paradoxically, they see people at the mercy of postmodern forces in a
way that is analogous to how behaviorists (who also reject notions of individual
agency, but for different reasons) see people to be controlled by reinforcement con-
tingencies.
WHAT ISSUES CA N BE RESOLVED
BY A COMMON PURPOSE
If we are to proceed with the task of developing a social science of idendty, we
must find a common purpose to drive our efforts; otherwise, there is no incentive
for those in each of the eight areas identified in Table
to read, attempt to appreci-
ate the merits of, or find inspiration in each othe r's work.
The very fact that someone is interested in an identity-related topic suggests
that he or she has a humanistic appreciation of the social sciences. Otherwise,
they could have devoted themselves to a much less ambiguous, and more so-
cially supported, area from the mainstream of their discipline (which is likely
dominated by objectivist assumptions about the most easily discussed and mea-
sured aspects of the discipline). In spite of its popularity, as measured by the
keyword citation method discussed previously, the fact is that Identity Studies
constitutes a collection of scholars who are marginalized in some degree from
8/20/2019 cote-2006-i
12/24
14 COTE
ten on these topics, making them seem more real and imp ortant), and it is
easier to secure grant money, because the assumptions and language are more
commonly shared. Therefore, those reviewing grant proposals have an easier
time understanding them. Similarly, in sociology, those areas that are most ame-
nable to easy understanding and measurement dominate in most departments
(e.g., social inequality, demography, health).
One approach is to first identify, for those we could include as part of Identity
Studies, what each perspective can contribute to a common cause and then show
what is value-added when we integrate the individual perspectives as part of a
larger whole. When some degree of unity of purpose and language is achieved,
those outside the field will then more easily understand it and, over time, more re-
spect for it will be achieved. When the field is unified in purpose and language,
textbooks will be written about it, undergraduates will be taught the basics , and the
utility of the field will slowly diffuse through the culture to become part of public
consciousness as these graduates take the ideas with them into their personal and
professional lives.
This scenario might seem pie-in-the-sky, but unless we have vision and goals,
and dream about the ultimate impact of our work, the growth of the field is n jeop-
ardy. To focus on these goals, we all need to ask ourselves why w e are doing w hat
we are doing. Are we simply following institutional reward contingencies (e.g., for
the benefits specifically derived from the next publication or more generally from
being an academ ic), or s there something larger than ourselves that is at stake? For
exam ple, at some level, identity is about potential—human po tential. If our in-
sights help more people reach their individual potential, we might also contribute
to the collective po tential of the hum an species, and clearly, there is room for im-
provement in this collective realm . To the extent that people do not reach their po-
tential in terms of their own identity formation, not only are opportunities missed
for collective advancem ent, but those who go through their lives with m ajor iden-
tity deficits likely drag the species down, pulling us all toward a common denomi-
nator that is lower than it might otherw ise be.
I can readily cite here several areas in which identity deficits reduce individual
and collective potential—namely, crime, poverty, school failure, health risks, and
talent loss. At the same time, an argument can be made that modem democracies,
which are often such in name only, can benefit collectively as greater portions of
their populations op timize their identity formation, especially in terms of po litical
awareness and participation, moral-ethical standards, and the development of
more global-universalistic outlooks. These are three concerns to which Erikson
8/20/2019 cote-2006-i
13/24
IDENTITY STUDIES: AN APPRAISAL 1 5
WHAT CAN WE HOPE TO ACCOMPLISH W ITH
A SOCIAL SCIENCE OF IDENTITY
The first goal of social science of identity needs to be the establishmen t of con-
sensus about the importance of this area. We do not need to work on those within
the field (except for internal disputes about the relative importance of each ap-
proach) so much as to help those outside the field appreciate what we are doing.
For example, I have had numerous discussions with colleagues, and overheard a
few discussions, about identity, and it is obvious that many do not have a clear
idea about what the concept means, let alone think that it adds anything to the so-
cial scientific enterprise. For example, one colleague recently raised the question
of what the concept adds beyond what we already had with the notion of
self-concept. Another thinks that the concept of adjustment is sufficient. Why
do we need a more com plicated co ncept? W ould O ccam 's Razo r dictate against it?
These are important questions that we need to answer soon and get the answers to
our colleagues, especially those sitting of grant review and tenure-and-promodon
panels.
For the field to develop into a credible force, we also need to have more and
larger studies funded. G raduate studen ts have conducted the vast majority of stud-
ies in this area as part of their thesis work. Although these studies are generally
done under competent supervision, they are nonetheless undertaken with very lim-
ited reso urces. And, although the field should be grateful for the free labor of grad-
uate students, we also owe it to our (present and future) graduate students to at-
tempt to secure the funding to help them maximize their leam ing experiences and
potential contributions to the field. With be tter funding, studies can then m ove be-
yond college student samples of convenience to population-based surveys that use
random sampling techniques and m ultiple m ethods that can triangulate on the phe-
nomena in question. To help us do this, we need to look back to the early days of
social science for inspiration and exam ple, before the development of separate uni-
versity departments (which have contributed to disciplinary boundaries), to when
studies were carried out by teams of researchers on impo rtant issues using a variety
of qualitative and quantitative measures, especially as stimulated by the war effort
before and after the 1940s (e.g.. House, 1977). Most urgent today are properly
funded studies of high-risk populations whose identity formation potential is im-
peded by persistent social structural and economic obstacles (cf. Yoder, 2000).
Such studies need to be properly funded so that they can prov ide scientifically
sound information for policymakers to deal with the major current influences on
8/20/2019 cote-2006-i
14/24
16 COTE
adulthood has becom e so prolonged and what we m ight expect in the future, not to
mention the supports that people need in making w hat is increasingly a hazardo us,
nonlinear, and perhaps never-ending passage (e.g., Arnett, 2000; Cote, 2000).
The objective of such studies needs to be the improvement ofth e life chances of
all mem bers of society. As we learned in the 20th century, it is not enough to sim-
ply improve economic opportunities. Although this is essential in any societal im-
provement, it is also crucial that everyone develop the personal resources for
developing and maintaining themselves as fully contributing citizens. Modern de-
mocracies require a level of functioning not required in previous societies, and
there is ample evidence that most people have a long way to go to reach this level of
functioning (e.g., Kegan, 1994). A primary question that we will need to answer is
just how and when to intervene to improve life chances. This question is perhaps
easier to answer for the most disadvantaged and at-risk populations, and recent
strides have been made in identifying those most in need of intervention (e .g., see
the Identity Distress Survey; Berman, Montgomery, & Kurtines, 2004). Inter-
vening in decision-m aking processes am ong the public at large, however, is a much
more problematic issue, as I discuss following.
Furthermore, rather than targeting only the individual, we need to think about
targeting institutions in terms ofthe ir effects on identity formation. This is where a
social science of identity will be most required. For example, there are new institu-
tional influences on identity formation that the old theories have not taken into ac-
count: increasing requirements for a prolonged education, the expansion of youth
culture into more aspects of the young people's lives, and the far-reaching social
and psychological impacts of media technologies. Old theories that assume that
young people spend long periods in crisis primarily over religion and politics miss
these important influences entirely (Co te, in press-a ), and the fact that identity for-
mation stretches into the 20s cannot be accom modated by theories that assume that
the identity stage is simply a psychosocial event limited to adolescence. In short,
there appear to be new institutional sources of identity, identity moratorium, and
identity crisis that have been missed by the old theories and that the newer theories
have pointed
to,
but perhaps not fully understood (cf. the debate be tween the devel-
opmental and postmodern approaches in the recent special issue
of Identity
Vol. 5,
Issue 2, 2005).
WHAT CAN WE RECOMMEND TO POLICYMAKERS AND
PEOPLE LOO KING FOR D IRECTION IN THEIR LIVES
8/20/2019 cote-2006-i
15/24
IDENTITY STUDIES: AN APPRAISAL 1 7
groundbreaking studies that will gain the attention of policymakers. This is the
case because our colleagues are the ones sitting on the peer-review panels used by
granting agencies. Of course, there is a chicken-and-egg problem here, because if
funding agencies provided the money to conduct this research, our colleagues
would respect the area more, as more and more impressive research was funded
and published. M oreover, if we had the interest of policym akers, the money w ould
become available to carry out these studies. Before we can get to this point, how-
ever, all of us within the Identity S tudies field will need to practice what we preach
and settle our own boundary disputes and in-fighting as a field. Until we learn to
respect each other's work, we cannot expect those outside the field to respect any
of our work. In short, if we— the experts— are continually bickering over both fun-
damental and trivial issues, how can w e expect those ou tside the field to take us se-
riously as experts or to even attempt to understand our work?
Policymakers need viable frameworks if they are to apply academic concerns
to real-world problems. Accordingly, more identity research needs to move from
the pure to the applied realm. This is not to abandon pure identity research,
which is essential in testing theoretical frameworks, but very little identity re-
search has applied our theoretical assertions, so we have little idea of the practi-
cal utility of most of our ideas (cf. Ferrer-Wreder, Montgomery, & Lorente,
2003).
This move to the applied side is best done in a nonpartisan fashion (i.e.,
through joint efforts from among the various approaches in the field, as illus-
trated in Table 1) and without fear of challenging the contemporary status quo of
identity formation (i.e., as noted previously, there is evidence of suboptimal
functioning at both the individual and institutional levels). Of course, there are
political issues in implementing research that potentially generates social
change, and sensitivity to this is necessary. A model that can be consulted for
this purpose is the applied developm ental science model (Lerner, Fisher, &
Weinberg, 2000), which proposes that scholars and communities become part-
ners in the knowledge-generation process and that multiple methods be used to
triangulate on the processes under scrutiny.
The hurdles to undertaking identity research that will have practicable policy
relevance are many, especially in individualistic societies where ideas of freedom
are virtually sacred. Indeed, given that many aspects of identity formation are now
choice based, how can we propose that policies be developed that influence peo-
ple's choice making? For example, although we know that there are considerable
drawbacks to identity diffusion (as per the identity status paradigm, where
person
maintains low levels of comm itment and little choice-making activity) in terms of
8/20/2019 cote-2006-i
16/24
18 COTE
Although this might seem like an intractable problem for modern democracies,
it needs to be recognized that modern democracies have developed and continue to
support institutions that directly and deliberately aifect people's choices in their
identity formation— most notably, educational sy stems . It is within the logic of in-
stitutionalized education that we perhaps have the most hope of positively affect-
ing identity formation in the area of choice making. Such efforts need to be in-
formed by a sophisticated view of choice making itself and the recent work of B.
Schwartz (2000, 2004) helps to bring to light the complex, potentially negative
aspects of unguided self-determination. Schwartz argued that people in individual-
istic societies face a tyranny of cho ice by the very nature of excessive
choice-m aking opportunities. Certainly, there are liberating potentials to a greater
freedom of choice, but ostensibly unconstrained choice can be paradoxically con-
straining, as in situations of having too many choices with too little information,
living with the consequences of poor choices, and experiencing the various
negative psychological consequences routinely associated with facing numerous
choices on a daily basis.
My recommendation for approaching this problem is to develop institutional
structures that are appropriate for individualistic soc ieties, by merit ofthe ir design
to guide people in learning how to adapt to, and m aster, choice m aking as a central
task in their lives (Cote, in press -b). Making choices is perhaps the most im portant
activity in people's lives in these societies—many of life's consequences result
from our choices— yet it is one of the least understood or prepared-for activities. I
draw on Margaret Mead's (1928) long-forgotten recommendation that individual-
istic societies should prepare their citizens with an education for choice. M ead 's
recommendadon has a surprising am ount of insight that prefigures concerns today,
such as those raised by B. Schwartz with his work on the tyranny of choice.
Mead (1928) wrote that, in comparison to modem Western societies (of the
920s),
in pre-Westernized traditional Samoan culture, young people had far less
choice as they came of age regarding the specific content oftheir future adu lt iden-
tities,
and she noted that this had the effect of eliminating much conflict from their
lives.
In particular, they did not have to choose among com peting religions or polit-
ical philosophies or from among a bewildering array of adult occupations. In con-
trast. Mead noted that there was a virtual requirement in the United States that
young people choose for themselves among the myriad of religious, political, and
occupational options. This requirement was based on the individualistic ideology
that life involves endless possibilities that must be preserved by an unconstrained
freedom of choice.
8/20/2019 cote-2006-i
17/24
IDENTITY STUDIES: AN APPRAISAL 9
today is not to revert to earlier social forms, w hich have their own sets of problem s,
but to advance to new ones that can realistically help us deal with our problems.
What Mead's analysis does suggest is that we need to think of contemporary chal-
lenges in terms of a baseline found in societies where identities are ascribed rather
than based on choice and individualization, because it appears that humans do not
have an inherent capacity for make prop itious choices (Cote, 2000). Rather, it ap-
pears that we need to be taught how to do so. Unfortunately, since the time of
Mead's writing, we have not developed the educational means by which to teach
choice making on a mass scale, even as the ideology of free choice has spread
throughout societies around the world (see Cote, in press-b, for more on recom-
mendations regarding education for cho ice ).
More generally, the Identity Studies community can contribute to policy con-
cerns by investigating the wider benefit of learning and education for identity
formation (cf. Dreyer, 1994). Work in this area has already begun .in England
through the efforts of the British government in funding the Centre for the W ider
Benefits of Learning at the University of London (Preston, 2004; Schuller et al.,
2004).
The wider benefits of learning, in general, are myriad, including better
health and more involvements in community-enhancing activities. Some of these
benefits are sustaining of the person's capacities, whereas others are
transformative, enhancing the person's capabilities. The identity benefits of
learning appear to include greater satisfaction with the course of one's life and
success in one's life projects (Cote, 2002), as well as better self-understanding,
independent thought, and an enhanced sense of one's place in the world
(Schuller et al., 2004), but work in this area has jus t begun. Of course, educa-
tion varies in quality, and much m ass educafion has become perfunctory. For
example, the high school diploma in the United States has recently been called
no more than an attendance certificate (American Diplom a Project, 2004).
Thus, it is clear that there is ample room in the curriculum to experiment with
innovations that yield returns in more aspects of people's lives beyond perfunc-
tory occupational training, including their identity formafion. As Dreyer aptly
noted a decade ago.
The need for educational reform in the U.S. public schools is clearly recognized.
What remains to be seen is whether developmental psychologists, such as identity
theorists, will play a role in that reform or will retire to the world of abstract research
(p.
137)
8/20/2019 cote-2006-i
18/24
20 COTE
search and theory? The print media (books, magazines, and Web sites) are the
venue most amenable to directly delivering complex information, but the visual
electronic media can be used to deliver indirect messages through the use of alle-
gory and allusion. Certainly, marketers have become very sophisticated in the use
of identity-based advertising to the point where they are arguably the most im por-
tant force transforming contemporary culture, especially youth culture (Cote,
2000), so we m ight take lessons from them. At the same time, movies and televi-
sion program s can be very infiuential in affecfing public consc iousness, especially
among the young, as in the case of the movie The Matrix (1999) and the
teen-targeting television program
uffy the ampire Slayer
(199 7-2003 ), both of
which have cult followings with millions of fans reading all sorts of identity-
related meanings into their content.
The purpose of these attempts to provide informafion to the public about iden-
tity formation would optimally be to promote agentic identity formation and to re-
duce social passivity. The developmental field has plenty to recommend in terms
of well-research con cepts like informational identity style (Berzonsky, 1989), per-
sonal expressiveness (Waterman, 1992, 2004), coconstructive problem solving
(Kurtines, 1999), and identity capital (Cote, 1997). These efforts can be directed to
helping people learn how to coun teract their own tendencies to inertia and the mere
following of reward confingencies (as in my example of the directionless doctoral
student at the beginning of this article), or what I have called default individualiza-
tion (Cote, 2000).
At the same time that personal mofivation is addressed, efforts can be d irected
at exposing the attempts to manipulate people's idenfides. Identity manipulation is
disempowering in individualistic societies, as evidenced by the widespread disen-
gagement of young people from adult society. Corporations now routinely engage
in predatoriai marketing (even of young children; Schor, 2004), branding (Quart,
2003),
and cool hunting (Heath & Potter, 2004) as part oftheir attempts to manipu-
late the spending habits of the young. Although markefing per se is not ob jection-
able,
identity-based marketing is a concern when it is directed at those who are in
their formative years of identity development (see Stein et al., I960, for early
warnings of this problem ).
Although they have tremendous potential to stimulate growth, educational in-
stitutions can be disempow ering to the extent that they encourage a passive follow-
ing of reward con tingencies based on false prom ises ofthe occupational benefits of
credentials (Cote & Allahar, 2005). Life within some of these educational institu-
8/20/2019 cote-2006-i
19/24
IDENTITY STUDIES: AN APPRAISAL 2 1
in face-to-face interviews 56 questions related to world geography and current
events. The geography questions simply involved pointing to one country out of
four choices spread over the globe. Answering the question on Iraq correctly
merely required know ing (a) that Iraq is in the Middle East and (b) where the Mid-
dle East is on a map o fthe world. In fact, more young Am ericans could locate the
M arquesas Islands, most likely because the pop culture TV show urvivor (2002)
had just presented a series of episodes filmed there.
This illustrafion demonstrates the mass media's influence in shaping people's
mental representations of the world. Young Americans are not alone in their igno-
rance of world affairs, however. Young Canadians did only m arginally better than
Am ericans, correctly answering only 27 out ofthe 56 questions (vs. 23 out of 6 for
young A mericans). Young Sw edes performed the best out ofthe nine countries sur-
veyed, answering 40 qu estions correctly (National G eographic Education Founda-
tion, 2002). In fact,
these
results support
a
wider claim that Sweden provides
a
model
of how the adult com munity can establish
a
benign institutional guidan ce for nurtur-
ing growth-enhancing self-determination, including effective secondary and ter-
tiary educational systems (Cote & Allahar, 2005). On the one hand, findings such as
these for advanced coun tries like Can ada and the United States do not bode well
for the future development of universalistic identities as envisioned by Erikson
(1964 ). On the other hand , these finding s suggest a urgent goal that can potentially
unite the Identity Studies comm unity around a common cause.
This last educational example points to another institution that is failing
young people in terms of what could be positive influences on identity forma-
tion—the polity. Young people around the world are disengaging on mass scale
from mainstream political institutions. The causes for this are being debated
(Cote & Allahar, 2005; Gidengil, Blais, Nevitte, & Nadeau,
2003;
Kimberlee,
2002), but the result is clearly a disempowering of the young that is directly re-
lated to their identity formation. Perhaps not coincidentally, this political apathy
(identity diffusion) dovetails with the corporate manipulation and educational
corralling mentioned previously. Knowledge is power, and a lack of knowledge
disempowers; the adult community is responsible for transmitting knowledge to
the next generation, so the extent to which the adult community fails in this task,
the more it disempowers its progeny. Young people deserve to know about the
potendal misdirections in their identity formation so that they can make in-
formed choices and direct their development in positive, growth-enhancing di-
rections. If we are serious about following the ideology of individualism in a
democratic context, all individuals have a right to an equal footing in their exer-
8/20/2019 cote-2006-i
20/24
2 2 COTE
KNOWLEDGMENT
This article is based on the 2005 SR IF Presidential Add ress presented on February
19, 2005 , in M iami, Florida.
R F R N S
Adam s, G. E., Cote, J. E., & M arshall, S. (2002).
Pa rent/adolescent relationships and identity develop-
ment:
A literature
review
a nd policy
statement. Ottawa, Ontario, Canada: Division of Childhood and
Adolescence, Health Canada.
American Diploma Project. (2004).
Ready or not: C reating a high school diploma that counts.
Wash-
ington, DC : Achieve, inc. Retrieved Decemb er 9, 20 04, from http://www.achieve.org
Arnett, J. J. (2000). Emerging adulthood: A theory of development from the late teens through the
twenties.
American Psychologist, 55.
469-480.
Bauman, Z. (2001). The individualized society. Camb ridge, England: Polity Press.
Baumeister, R. F., & Muraven, M. (1996). Identity as adaptation to social, cultural, and historical con-
text.
Journal of Adolescence, 19,
4 0 5 ^ 1 6 .
Beck, U. (1992). Risk society:
owards
a new modernity. London: Sage.
Beck, U., & Beck-Gernsheim, E. (2002). Individualization: Institutional individualism and its social
and political co nsequences.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Berman, S., Montgomery, M ., & Kurtines, W. (2004). The development and validation of a new mea-
sure of identity distress.
Identity: An International Journal of Theo ry and Research, 4,
1-8.
Berzonsky, M . D. (1989). Identity style: Conceptualization and m easurement.
Journal of Adolescent
Research, 4,
267-2SI.
Brubaker, R., & Cooper, F. (2000 ). Beyond identity.
Theory Society, 29, \-47.
Burnett, M . (Executive Producer). (2002). Survivor Marqu esas [TV
Series].
United States: CBS Broad-
casting Inc.
Burrell, G., & Morgan, G. (1979). Sociological paradigms and organisational analysis. London:
Heinemann.
Chandler, M. (2001). The time of our lives: Self-continuity in Native and non-Native youth. In W.
Reese (Ed.), Advances in child development and behavior (pp. 175-221). New York: Academic.
Coan, R. W. (1979). Psycho logists: Personal and theoretical pathways. New York: Irvington.
C6t6, J. E. (1994).
Adolescent storm and stress: An evaluation of the Mead/Freeman controversy.
Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Eribaum Associates, Inc.
C6t6,
J. E. (1996). Sociological perspectives on identity formation: The culture-identity link and iden-
tity capital.
Journal of Adolescence, 19,
419-430.
C6t6, J. E. (1997). An empirical test of the identity capital model.
Journal of Adolescence, 20,
577-597.
Cote, J. E. (2000). Arrested adulthood: The changing n ature of maturity and identity. New York: New
York University Press.
Cot^, J. E. (200 2). The role of identity capital in the transition to adulthoo d: The ind ividualization thesis
examined. Journal of Youth Studies. 5(2), 117-134.
8/20/2019 cote-2006-i
21/24
IDENTITY STUDIES: AN APPRAISAL 2 3
C6t6, J. E,, & Allahar, A. (2005).
C ritical youth studies: A Canad ian focus.
Toronto, Ontario, Canada:
Pearson Education.
C6t6, J. E., & Levine, C. (1992). The genesis ofth e humanistic academ ic: A second test of Erikson 's
theory of ego identity formation. Youth
Society, 23,
387-410.
Cote, J. E., & Levine, C. (2002 ).
Identity orm ation,
agency,
an d
culture.
A social psychological synthe-
sis. H illsdale, NJ: Lawrence Eribaum A ssociates, Inc.
Cushm an, P. (1995). Constructing the self constructing America. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Derrida, J. (1982).
Margins o f philosophy.
Ch icago: University of Chicago Press.
Dreyer, P. H. (1994). Designing curricular identity interventions for secondary schools. In S. L. Archer
(Ed.),
Interventionsfor adolescent identity developmen t
(pp.
121
-140).
Thousand
Oaks,
CA: Sage.
Erikson, E, H. (1963).
C hildhood and society
(2nd ed.). New York: Norton,
Erikson, E. H, (1964).
Insight and
responsibility. New York: Norton,
Erikson, E, H, (1968),
Identity:
Youth
and crisis.
New York: Norton.
Ferrer-Wreder, L,, M ontgomery, M, J,, & Lorente, C, C , (2003). Identity promo tion, adolescence. In T,
P, Gullotta & M. Bloom (Eds,),
Encyclopedia of primary prevention and health promotion
(pp,
600-606), New York: Kluwer,
Frank, T, (1997),
The conquest of
coot:
Business
culture,
counterculture, and the rise of hip consumer-
ism. Chicago: The University of C hicago Press,
Furlong, A,, & C artmel, F, (1997), Young
people and social chan ge: tndividualization a nd risk in late
modernity.
Buckingham, England: Open U niversity Press,
Gergen, K, J, (1991), Th e saturated self: Dilemmas of identity in contemporary life. New York: Basic
Books,
Gergen, K, J, (2001), Psychological science in a postmodern context,
American Psychologist, 56,
803-813,
Giddens, A, (1991),
Mod ernity and self-identity: Self and society in the late modern age.
Stanford, CA :
Stanford University Press,
Gidengil, E,, Blais, A,, Nevitte, N,, & Nadeau, N, (2003), Turned off or tuned out? Youth participation
in politics.
Electoral
Insight 5(2), 9-14,
Goffman, E, (1959), he
presentation of self in everyday life.
Garden City, NY: Doubleday,
Goffman, E, (1963),
Stigma: Notes on the management of spoiled identity.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Prentice Hall,
Grossman , L, (200 5, January 25 ), Grow up? Not so fast.
Time,
pp , 42-53 ,
Hall, S, (1996), Introduction: Who needs identity? In S, Hall & P, Du Gay (Eds,),
Q uestions of cultural
identity (pp.
1-17 ,
London: Sage,
Heath, J,, & Potter, A, (2004),
The rebel
sell:
Why the culture can't be
jammed. Toronto, Ontario,
Canada: HarperCollins,
Hempel, C, G, (1965),
Aspects o f scientific explanation.
New York: Free Press,
Hempel, C, G, (1966),
Philosophy o f natural science.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall,
Hewitt, J, P, (2000),
Self and society: A symbolic interactionist social psychology
(7th ed,), Boston:
Allyn & Bacon,
House, J, S, (1977), The three faces of social psychology,
Sociometry, 40,
161-177,
Kasner, L,, & Ho uts, A, C, (1984), A study of the value systems of behavioral scientists,
Am erican
Psychologist, 39, 840-850,
Kegan, R, (1994),
In over our heads: The mental demands of modem life.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard
8/20/2019 cote-2006-i
22/24
24 COTE
Kuhn, M. H., McPartland,
T.
S, (1954), An empirical investigation of self-attitudes,/Imen'can
Socio-
logical
Review,
19 ,
68-76,
Kurtines, W, M, (1999),
A co-constructivist perspective on hum an behavior an d development.
Unpub-
lished manuscript,
Kurtines,
W
M, (2003),
Changing lives:
Theoretical
metatheoretical, and method ological issues
in
th e
analysis of developmental
change. Unpublished manuscript,
Leary, M, (2004), What is the self? A plea for clarity. Self and Identity, 3, 1-3,
Lerner, R, M ,, Fisher, C, B,, W einberg, R, A, (2000 ), App lying develop men tal science in the 21st
century: International scholarship for our times.
International Journal of Behavioral D evelopment,
24,
24-29,
Marcia, J, E, (1980), Identity in adolescence. In J, Adelson (Ed,),
Handbook o f adolescent psychology
(pp, 159-18 7), New York: Wiley,
McAdams, D, P, (1993), The stories we live by: Personal myths and the making of the
self.
In R,
Ashmore L, Jussim (Eds,),
Self and
identity:
Fundamen tal issues
(pp, 46-7 8), New York: Morrow,
Mead, M, (1928),
Com ing of age
in
Sam oa: A psychological study ofprimitive youth for
estern
civili-
zation.
New York: Morrow Quill Paperbacks,
National Geographic Education Foundation, (2002), National G eographic-Roper 2002 Global Geo-
graphic Literacy Survey.
Retrieved Decem ber 28, 2004, from ww w,nationalgeographic,com/
geosurvey/download/RoperSurvey pdf: RoperASW
Niedzviecki, H, (2004),
Hello, I m
special:
How individuality became the new conformity.
Toronto,
Ontario, Canada: Penguin Canada,
Preston, J, (2004),
Identity, learning and engagement: A qualitative enquiry using the NCDS
(Wider
Benefits of Learning Research Rep, No, 13), London: Centre for Research on the Wider Benefits of
Learning, Institute of Education, University of London,
Quart, A, (2003), Branded:
The buying and selling of teena gers.
New York: Perseus,
Rattansi, A,, Phoenix, A, (1997), Rethinking youth identities: Mod ernist and postmodernist frame-
works. In J, Bynner, L, Chisholm, A, Furlong (Eds,), Youth,
citizenship and social change
in
a Eu-
ropean context
(pp, 121-150), Aldershot, England: Ashgate,
Schor, J, B, (2004),
Born to buy: The comm ercialized child and the new consumer
culture. New Y ork:
Scribner,
Schuller, T , Preston, J,, Hamm ond, C , Brassett-Grundy, A,, Bynner, J, (2004),
The benefits of learn-
ing: The impact of education on hea lth, family life and social
capital.
London : RoutledgeFalmer,
Schwartz,
B,
(2000), Self-determination: The tyranny of freedom,
Am erican Psychologist, 55,
79-88 ,
Schwartz, B, (2004),
Th e paradox of choice: Why more is less.
New York: HarperCollins,
Schwartz, S, (2005), A new identity for identity research: Recommendations for expanding and refo-
cusing the identity literature.
Journal of Adolescent Research, 20,
923-308,
Sherif M, (1958), Superordinate goals in the reduction of intergroup conflict,
American Journal of
So-
ciology, 63,
258-349,
Sidis, B,, Goodhart, S,
P,
(1904),
Multiple personality: An experimental investigation into the nature
of human individuality. New York: Appleton,
Sokefeld, M, (1999), Debating self identity, and culture in anthropology.
Current Anthropology, 40,
4 1 7 ^ 3 0 ,
Stein, M, R,, Vidich, A, J,, W hite, D, M, (1960 ),
Identity and
anxiety:
Survival of
the
person in mass
society.
New York: Free Press,
8/20/2019 cote-2006-i
23/24
IDENTITY STUDIES: AN APPRAISAL 2 5
Swidler, A, (1986), Culture in action: Symbols and strategies, American Sociological Review 51
273-286,
Wachow ski, A, Wachow ski, L, (Directors), (1999), The Matrix [Motion Picture], United States,
Warner Bros,
W aterman, A, S, (1992), Identity as an aspect of optimal psyc hological functioning. In G, R, Adam s, T,
P, Gullotta, R, Montem ayor (Eds,), A dolescent identity formation (pp, 50 -72 ), Newbury Park, CA:
Sage,
Waterman, A, S, (2004), Finding someone to Be: Studies on the role of intrinsic motivation in identity
formation. Identity: An International Journal of heory and Research 4 209-228,
Weigert, A, J,. Gec as, V, (200 5), Sym bolic interactionist reflections on Erikson, identity, and
postmodernism.
Identity: An International Journa l of heory and Research 5
161-174,
Weigert, A, J,, Teitge, J, S,, Teitge, D, W, (198 6),
Society and identity:
oward
a sociological psy-
chology. Cam bridge, England: Cam bridge University Press,
Wertheimer, M, (197 2), Fundamental issues in psychology. New York: Holt, Rinehart Winston,
Wexler, P (1983),
Critical social psychology
London : Routledge Kegan Paul,
Wexler, P, (1992 ), Becoming somebody: oward a social psychology of school London: Falmer,
Whedon, J, (Creator), (1997-2003), Buffy the Vampire Slayer [TV Series], United States: UPN Televi-
sion,
Yoder, A, E, (2000), Barriers to ego identity status formation: A contextual qualification of Marcia's
identity status. Journal of Adolescence 23 95-106,
8/20/2019 cote-2006-i
24/24