RUNNING HEAD: Reading Response Paper Identity Theory

Jessica Stec
September 6, 2014
Submitted in partial fulfillment for the requirements of EDUC 532
Concordia University
Reading Response Paper Identity Theory

Identity Theory

In reading the article Identity Theory and Social Identity Theory (2000) written by
Stets and Burke, there were several new things that I learned. The beginning states the
main difference in looking at the two theories and how each is most often separated. I
most easily interpret the two theories in that social identity theory looks at the identity of
a person in the group context, and identity theory relates to identifying roles of ones self.
These two theories are somewhat related depending on the context, but also different as
well. I think the goal of the article is to recognize the similarities and differences and
eventually look at them as one that can branch out in different ways.
The early stage for both theories is identification of ones self. Stets and Burke
state, In social identity theory and identity theory, the self is reflexive in that it can take
itself as an object and can categorize, classify or name itself in particular ways in relation
to other social categories or classifications. This process is called self-categorization in
social identity theory; in identity theory it is called identification (p. 224). If this is the
case, one can identify as being of the higher class, middle class, or lower class in society.
As a young child, my parents were of the working lower class, but as we got older, they
became part of the middle class in society. I would identify myself as being part of the
middle class also. Looking at these theories separately, social identity theory looks at
intergroup relations and where people find themselves within those groups. They can
identify similarities with others and include themselves as part of a group that would be
referred to as the in-group. Those not in the group they do not have similarities with,
would then be classified as the out-group. Identity theory takes on a more centralized
view and looks at a person as a having a role with or among others in a group or in

Identity Theory

individual relations. Persons have a role and in order to function properly reciprocity
must be active in order for each person to fill the role they identify with and with others.
After categorizing, the next part in each of these theories is the activation or
salience of each identity. Stets and Burke explain the difference of this topic between the
two identities, A salient social identity was one which is functioning psychologically to
increase the influence of ones membership in that group on perception and behavior. In
identity theory, salience has been understood as the probability that an identity will be
activated in a situation (p. 229). How I best understand this concept is the identity
becoming real and the actions one takes once they have identified with a group. As I
view my identity as being an Oklahoma State fan, I undergo certain activities that help
me relate to being in that group. I wear orange every Friday, I try to attend one football
game per season with my son, and I teach my children the OSU fight song. These are all
actions that help me associate in that category. The identity theory looks at it slightly
different, and if I am a Cowboys fan, I will make that known in situations of college
sports conversation or activity. These two identities almost view salience from opposite
ends, yet they are both very closely related. One views activation as what one does to be
part of a group, the other as what one does in a situation that sets them apart as being part
of that group. The theories also view different levels and based on the situation, what one
refers to being part of the group entails. Those closely related, the idea of salience is one
that takes on different meanings for each different theory.
Lastly, the cognitive and motivational processes are examined when looking at
each theory. Depersonalization is a term used for the social identity theory that is
referred to as a cognitive process. This looks at identifying oneself as part of the in-

Identity Theory

group. One looks at being part of the group, and then takes action that would constitute
being part of the group. Self-verification is the cognitive process in identity theory and
views the persons role as part of the group. The role each person plays in a group in
contrast to just being part of the group is the major distinction that sets these two terms
apart. The motivational process views self-esteem and how one either gains or loses
based on their role or identity within a group. Often times, if people are actually part of
some group, their self-esteem rises because they feel they fit in or have a place
somewhere or a role to fill. Vice versa, if one does not have a group or role to fill, their
self-esteem is lower. It does not necessarily matter the status of the group or the role, but
the fact that one feels important. I look at this topic and believe the research is true. I
may not have the most money, or be part of the in-group that lives on the hill, but I do
have a role within my family, and a group of friends I do belong to, and this in turn gives
me self-esteem.
Within the context of these two theories, is the recognizing of ones own self and
where do I belong. We all have the desire to feel important or fit in somewhere, but the
number one priority is to first be true to yourself and find out who you are, without
worrying about what group you fit in, or what role you will fill or play. As a middle
school teacher, I often see children trying so hard to be someone else, or in order to fit in
they change themselves and may be happy to be in a group, but are not happy just being
themselves. It is unfortunate that self-worth is so reliant on someone determining what
others think of your or the need to fit in with a group in some manner or another. I often
try to encourage my students to be themselves, be independent, strive to be unique.
Unfortunately, as I type this, I realize it is not just students, but society as a whole.

Identity Theory

Everyone is trying to fit in somewhere and often in the process people lose who they
really are on the inside or end up hurting others in their struggle to be somebody. In
my situation, living in a small town and being not only out of town, but out of state as
well, I completely understand this. After being here two years, I am just now finding
where I belong, and although it may not be the popular group it is where I fit and where
I am happy and can be myself. One thing I said when we moved here, I will not lose
myself just because it is not my original home. It is hard being the outsider, and the one
looking in, however, at some point we must truly be happy with ourselves and remain
true to who we are.
The study of these two identities has definitely given me something to think
about. I never really knew there was so much that went into developing and
understanding a theory, although I realize that now. This was not what I expected but I
have benefited from reading and learning and believe certain topics will remain with me.
I think the two theories are very closely related, but cannot be merged because of the very
distinct differences. Good information to have and understand, definitely something to
think about.

Identity Theory

6
Resources

Stets, J.E. & Burke, P.J. (Sep., 2000). Identity theory and social identity theory. Social
Psychology Quarterly, 63(3), pp 224-237.