The Past, Present, and Future of an Identity Theory

TLDR

Identity theory research has evolved along two strands: one linking social structures to identities (Stryker et al.) and another focusing on self‑verification processes (Burke et al.), with the term’s widespread use across disciplines yet considerable conceptual variability. The paper reviews the two strands of identity theory and discusses how social‑structure linkages and self‑verification processes mutually inform and reinforce one another. The authors synthesize the literature and analyze the reciprocal influence between social‑structure–based identity formation and self‑verification mechanisms. The review concludes with illustrative applications of identity theory to other social‑psychological domains and outlines challenges that must be addressed to clarify the self–society relationship.

Abstract

Among the many traditions of research on two somewhat different yet strongly related strands of theory have developed. The first, reflected in the work of Stryker and colleagues, focuses on the linkages of social structures with identities. The second, reflected in the work of Burke and colleagues, focuses on the internal process of self-verification. In the present paper we review each of these strands and then discuss ways in which the two relate to and complement one another Each provides a context for the other: the relation of social structures to identities influences the process of self-verification, while the process of self-verification creates and sustains social structures. The paper concludes with examples of potentially useful applications of theory to other arenas of social psychology, and with a discussion of challenges that theory must meet to provide a clear understanding of the relation between self and society. The language of identity is ubiquitous in contemporary social science, cutting across psychoanalysis, psychology, political science, sociology, and history. The common usage of the term identity, however, belies the considerable variability in both its conceptual meanings and its theoretical role. Even when consideration is restricted to sociology and social psychology, variation is still considerable.'