Drawing on Bayesian probability theory, we propose a generalization of affect control theory (BayesACT) that better accounts for the dynamic fluctuation of identity meanings for self and other during interactions, elucidates how people infer and adjust meanings through social experience, and shows how stable patterns of interaction can emerge from individuals' uncertain perceptions of identities. Using simulations, we illustrate how this generalization offers a resolution to several issues of theoretical significance within sociology and social psychology by balancing cultural consensus with individual deviations from shared meanings, balancing meaning verification with the learning processes reflective of change, and accounting for noise in communicating identity. We also show how the model speaks to debates about core features of the self, which can be understood as stable and yet malleable, coherent and yet composed of multiple identities that may carry competing meanings. We discuss applications of the model in different areas of sociology, implications for understanding identity and social interaction, as well as the theoretical grounding of computational models of social behavior.

In recent years, scholars have come to understand emotions as dynamic and socially constructed—the product of interdependent cultural, relational, situational, and biological influences. While researchers have called for a multilevel theory of emotion construction, any progress toward such a theory must overcome the fragmentation of relevant research across various disciplines and theoretical frameworks. We present affect control theory as a launching point for cross-disciplinary collaboration because of its empirically grounded conceptualization of social mechanisms operating at the interaction, relationship, and cultural levels, and its specification of processes linking social and individual aspects of emotion. After introducing the theory, we illustrate its correspondence with major theories of emotion construction framed at each of four analytical levels: cultural, interactional, individual, and neural.

Victim" and "survivor" identities are central to discourses on sexual victimization. Activist and academic discourses associate the former with weakness and latter with strength, while centering images and experiences of white women. Yet, little research has explored who identifies as "victims"/"survivors" or how these identities relate to distress. We utilize identity theory to consider how "victim" and "survivor" identities are incorporated into and prioritized within the self among women of color, white women, and men. In a sample of college students who have experienced sexual assault (N = 169), we find identity theory's core conceptscommitment, prominence, and salience-are strongly and positively correlated across identities, suggesting respondents cannot be easily dichotomized into "victims" and "survivors." Indeed, most respondents identified with both identities (44%), while 25% identified as "survivors" only and 11% as "victims" only. As expected, respondents who identify only as "victims" or as "victim/survivors" report greater negative emotions and depression and lower self-esteem than those who identify only as "survivors." The "victim" identity is particularly damaging for men's emotional states, while the "survivor" identity ameliorates distress among women of color. We discuss how these identities interact with social identities and each other.

Past research has shown that members of a given culture have consensual and stable perceptions of the affective meanings of many social concepts (Heise, 2010). We define "affective meanings" as semantic structures of concepts grounded in emotional experience (see Osgood, 1962; Osgood, May, & Miron, 1975; Rogers, Schröder, & von Scheve, in press; Schröder & Thagard, 2013). People rely on those meanings as sources of implicit cultural knowledge that constrains day-today social interaction (Heise,