Motives and Contexts of Identity Change: A Case for Network Effects

Abstract

We attempt here to interrelate various theories of identity 1 and to describe how various social contexts and cognitive motives influence the process of identity change. Although many strands of literature describe identity dynamics, two are considered primary: identity theory (Stryker 1980;Stryker and Serpe 1982) and social identity theory (Tajfel 1981;Tajfel and Turner 1986;Turner et al. 1987). Recent literature has tried to combine these two paradigms by comparing the distinct contexts and motives that each theory proposes (Deaux and Martin 2003;Hogg and Ridgeway 2003;Hogg, Terry, and White 1995;Stets and Burke 2000). Two views of social context emerge: category and network. Both are alluded to in theory but lack clear operationalization and empirical study. Similarly, two views on motives emerge: internal standards of self-efficacy and external standards of self-verification. Both of these are related to identity dynamics but left somewhat unconnected to social contexts (Elliot 1986).We develop a novel way to operationalize category and network contexts in order to link contexts to motives, and we argue that they jointly influence processes of identity change. We establish these links by analyzing unique data on thousands of students in a natural setting, namely the high school. These students report nearly complete information on their social networks, identity perceptions, and crowd affiliations over time (Brown 1990). Using these data, we develop formal tests which establish a macro-to-micro-level argument that particular network and category contexts are associated with motives of self-efficacy and self-verification, and thereby influence the process of identity transformation.In this paper we interrelate different theories of identity and describe how various social contexts and cognitive motives influence the process of identity change. We consider two competing theories about the linkage of contexts with motives for identity change: the effect of category traits, based on social identity theory, and the effect of social networks, based on identity theory. To explore these relations, we use data collected on more than 6,000 adolescents at six high schools in two consecutive school years. Multilevel logit models reveal a strong relationship between contexts and perceived identity imbalances, and a strong effect of identity imbalance on identity change. More important than category traits are the social network characteristics of prominence, homogeneity, and bridging; these form social contexts that affect perceptions of identity imbalance, and the perceptions in turn lead to a heightened incidence of identity change.289

Network Effects and Social Inequality

“…Those that have, have used data from schools and have reached different conclusions (based on different data sets). Cohen (1977) and Mercken, Snijders, Vartiainen & DeVries (2009), for example, finds large selection effects in high--school peer groups, whereas McFarland & Pals (2005) find little selection between middle school and early high school.…”

Longitudinal analysis of personal networks. The case of Argentinean migrants in Spain

“…However, several scholars argue that it is important to consider the structure of alter-alter ties as it can modify ego-alter relationships (e.g., McCarty, 2002;Wellman, 2007). For example, the density and openness of the personal network structure shape the intensity of social control, the possibility to mobilize social support (Lin, 1999), the diversity of social capital (Flap, 2004), and the conformity of opinions and identifications in the networks (e.g., McFarland & Pals, 2005), all which can have consequences for individual well-being.…”

Understanding individual behaviors within covert networks: the interplay of individual qualities, psychological predispositions, and network effects

“…It is also possible that identity change may be the outcome of influence processes. McFarland and Pals (2005) found that adolescents changed their social identities to make them consistent with others within their personal social networks. The possibility that identity may be both an antecedent and an outcome of network structure raises the difficult question of disentangling dyadic selection from influence.…”