Sources of distinctiveness: position, difference and separateness in the identities of Anglican parish priests

Abstract

We investigated the implications of three sources of distinctiveness-position, difference and separateness-for identity and subjective well-being in a survey of 149 Anglican parish priests. Distinctiveness was examined within parish and clergy comparative contexts. Each source contributed substantially and uniquely to ratings of the distinctiveness associated with identity elements in each context. Parish-context position was emphasised within identity and was positive for affect, while parish-context separateness was negative for affect. Distinctiveness in the clergy context was not emphasised within identity and was unrelated to affect. This shows that distinctiveness is not a unitary construct: extending existing theories (Breakwell, 1993;Brewer, 1991;Triandis, 1995), we argue that different forms of distinctiveness will have different implications for identity and well-being according to culture and context.

Combining individuality and relatedness: Representations of the person among the Anglican clergy

“…The considerable importance of relationships and community among these participants clearly poses problems for perspectives which assume that UK participants can be treated unproblematically as representing an individualistic culture. Indeed, subsequent quantitative data show that, despite residing in a nation considered among the most individualistic in the world (Triandis, 1995), UK Anglican parish priests display on average considerably less independent and more interdependent self-construals than do student samples from the USA, Australia, Japan and Korea (Vignoles et al, 2002). It is somewhat ironic that cross-cultural research into these constructs-while aiming to understand the potential diversity of cultural environments and psychological processes-has relied almost exclusively on cross-national comparisons based on student samples (see Oyserman, Coon, & Kemmelmeier, 2002).…”

“…Here Matthew appeared to resolve the apparent opposition between uniqueness and relationships through a distinction between forms of uniqueness. Matthew negated separateness as a source of uniqueness, but emphasized difference and especially position, which were not incompatible with relationships (for related quantitative findings among Anglican parish priests, see Vignoles et al, 2002).…”

Just Another Face in the Crowd? Distinctiveness Seeking in Sweden and Britain

“…centrality of each element within identity, happiness about each element, influence of each element on everyday actions). Four questions (α=.80) measured the association of each identity element with feelings of distinctiveness (in general, and in terms of social position, difference, and separateness: see Vignoles et al 2002b).…”

Identity motives and in‐group favouritism: A new approach to individual differences in intergroup discrimination

“…A new approach to measuring identity motives Until recently, no method has been available to measure the strength of identity motives independently of their satisfaction. However, Vignoles and colleagues (Vignoles, 2004;Vignoles, Chryssochoou, & Breakwell, 2002a, 2002bVignoles et al, 2006) have recently developed a new approach to studying identity motives, based on their effects on individuals' subjective identity structures. This approach assumes that the identity of an individual consists of multiple identity elements (or self-aspects: Simon, 2004), which vary in their perceived centrality or importance for self-definition (Gurin & Markus, 1988).…”