Maria Adela Tamayo
MLA:
Hogg, Micheal A., et al. “ A Tale of Two Theories: A Critical Comparison of Identity with Social Identity Theory.” Social Psychology Quarterly, vol.58, no.4, Dec. 1995, pp. 225 – 269., doi: 10.2307/27787127
APA:
Hogg, M.A., Terry, D.J, & White, K.M. (1995). A Tale of Two Theories: A Critcal Comparison of Identity with Social Identity Theory. Social Psychology Quarterly, 58(4), 255. Doi: 10.2307/2787127.
Summary:
Hogg et al. Focuses on identity theory and social identity theory and how the two theories are similar but yet on different ends of the spectrum. Both cover the social basis of “self-concept” and normal behavior. Even though the theories have some similarities and differences. There is no published work that that has tried to compare them because the theories fall into different disciplines. Hogg summarizes the two theories, then writes about similarities and differences and then end with suggesting what can be researched. Identity theory is considered a “microsociological” while social identity theory is “ social psychological” theory.
Identity Theory
Identity theory explains social behavior as the relationship between self and society and how these two effect each other. Society affects social behavior because it influences the self. The identity theories created the symbolic interactionist to be able test the theory empirically. The central idea is that the “self” is reflection of society and this reflection is multifaceted. This reflection is also made up of organized parts that can be formed. They worked with a theory originated by Stryker. Stryker saw the organized parts as part of the identities or roles. Stryker sees the role or identities of the self are developed by how we interact with others.
Since we interact with groups our identities changes because of these interactions. That’s why a person identity is multifaceted because one person can multiple identities, with each identity tired to each group they belong to each other. Identity theorists focus on the roles in society rather than the different social attributes of these roles. It also focuses on salience. In different situations a person may choose a certain identity because it is more prominent or because it fits the context of the situation. So a person action can depend on the role they choose to take on for that moment.
Social Identity Theory
Social identity theory is a social psychological theory that focuses on inter group relations, group processes and social self. SIT theorist focus on the early work of British Henri Tajfel. He worked on social factors perceived, cognitive and social beliefs behind racism, and prejudice and discrimination. His work was further developed by John Turner in the late 1970’s. He developed the “self-categorization” theory which different but close to SIT. So it is considered to be a part of SIT. A social category is considered a nationality, political affiliation, and any team they are part of. A group they belong to or are born to. These social categories provides the terms or characteristics of the person identity. These identities help us to regulate ourselves in a situation, we perceive then we change our behavior by the norms of social groups.
In the article the similarities listed is a lot shorter then the differences. Hogg in the summary after the summaries for the theories states that both theories be provided because they are two different scientific disciplines. They believed that since the two theories are two different scientific disciplines so it hard to criticize them together. Since IT and SIT both meet different standards and define different areas. So the differences found in comparison could be because the theories are different so they will each bring up different issues. The most important difference the author states is the “level of analysis”. Since identity theory is not psychological it does not focus on generative cognitive as important as social identity theory does. While social identity theory does focus on the generative cognitive because it a psychological theory.
Response:
Hogg states in the article, “ generally it is inadvisable attempt to integrate two very different theories.” They prefer to keep separate and to pit them against each other. But I keep thinking why do we have to pit them against each other. Why cant we use them together to understand identity? Society does affect our identity but so does our brain. So couldn’t we use both the social and the psychological theory to look at the bigger picture of a person identity. We could use a comparison that shows the strengths and the weaknesses of the theories to look at someone identity as a whole.
Quotations and Key terms:
“ I, who for the time have staked my all on being a psychologist, am mortified of others know much more psychology than I. But I am contented to wallow in the grossest ignorance of Greek . My deficiencies there give me no sense of personal humiliation at all. Had I “pretension” to be a linguist, it would have been just the reverse.” (James, 1890, 1950:309)
This stuck out to me because I think that if you are truly doing your job well why would you be mortified if someone knows more about your subject then you. I would take it as opportunity to learn. At my old church the pastor would get offended because some of the older members thought I could be more then a Sunday school teach and be a pastor. So he started to treat me differently and tell me as women I couldn’t be a pastor. Yet I never wanted to be a pastor. I love being a Sunday school teacher. The way I saw it is instead of trying to stop me from doing something I didn’t even want to be why not just focus on being the best pastor you can be. The way I focused on being a good Sunday school teacher .
Salience was brought up in identity theory and social identity theory. The idea behind salience was formed and worked based on the idea that a person will change there identity based on the position of that identity or depending on the situation they are in.
Maria,
ReplyDeleteDon't forget to identify yourself when you post a blog.
Just saw that I should post my name in the title?
DeleteIf you're on the All Posts page your name shows up regardless. If you're on the blog, you have to add it somewhere.
DeleteI think you missed the point of the William James quotation. He was saying that he knew nothing about Greek because it was not part of his area of expertise. He was pointing out a basic part of our self-image, that we aren't upset when others know more than we do about a topic we have never studied, nor have any interest in studying. I would argue that the flaw in his logic is the assumption that we might know more than anyone and any single thing. There is a horrible psychic price for wanting to be the best, the worry that there might be someone out there who knows more than we do. If your self image is built on the need to be the most knowledgeable, you have a fragile hold on yourself.
ReplyDeleteI didn’t see it in that way but now I do. If its a topic we dont care about we dont feel the need to be better or learn about. We can even just listen to it. I agree I dont think we know more then others. i think as people we all have experiences that make up our expertise. I think when get caught up in that assumptions of I know more then others that what breaks our self image. If our self image is based on competition with others makes our image fragile.
Delete