The Strength of Weak Identities: Social Structural Sources of Self, Situation and Emotional Experience Author(s): Lynn Smith-Lovin

Source: Social Psychology Quarterly, Vol. 70, No. 2 (Jun., 2007), pp. 106-124 Published by: American Sociological Association Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/20141775 . Accessed: 02/01/2011 19:28
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at . http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=asa. . Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

American Sociological Association is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Social Psychology Quarterly.

http://www.jstor.org

_2007,

Social Psychology Vol. 70, No.

Quarterly 2, 106-124

The Strength of Weak Identities: Social Structural Sources of Self, Situation and Emotional
xperience* LVNN SMITH-LOVIN
Duke University

Modern

dimensions

with uncorrelated salient relatively socially to unidimensional weak, (as opposed strong, multiplex) of ties and more weak ties for the ties. What are the implications strong of a society with fewer mean for our emotional in everyday experience life? I outline self? What do these changes a structural view of self, situated It is an ecological in which identity, and emotion. theory differentiated, and encounters experience are of self the link between the macro-level structure and the community and emotion. In this ecol of salient of potential s elf are identities) social change.

societies

are highly a preponderance

interpersonal micro-level

conception, identity performance, enactments ogy of encounters, (especially multiple-identity indicators quite rare. But where they occur, they are important

The

central

theme of this address

is the

tation measured

impact of changing social the self, its constituent identities, the emo and of the interactions, resulting ecology tional experiences. As a structural symbolic that the person we interactionist, become depends profoundly on the networks in which we are embedded. The actions we I argue take and the emotions we experience
on these networks. These networks

structures on

cultures have operated to sustain those meanings (Smith Lovin 1979, 1987b). I was fascinated by Goffman's

the affective meanings that for settings, and what actions

depend
are, in

(1963) description of the expres sive order of public places and by psychologist (Barker 1968; Barker and Roger Barker's 1951, Wright 1959) careful description of the behavioral settings in a small Midwestern town. Goffman described how people were obligated to sustain the character of institu tionalized settings. Barker and his colleagues that what we do depends much recognized
more on where we are and who we are with

turn, shaped powerfully

that we occupy. Social

by the social settings

change occurs, very

these forces operate to change the cultural meanings of identity labels. rarely, when Throughout my career, I have been inter ested in how social settings influence the experiences of actors within them. My disser
* This Social to the address was presented Cooley-Mead section of the American Sociological Psychology

than who we are. While

the era were concentrating

many
on

sociologists
personal

of
atti

tudes and values, Barker noted that place determined the patterned elements of an inter action,
possible

including
outcomes.

its participants,

actions,

and

on August at the Association's 13, 2006, to inMontreal. Address annual meetings correspondence of Sociology, Box 90088, Lynn Smith-Lovin, Department Duke University, Durham, NC 27708-0088; smithlov? Association has sup The National Science Foundation soc.duke.edu. ported my research program throughout my career. Grants in this address that supported specific findings mentioned SES Grants Foundation Science include National 9008951 and SES-0347699.1 Miller thank David R. Heise, Neil J. Owens, McPherson, Timothy Dawn T. Robinson, Sheldon Stryker, Allison K. Wisecup, 229 seminar at Duke and members of my Sociology for comments on earlier drafts of this address. University J. MacKinnon, Allison K. Wisecup ses renorted here. provided valuable help with the analy

scholars had a sense of settings as constraining occupants' activities, explaining in much of the taken-for-granted variance an that interaction. They recognized everyday These mined actor's socially structured environment deter more about what he or she did than what was inside him or her. The person who was a quiet worshipper at church could be a extrovert at a party the night boisterous before. I still think that Goffman and Barker were correct in their assessment of settings' impacts. In this address, I return to some of

106

S LF ANDSITUATED IDGNTITV 107

their themes.
munity and emotions.

I develop
affects

a theory of how com

selves, interactions,

structure

I titled this address "the strength of weak identities," with a bow to Granovetter's (1973) classic paper that outlined the life-shaping impact of information
Weak ties are the simple,

I began this work six years ago in to a review of Identity Theory response research (Stryker and Burke 2000). The review argued that we (1) needed to further of the self as a develop the conceptualization set of multiple identities, and (2) needed to further specify how commitment to networks of relationships were related to internalized identities. The next year, I received an invita honoring Sheldon Owens, Serpe and Thoits Stryker (Burke, 2003; Stryker 2003). This opportunity led me to think about the concepts of self and identi ty as they related to networks of interaction. I developed an ecological theory of the structur al conditions under which develop (Smith-Lovin 2003). when multiple identities are likely to operate in the same setting. In this address, I develop my new ideas on the topic with a little back ground on why they have changed. Imake six
arguments:

carried by weak
less intense,

ties.
more

ties that we are likely to have with those who are far from us in social space. My argument is that the structure of modern social systems leads us to spend much time in unidimensional
these weak-tie interactions. These interactions

tion to attend a conference

result in complex, fluid selves, but relatively simple interactional situations. The ecology of our encounters depends
more on the structure of our environment than

on individual volition.
one of my own papers,

To repeat the title of

"You are who you

selves complex I tried to predict

(Smith-Lovin 1993). But who you know depends profoundly on the structure of organizations and institutions that surround you. Symbolic interactionists have often stressed the choices thatwe make among is identity enactments (e.g., if "professor" our in the salience of self high hierarchy structure, we will start lecturing at the drop of a hat). I emphasize here that social structures around us often lead us to enact identities that
are not central to our self-structure. Who

know"

and McPherson

1. Current social systems?with

differentiation, lated social their statuses, relatively and their

their high
uncorre technolo

gies thatfree usfrom limitations of time

and spacehave resulted in complex

selves
2.

but unidimensional

(weak

tie)

relationships. Such a weak less stable

3. Complex

tie system will make selves as more complex. are more selves but unstable as well

to be a "traffic violator" when driving? Those "weak" identity enactments, while not central to our definitions of self, still influence our emotional lives in a profound way. The most common situation that evoked anger in the 1996 Module on Emotions in the General Social Survey was waiting in line at the gro wants
cery store.

likely to be characterized by attributes and less likely to be characterized by

institutionalized 4. Simultaneous more occur role identities. with two likely about dif or to engagement

self-identities either when

is most ruminating

In a sense, I argue for modifying Stryker's (1980) classic statement of structural symbol ic interaction: that society shapes self which then shapes social interaction. Society does It also shapes selves. interactions through the ecology of encounters. But in much of everyday life, selves do not dominate as the central mediators that they were in I propose formulation. Instead, Stryker's below that the social environment (especially shape its network connections) shapes both the self and social interaction, and creates a somewhat spurious correlation between the two. to qualify my I hasten of revision Stryker's venerable asserted that selves statement. influenced Stryker only interaction in

ferent parts of the self or in situations

with multiple audiences.

5. Mixed
rare neously ferent 6. While

emotions
situations enacts meanings. rare,

are elicited
an actor with identities

by those
simulta very dif

where

interactions

in

simulta

neously
mixed important changes

held
emotions

self-identities
that they of

and
evoke

the
are

precursors in meaning.

cultural

108 SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY QUfiRT RLY

cases where choice of identity was possible. I am suggesting that the glass of "choice" is more than half empty?that the majority of encounters in actors' lives are shaped not by self-structures, but by the social environments in which they are embedded. These environ ments may be determined to some degree by past choices (e.g., the choice to marry, the choice to work at a given job). But, as sociol ogists, we know that those "choices," too, are influenced by many
structures. As actors,

SVM?OLIC INT6RACTION UUITH STRUCTUR6: HISTORIC ROOTS

structural symbolic interaction upon I build began with Sheldon Stryker's (1980) linking of symbolic interactionist ideas with role theory. In his Identity Theory, Stryker rejected a symbolic interaction that which only on creative, atypical behavioral in ill-defined, productions unconstraining behavioral settings. Instead, he concentrated on the stable, recurring interactions in our focused social system. By linking role behavior to the internalized meanings that roles had for indi viduals, he provided the connection between social structure, meaning, and action that dri ves structural symbolic interaction today. Especially relevant is research conducted by Stryker and Richard Serpe (1982; Serpe 1987; Serpe and Stryker 1987, 1993) that developed an ecological understanding of the showed how the change in set ting from high school to college led to two related processes. First, self-identities moti vated students to seek out groups in the new environment that would allow the expression of salient, long-held roles. Individuals recreat in the new environment. ed themselves structure of the new envi the social Second, ronment had an impact on the selves that could be sustained in that setting. When groups were not available to reaffirm old role those identities withered and identities, decreased in salience. This dynamic ecology of actor choice and social structural resources gives us a powerful picture of how selves and
social environments shape one another.

The

factors other than identity

our menu of opportuni

ties and the information

past network contacts rent social position. in So, as experienced everyday life, selves are probably more impor tant to how we think and feel about ourselves than to our interaction probabilities. We spend much time in identities that are not central to
our self-structure. When we are enacting iden

accumulated from our cur strongly affect

tities that are central to the self-structure, it is more likely to be a function of the institution in which we are embedded al environments than any immediate choices we make. The fact that so many of our modern insti tutional settings segregate us into single-iden live in a Gesellschaft tity environments?we than a Gemeinschaft world?makes enactments multiple identity quite rare. One of the reasons thatAffect Control Theory, as a rather theory of situations rather than selves, has in describing role behav been so successful iors (Heise and 1979, 2007; Smith-Lovin Heise MacKinnon is that there 1988; 1994) are relatively few situations in which actors occupy multiple ferent meanings. occasions does when strikingly dif That said, it is on those rare the ecology of encounters identities with

self. This work

lead to parts of the self being activated that are both simultaneously enacted and importantly different in meaning that, when individuals, lead to this mecha

We have not seen substantial development in this very productive line of work in the past in structural a to shifted symbolic control-sys tem view of identity and action. This control system focused on one identity at a time and interaction how itwas maintained and Burke in interaction (Stryker 2000). Affect Control Theory led this movement with a mathematical model of the relationship between identity and action and Heise (Heise 1979, 2007; Smith-Lovin MacKinnon Robinson and Smith 1988; 1994; Lovin 2006). three decades. The focus of work

experienced by multiple cultural change. Understanding nism

of multiple-identity occupancy may show how micro-level interactions can lead to

macro-level

in cultural meanings changes structures the that (and they both generate and I this represent). hope perspective contributes to the much-neglected pathway from self to the reshaping of society.

S6LF fiNDSITU?T D ID6NTITV 109

Affect Control Theory had no model of the self. Social situations determined what identities would be enacted (although actors could seek out situations with a predisposition
to enact an identity, as when a person enters a

data?from
and from a

an experiential
nationally-representative

sampling

study
survey

that illustrate some features of modern

ty structure. I then make some rather

identi
straight

a to become in a desire office on The theoretical focused argument Patient1). the behaviors and attributions that occur once doctor's a situation and have determined the relevant self-identities are within it. Affect Control Theory was a theory of social situations, not of the relationship between actors define what individuals and the social structures in which they were embedded. Just as many of us turned to the interrela tionship of emotion, identity, and action in the late 1980s (Smith-Lovin 1990; see review in seems Smith-Lovin that it is time to 1995), it put self, and social structure back I join MacKinnon and Heise recent work and Stryker's (forthcoming) (Stryker, Serpe and Hunt 2005) in tackling the question of the social structural sources of self identity, together again. and social interaction. This structural empha sis will connect our symbolic interactionism to important substantive issues like social movement (Heise 1998; Heise participation and Britt 2000; Stryker 2000) and the impact on mental of identity occupancy health (Thoits 2003; Simon 1995, 1998; MacKinnon and Golbournne 2006). At a more structural us to link the impressive work it allows level, on the dynamic evolution of social groups and 1983; McPherson (e.g., McPherson to the of Ranger-Moore 1991) epidemiology individual experience. Like Stryker (1980), I interactionist hope to reintegrate symbolic concerns the mainstream of thought with
more macro-level thinkers.

forward arguments, based on Affect Control Theory, about how the rare, simultaneous experience of multiple identities with substan tively different cultural meanings can produce emotions
change.

and

actions

that

create

social

AND SCOP6 D6FINITIONS, QUESTIONS,

I focus on five basic questions. First, what structures determine available identi ties? Second, how do these identities combine into selves as individuals internalize them social through personal biography? Third, when do people occupy two or more identities within the same social situation? Fourth, how do those simultaneously held identities produce lines of social action and emotional response? Fifth, what does the experience of multiple identity occupancy imply for social change? I use the term identity in a broader sense than Stryker's (1980) definition. In his inte and of role theo interaction gration symbolic ry, Stryker (1980) focused on role-identities, the internalized meanings of roles for the indi Instead, I adopt the more comprehen sive image that Neil MacKinnon and David Heise (forthcoming) use in their new book on vidual. and Heise define "cultur identity. MacKinnon al theories of people" as the set of categories that a culture provides for labeling types of people,
among

as well
those

as the logical
categories. For

implications
example, the

In this address, I partition the broad issue of the multiple-identity self into a set of more specific theoretical questions. This dissection allows me to use some well-formed ideas from other research ture and encounters traditions individuals and to link social struc an ecology of some I present identities. into

Court Justice Supreme implies Lawyer, which implies College Graduate, and eventually implies more abstract levels like identity and Human. Notice that these cultural theories of people can change. Thirty years ago the same identity, Supreme Court Justice, might have implied the more abstract identity Man. While that might still be a part of the prototypical Justice, the strength ofthat impli cation has softened in the past three decades. In the theoretical argument here, I deal with identities that operate at the same level of the perceptual control system, rather than those that represent higher or lower levels of Adult

I will use the Affect Control Theory convention that indicates and emotion capitalization identity, behavior, labels that carry affective meaning within a culture that must be maintained by interactions.

PSYCHOLOGY 110 SOCIAL QUART6RLY

and Fararo reference signal (see McClelland 2006 for amore complete treatment of control systems in sociology). Control theorists know thatmultiple levels of control exist, with shifts at higher levels effectively resetting the refer ence levels that are operative at lower levels. Rival For example, if I come to view a Friend as a for a romantic interest, Imight reinter earlier actions in this new framing, while pret represent the ways that people think about themselves and others in situations. Cognitive labeling and affective meaning are inextrica bly intertwined 1979; MacKinnon (Heise 1994). Labeling someone (including oneself) leads inevitably to control processes of identi Since identity labels carry ty maintenance. and guide social action, I cultural meaning ask what the features of social of structure potential availability

first

not changing my view of what had physically occurred in those earlier interactions (a lower level of processing), nor changing my view of my Friend/Rival as a normal, human member of my
ment).

determine identities.

SOCIAL STRUCTUR? ANDCOMPL6X S6LV6S

What actors? All the "cultural social structural features determine theory of people" available to

social group

(a higher

level of judg

I attempt to analyze the relation ships among those identities whose meanings directly generate lines of action and emotion al responses to the actions of others in inter Here, personal situations. An operational criterion is the nouns that people might use spontaneous ly (or when asked) to name themselves or oth ers within a situation. So, both Friend and Rival would be identities, because they are ways in which I could label someone with whom I have an interaction. They make sense within my culture, and the act of labeling someone communicates much to others in the culture who
meanings.

three types of identity?role-iden and differentiating tities, group memberships,

networks as their

characteristics?have

source. In the case of role-identities, a network relation with an alter defines a position within a social structure. That position has rights, and behavioral expectations responsibilities, vis a vis some other position (Merton 1957; Stryker 1980). In the case of group member to a ship, the network tie is a connection named McPherson group of 1983). characteristic identities, interactions with peo ple different from us create salient social cate alters 1974; (Breiger In the case of personal

share those words identity labels

and their social include:

(1) the in the role-identities indicating positions social structure, (2) the social identities indi in groups, and (3) the cat cating membership that come from identifi egory memberships Cultural
cation with some characteristic, trait, or

and (Berger, Fisek, Norman, gorizations Zelditch 1972). We only know we are intelli gent if we compare ourselves with someone we think is less smart. Our social context (in particular, who we are in contact with) influ ences the meaning of our category occupancy (Hogg and Abrams 1988). The meaning of our category membership (e.g., what itmeans to be British) is influenced by the context to If the British which we compare ourselves. tradition compare themselves to Americans, alism and reserve may be most salient. If com parison to new immigrant groups from older civilizations (e.g., the Middle East) is more like patriotism or tol proximate, distinctions erance may be highlighted. Given that network ties generate identity labels, we know that affective meanings (like status) will almost and Ridgeway, Once there is a noticeable inevitably Smith-Lovin follow (Mark, unpublished). difference among

attribute (Smith-Lovin 2003). For example, when we asked 38 members of the university community atArizona about their identities in a 1995 experiential study, they sampling reported 328 distinct identities. These ranged from role-identities with clear role alters (e.g., Bartender, Landlord, Sister), to activity-based alters (e.g., Artist, to social identities lover), Camper, on based group membership (e.g., Church to salient Member, Greek), personal charac teristics (e.g., African American, Responsible ambiguous Music
Person).

identities with

I argue that this wide range of social labels should be studied together because they

111 S LF FIND SITUATED ID6NTITV

that allows people to be categorized, then the category label acquires status value (e.g., evaluative meaning or influence) within a culture with remarkable regularity.2 Even no to with characteristics relationship actors resources will or other salient status distinctions and evaluation can create systems become imbued with (primarily age, sex and physical capabilities). As society grows in size and societies
scope, the scale of the system acquires other

and education, to dimensions, More social interaction. organize importantly, McPherson (2004) argues that salient dimen sions of social differentiation become less cor

such as wealth

influence potential. Social evaluative meaning almost out of thin air. The smallest human groups have age and sex vari ations, and these distinctions inexorably lead to "cultural theories of people," with implica tions about the relationships
and evaluative meaning.3

related in large systems. This unfolding of the multi-dimensional social space leads not just to greater diversity in the system as a whole; it of many more also allows the development regions (niches) within the social McPherson and system. (1983; McPherson Rot?lo 1996) has shown that these niches have distinctive implications for the shape and com of the groups within position membership structure. The of social composition larger and their in social turn, environments, groups have profound implications for the network profound ties of their members Lovin have (McPherson and Smith 1981, 1986, 1987,2002). Most theorists focused on the information that such

among categories

The clear dependence of identities on net work relations is very useful, for there is a substantial literature about network features of social systems. The first principle upon which I draw is the relationship between size and dif ferentiation Mayhew, Levinger, (e.g., and James 1972; Mayhew McPherson, 1974). In virtually any domain?from the entire
social system to a voluntary association?

larger size leads to increased internal differen tiation. Relations between actors shift from to Gesellschaft. In larger sys Gemeinschaft are function we who interact those with tems, ally interrelated but different from us; in smaller systems, we interact with those who are similar. More differentiation means more role identities, more membership groups, and more interact within Miller salient distinctions among the system. McPherson those who

diverse ties bring 1983; (Granovetter McPherson and Smith-Lovin 1987). Here, I focus on the consequences for self-identities. Both the size-differentiation principle and the unfolding of Blau space in larger, technologi cally advanced systems lead us to the same prediction.
Proposition related 1: System of size will be positively to the number identities in the system.

a (2004) has made the dimension related about argument closely space, ality of the salient socio-demographic which he calls "Blau space." He notes that there are few characteristics distinguishing individuals in small, technologically simple

Having established the opportunity struc ture for creating selves within society, we now turn to the question of how actors occupy and
internalize identities to create a self-structure.

ID6NTITI6S INTO S6LV6S: TH6 INT6RNAUZATION Of STRUCTURE

Now that I have described the resource space within which selves are formed, I can proceed to the next question: what determines the complexity and stability of selves? The differentiation density of in larger systems creates lower interactions among actors and of that interaction. This segmentation of interactions has profound of social actors

More

gories simple

formally, is an attractor. assumptions

evaluative about

differentiation tomake

of

cate

If one is willing the diffusion

a couple of and loss of status will prevent I expect that

social conditions beliefs, only very specific status beliefs from forming. consensual 3 I am an Affect Control Theorist, Because

vs. weakness) and activity (liveli potency (powerfulness ness vs. quietness) meanings would be created in the same the Mark, Ridgeway, and Smith-Lovin way. However, the status con paper is developed within (forthcoming) struction ing. paradigm and deals only with evaluative mean

greater lower density

implications for the selves within the system.

PSVCHOLOGV 112 SOCIAL QUART6RLV

I develop a somewhat more nuanced set of predictions by using more of the ecological framework developed by those who study the net distributions, interplay of population works, and social groups. McPherson (1983) an ecological theory that should developed apply entity that (1) spreads network contacts and through homophilous some of competition for the level involves (2) social to any rect forces. The direct effect of homophily
to create more, smaller groups. But homophi

is

on tie stability; ly also has an effect ties are more likely to survive homophilous for longer periods. Recall that the effect of tie stability is to make groups less numerous and direct effects on homophily's larger. When group size and number and its indirect effects through tie stability are taken into account, the
net effect is near zero.

time or energy of actors. We know that social the systems are characterized by homophily, as actors of interaction increasing probability
become more similar on almost any character

Therefore, any impact on the complexity of self structures from homophily comes from the overlap of groups or the diversity of groups, both of which should make for amore complex self. Homophily within a social sys tem is likely to be created when socio-demo graphic dimensions are more correlated, since can be a in such system. simultaneously optimized Under such conditions, groups (and other social entities like communities that hold sim homophily on multiple dimensions ilar tastes, engage in similar activities, etc.) will tend to be small and less diverse, leading
to a simpler Proposition be positively Proposition be negatively social self. of self structures 2: Complexity to system size. related will

istic, from physical distance to socio-demo graphic features to information (McPherson, and Cook 2001). Birds of a Smith-Lovin, social entities together. When or cultural tastes, occupations) (like groups, in this for people's energy compete resource space, they become homophilous localized in that space. Different kinds of peo ple do different kinds of things. Entities as feather flock
wide ships, ranging occupations, as voluntary musical group tastes, member and reli

practices have been successfully lyzed using this framework (Mark 1998,1999; Rot?lo and McPherson 2001; Chaves 2004). An ecology of identity allows us to exam gious

ana

between ine the relationship system-level and the range, diversity, and characteristics (Smith-Lovin overlap of identity occupancy (2000) used 2003). For example, McPherson to analyze the relationship simulations in a system between the level of homophily and some outcomes that are directly related to number of distinct groups, the identity?the within groups, and the member heterogeneity to which actors in the extent ship overlap (the of multiple groups simul that "group" here taneously). Remembering can represent any social entity that spreads through homophilous networks and competes time and energy, all of these features of should be related to the self-complexity actors within the system. In the simulations, a high level of homophily suppresses the extent for groups overlap and the diversity of people within those groups. Effects on group size and the number of groups (net of system are minimal, because primarily size) to which homophily has countervailing direct and indi system are members

of self structures will 3: Complexity to the correlation of salient related within the social of self system. structures will

distinctions

Proposition a social

4: Complexity

be negatively related to the level of homophily in

system.

This

treatment of self structure

is more

structural and cultural than social psychologi cal. I argue that this approach is useful in order to move us back to a serious considera tion of the social structures inwhich individu als are embedded and inwhich their selves are formed. Some niches in social space imply more complex selves than others. Without tak into ing the broader system-level phenomena account, we risk viewing complex selves as something akin to a personality characteristic (an individual attribute). Instead, I view them here as a reflection of the social system and an individual's
on network

location within it. By focusing on the dependence

ties, I can generate some

of selves
relative

ly straightforward

predictions,

based on what

S LF ANDSITUAT6D IDCNTITY 113

we know about the density and diversity of networks in different regions of social space. For example, we know from Peter Blau's that numerically (1977) structural analysis smaller categories of people will have more out-group ties than those in larger categories (e.g., African Americans have more ties with than Anglos do with African Anglos Actors higher in the stratifica Americans). tion system are more likely to have diverse networks system fication that range further through the social than those who are lower in the strati (Lin 2001). empirical proposition
5: Individuals

is one example. Turner (1976) argued that society was undergoing a shift from the per ception of self as an institutionally motivated actor toward a more impulsively, personally motivated one. Pescosolido and Rubin (2000) noted similar processes of self-perception in a
postmodern world when actors were more

often found at the center of a spoke structure of relationships, rather than in overlapping affiliations. When people serve as a group single bridge between different groups, they are more likely to perceive themselves in an individuated, autonomous way. They are less institutional, and sub likely to be collective, I in the social. merged suggest that structural influence how people see positions directly themselves and their motivations.
7: People less with more complex selves

system well-established corresponding plexity:

Proposition ly smaller selves than

Each facts about

of leads

these to a

self com

categories individuals

numerical occupying will have more complex from numerically larger

Proposition

will be more
terms and group-membership

likely to self-describe in attribute

to self-describe likely using or role-occupancy terms.

categories. Proposition more complex 6: Higher selves status than lower actors status will have

actors.4

Now,

Above, I have repeated my argument for an ecology of identities (from Smith-Lovin a number of and have suggested 2003), an ecology what about such propositions would look like. Hypotheses could use survey methods to locate respondents in social struc tural space and to measure
tures. Further, these structural

turn to the domain of interaction to how these system level properties will suggest be reflected in actual social interactions. Iwill Complexity of Situated Encounters

A complex self is a necessary condition for multiple identities to be enacted simulta

neously in a situation. Increasing self-com

their self struc

phenomena

could

held by linked to self-concepts respondents in different social niches. I lack the space to develop these ideas fully, but here be

such multiple plexity may make identity enactment more likely by chance. Inmy earli er chapter on the ecology of identity, Imade a base-rate argument (Smith-Lovin 2003). I suggested that having a complex self would make one more likely to enact multiple identities in the context of a single situation. Some new data and a reconsideration of other such theoretical ideas have changed my thinking. I believe that I had underestimated the extent to which modern interactions are segregated. This segregation leads complex selves to be played out in relatively simple single-identity
interactions.

4 readers are disturbed Many by this proposition, it seems to imply that lower status people are because inferior in some way. I have two reactions to that concern. states theory (Berger et al. 1972), First, like expectation the proposition is about position within the structure rather than any intrinsic characteristic of people. It is not racist or sexist to say that if people hold lower status posi then people have competence expectations, for collective task interaction. implications a posi Neither is it racist or sexist to say that occupying tion higher in a hierarchy gives one a more diverse set of network contacts. Second, we tend to assume that "com this fact has is good. But, in this case, the contrast to com plexity is not simplicity, but rather a gemeinshaft integra tion of community and identity. This state is more often plexity" the focus of a mythic yearning than an object of scorn. It state for people or for social sys may not be a negative tems. tion for which

Two types of data, one on network ties and

one on interactional encounters, made me

reassess my base-rate argument. The first is a national survey of close confidant ties collect ed with Miller McPherson in the 2004 General Social Survey. The fact that these close ties are rarer in 2004 than they were in a 1985 survey

PSYCHOLOGY 114 SOCIAL QURRT6RLY

received much attention (McPherson, Smith Lovin, and Brashears 2006). What strikes me about these data, however, is how few multi plex (multiple relationship) ties we found.5 We know that these data measure ties very, very close et al. 2006: 354-6). The (McPherson and the confidants with whom respondents The experiential sampling study mea sured the self-structure of individuals in a tra ditional way. We asked respondents to list up to 10 "more important" and 10 "less impor in a questionnaire. We tant" self-identities within focus then assessed the identities that they enacted the context of situations sampled at random during an eight-day period. Here, I on identities. two features of our respondents' First, of the 224 identities that

they "discuss important matters" have known each other for an average of seven years and interact almost five times a week (McPherson et al. 2006:360). Close ties are more likely distant ones to be multiplex. is one of Indeed, part multiplexity Granovetter's (1974) definition of a close tie. Yet when we look at the very close tie of spouse in the 2004 data, we find that 58 per cent of the spouses mentioned do not share than more any other structural link with These spouses are not also
coworker, comember of a

in the self-structure respondents mentioned 105 assessment, only appeared in the situa were that tions sampled in the study. Almost as many identities (104) appeared only as situat ed identities, but did not appear in the self structure. Clearly, respondents were spending much of their time (roughly 50 percent) in identities that were elicited by their situational
but were not an expression of "who

their partners. as designated

group or

contexts,

voluntary

other kind of relation. Of the 42 percent that in their did have some serious multiplexity with their spouse (that is, other relationship than labeling their spouse a "friend"), only 13 percent had more than two types of relations with their spouse. Of the 1467 respondents that we surveyed, only 33 had a spouse who
was also a friend, advisor, coworker, and

they were." This picture of the interactional environment is somewhat at odds with our tra ditional views of self-structure enactment, which would lead us to expect a large number of self-identities in interactional situations Thoits 1980; 2003). (Stryker When we turn our view to the situation level, this tension is reinforced. Of the 578 sit uations observed, 261 involved no self-struc ture identities at all (see Table 1). The majori ty of situations (378 of 578 or 65.4 percent) involved only those (192 of tity that was self structure. tions were not as likely to identities a single identity. Over half of the 378) involved a single iden not central to the respondent's While multiple-identity situa rare (200 out of 578), they were

kind of complex, mul tiplex relationship that I have with my hus and which many aca band, Miller McPherson, demic couples assume is typical. group comember?the
Non-kin ties were even simpler. Among

non-kin
data coworkers

relations, very few people

neighbors and comembers and in a

in the 2004
or

were

coworkers, voluntary

group. Only about six percent of the non-kin in a seriously structural ties were multiplex one institutional or more than way, linking nature of The unidimensional group context.6 me to look these very close relationships led back at experiential 1995. sampling data collected in

involve two non-self-structure or a self-structure identity and a as situational identity purely they were to involve the combination or clash of two salient identities that were a part of the core self
structure.

5 at http://sda. available The data are publicly for those who would like to berkeley.edu/archive.htm, explore this issue in greater depth. 6 all non-kin ties were labeled as "friends," but Almost label to I do not consider the addition of this relationship make mous a tie multiplex. Instead, it seems almost synony asked of the question, which with the meaning important matters."

These empirical findings, generated by to lead me very different methodologies, reconsider my earlier view of an increasingly differentiated social system leading to increas ingly complex social interactions. Multiplex (multiple identity) relationships do not seem extremely common, even in the context of
very close ties. In fact, our experiential sam

about "discussing

pling data indicate few situations where multi lead to multiple-identity plex relationships

SC-LF ANDSITUATED IDENTITY 115

Table 1. Situations from an Experiential Identity Situations identities identity and one purely identities situational identity Sampling Study (N = 578)_

Of 200 Mulitple

69 had no self-structure 77 had one self-structure 54 had two self-structure Of 378 Single 181 involved

Identity Situations: self-structure identities identities

192 involved purely

situational

interactions with multiple-identity

a significant other. When situations did occur in our

MacKinnon these ideas Pescosolido McPherson's argument change

and Heise in an and

(forthcoming) institutional Rubin

experiential sampling study, they seemed more likely (1) to result from unusual situa tions with multiple audiences (in a group of several people), (2) as the result of enacting a identity while self-structure mentally or as the result of identity, (3) ruminating over For exam non-interactional conflicts. identity a test a Student about reports worrying ple, situationally elicited non-salient a salient occupying while associates. he is lunching as a Friend with some A respondent reports worrying about which family member to stay with on an trip while she is interacting with in a laundromat. Stryker's point central importance of selves may force when predicting our elicita

(1983, 2004) in interpreting large-scale in the relationships between

develop context, echo (2000) more structural historic self and

identity. Pescosolido and Rubin argue that his torical social network patterns progressed beyond an unfolding of salient dimensions to society where individuals most structural holes, connecting nonoverlapping groups. In such a postmodern ly bridge world, where most network ties are bridging ties, individuals would have complex selves but would seldom encounter in situations which multiple salient identities were relevant. and Rubin suggest that the mechanism primary driving the postmodern network where individual structure, "spoke" actors act as bridging ties between otherwise unconnected groups, is the declining stability of ties. If ties are stable, long-term relations, are the fact that most group memberships recruited through network ties should lead one Pescosolido a postmodern

upcoming strangers about the have more mation

them.

tion of cognitive sch?mas (networks of infor in about our central self-identities) our rather than about lives, thinking acting in

selves did not seem to come Complex from complex relationships. Nor did they lead to complex situations. Instead, they were the features of mind?the process of mostly our about lives, making ruminating plans, being "out of" the current situation and cog in "another place" nitively (or emotionally) us. that is important to

bridging tie to become many. Social groups will become cross-cutting social circles if ties persist long enough for new ties to build on the old (2000; 2002) simulation studies of system-level para meters and their effects on group structure show a strong positive relationship between tie and the membership stability overlap of groups. These simulations also show that tie stability fosters larger, more diverse groups that survive longer, although in smaller num results from these sys relationships lead to my first situa tion-level predictions. Ties that persist for longer periods of time are more likely to evoke group memberships multiple, overlapping tem-level bers. The simulation connection. Indeed, McPherson's see also McPherson and Smith-Lovin

TH SITUATIONAL S6LF: R6THINKING ANDSIMPL6 S6LV6S COMPL6X SITUATIONS

Neil MacKinnon's and David Heise's (forthcoming) book begins with an extensive discussion of the postmodern self. Inmuch of this literature, the self is a local, experientially based one. Postmodernists argue that we are now many people to many audiences, but not same at the time. While necessarily

11 ? SOCIRL PSYCHOLOGY QURRT6RLY

and, net of other social forces, to result in the simultaneous operation of multiple identities.
8: Interactions Proposition one has a longer history whom with of alters interaction with are

1999). These processes (Keeton together increase the clarity of group boundaries. Interacting in sparser, less interconnected networks of weak ties exposes us to new infor and makes us more mation, likely both to leave current groups and to join new ones. these patterns directly to identity, Relating Robinson, Keeton, and Rogalin (2002) show that people who interact in less dense net adopt more identities with more diverse in an experimental computer chat meanings situation. If our world has a higher proportion works of weak ties, we also have more
selves?but not necessarily

more
shorter

likely to involve multiple

with those with whom term relationship.

identities than
one has a

interactions

Proposition

9:

Interactions

between

alters with

multiplex
multiple between gle

relationship will more

identity alters who standards than are connected

likely evoke
interactions by only a sin

relation.

sam from the experiential to this illustrate point. The pling study helps an with is administrative assistant respondent three children. She is polled while in her uni versity office, where she is "speaking with a An example soccer mother." Coach, Mother, (she volunteers She occupies the identities of and Friend in the conversation

complex,
more

less
com

stable

plex situations. Social situations must

involve relation are or that involve multiple ships multiplex actors who have different relationships in order to evoke multiple identities simultane Pescosolido and Rubin (2000) ously. While world leads to argue that a postmodern audiences increasingly segmented, segregated for a limited slice of the self, having several

questionnaire friend's child's the coach of her neighborhood soccer team, and all three of these identities are part of her self-structure (as recorded in the survey at the beginning of the study). Her in this multiplex embeddedness relationship, in spawned neighborhood, voluntary associa tion, and family institutional contexts, has potential for discomfort. There are different for each expectations and cultural meanings
role-identity.

the third identity, when the only gives room for two). She is

people in a setting increases the chances that an actor will occupy a different identity for different alters in the situation.
10: Interactions with more Proposition to evoke multiple alter are more likely standards than interactions by only between relation. are connected a single than one identity alters who

But such multiplex ties are increasingly as our recent indicates rare, paper (McPherson et al. 2006). Instead, we are increasingly able to segregate our audiences. The implications of the increasing proportion of weak ties, and the scarcity of deep, embedded ties and cross cutting social circles is actually the McPherson, found. Consider and Drobnic (1992) research that weak and strong ties influence our quite pro Popielarz, shows how

a brief example from the experien tial sampling study illustrates the process sug Again, gested by P10. A university administrative assistant finds herself inmultiple identities at "working with a professor on the to provide Retention Committee Minority input as a minority and support as a staff per son." There are five people in the situation (2 males and 3 females?both males are white and the females are of various ethnicities). She interacts with all of the individuals present, "teaching" the others about the racial/ethnic climate on campus, but only knows and inter acts with one of the men (her mentor, the pro fessor) on a regular basis. She indicates the situationally relevant identities she occupies include Teacher Student (a self-structure identity) and non-self (a identity, elicited in this a meeting

stability of shared in ties groups. Strong memberships a with those in group dramatically lengthen our stay in that group. Multiplex relationships as their multiplex, increases and people pull their friends into shared activities. Dense net of works inside a group make the meanings the group move identities shared within tend to become more shared information

S6LF RNDSITURT6D IDENTITY 117

situation
mentor,

by her relationship
the professor).

to her former

how multiple identities when simultaneously held will lead to lines of action in situations.

Like the work setting above, most interac tions occur in the context of larger institution of these al foci. Therefore, the composition institutional settings has powerful effects on the direct connections among actors within and I have shown those settings. McPherson that most of the observed similarity among friendship ties formed in groups, for example, structure of the is due to the opportunity group, within rather than individual the group choices made and Smith (McPherson Lovin 1986, 1987). Therefore, we can think of setting-level versions of P2, P3, and P4 to pre dict when interactions will involve alters who differ in some socially-important characteris tic (either roles or category memberships). People who interact in large, diverse groups or institutional settings with low internal correla tions more social characteristics will be in interactions likely to be embedded with diverse others, and to occupy multiple identities within those interactions. To state among the most proximate prediction:
Proposition are dissimilar who 11: Interactions on involving actors char

IDNTITI6S HOW MULTIPL6 CRAT UN SOF ACTION

As Stryker and Burke (2000) noted, the "internal" branches of structural symbolic I would which include interaction?among Affect Control Theory?have mostly ignored the problem of multiple identities. They large ly assume that one identity becomes central to
an interaction and that actors operate to main

tain that identity. This been appropriate: most

emphasis may have of our interactions

involve unidimensional institutional contexts or place us in identities that are not central to our self-structure. Still, the multiple-identity enactment issue has been central enough for theorists
tions.

to develop Control

some

intermediate

solu

Affect identities Thomas

meanings, tion. For

theorists add qualifiers to and Heise 1987; Heise and (Averett to create 1989) amalgamated identity
which example, actors maintain in a situa socio-demographic charac

socio-demographic

acteristics will be more likely to invokemultiple

identities cally than interactions among demographi similar alters.

to role-identities create composites like "a Female Doctor" or "a Latina CEO." Moods and personality char acteristics can be added in the same way, cre like "a Depressed combinations ating teristics
Teacher" or "a Gregarious Clerk." The mean

can combine with

that PI 1will be supported only net of the potentially powerful effects of tie stabil Note ity in P8. Homophilous, multiplex, long-term relationships are more likely to be strong ties than weak ties. On the other hand, we would expect ties between dissimilar others to be weak ties. As such, the zero-order relationship and multiple between dissimilarity identity occupation (PI 1)might well be negative. But,

ings that a culture holds for these qualified identities can be predicted very accurately using the same empirical paradigm thatAffect Control Theory uses to estimate affective meanings after an event (Smith-Lovin 1987a). assess the meanings of both the on and the characteristic identity qualifying the three dimensions of affective meaning that Affect Control Theory uses as its metric Researchers evaluation, potency, and activity (Robinson and Smith-Lovin 2006; Heise 2007). The
researcher assesses the meaning of the com

controlling for tie duration (P8) and multi plexity (P9), I expect dissimilarity to give rise tomore category-membership personal identi
ties.

I have generated a series of predictions, derived mostly from social ecology and net work theory, about when multiple indentities will be available tive within situations. in self structures and opera I now move onto more terrain to discuss

posite (qualifier identity) using the same scales. Then the meaning of the composite is regressed on the meanings of the identity and in isolation to develop an qualifier measured empirically derived model of how the two combine to form a new fundamental meaning for the composite identity.

familiar social psychological

118 SOCIRL PSYCHOLOGY QURRT6RLY

Not surprisingly, when the attribute close matches the identity inmeaning, the identi ly tymeaning is not changed significantly by the addition of a qualifier (e.g., a Rich CEO). In this case, the qualifying characteristic is already included in the prototypical meaning of the identity. When the qualifier is signifi in different (e.g., a Generous cantly meaning the CEO), resulting composite is a predictable of the two distinct meanings (the of meaning being a Generous person and the meaning of occupying the position CEO). So, a Generous CEO seems nicer and more potent function than the average CEO. INTERACT, the simu lation program based on Affect Control Theory (available at http://www.indiana.edu/ ~socpsy/ACT/),
researchers. turbing, one would expect stress to result.

There also might be a heightened probability of leaving the interaction. Our experiments show that people are more likely to select away from interactions with those who fail to their identities (even when confirm those are in identities negative evaluation) (Robinson
Proposition

and Smith-Lovin
12: Interactions

1992).

identity meanings actor will create involving a single

involving disparate held simultaneously by one more stress than interactions identity standard.

13: Actors will terminate interac Proposition tions in which enact dis they simultaneously at a higher rate than parate identity meanings interactions involving a single identity.

does

the calculations

for that this parallel multiple identity processing could explain is the com mon experience of mixed If our emotions.
control models are correct, emotions are expe

One phenomenon

meaning,

identities are relatively close in simultane they can be maintained is similar actions. Since it the mean ously by in the three-dimensional (evaluation, ing potency, and activity) space that determines the actual processing of the event in Affect Control Theory, two identities that are very When close in the meaning space are effectively the same identity. Consider, however, the relative ly unusual case where two identities are quite in meaning, but simultaneously different evoked by the situation. In this case, actions thatmaintain one identity will be disruptive to

rienced primarily as the result of the confir mation or disconfirmation of identities. If an actor is occupying more than one identity and simultaneously, experiencing events from those multiple perspectives, it is natural that a mixture of emotions would For example, a directive
negative deflection on the

result from events. action

that would of the support identity Judge might produce

evaluation and pos

the other. In the conceptual language of Affect Control Theory, "deflection" will result. A connectionist model, which allows the parallel processing of multiple understandings of the situation, is consistent with the new challenges by multiple identity standards. The distributed representations that are possible within the connectionist model (Kashima, Foddy, and Plakow 2001) are well a multiple-identity suited to characterizing self. Multiple aspects of the self can be acti vated by a situation. Events can be perceived and processed simultaneously from the point of view of multiple identities (Smith-Lovin 2001). If identities rather disparate in meaning are processed in parallel, maintenance in one will result in deflection for the other. Since as a deflection is experienced psychologically sense that the world is unpredictable or dis introduced

itive deflection on the potency dimension for the Woman who occupies that position. This might produce a mixture of feelings of being humble (the Judge) and being (theWoman).
Proposition actions with neously in their enced identity. held 14: Emotions

contemptuous
in inter simulta variable experi a single

experienced

multiple-identity meanings be more by one actor will

than emotions meaning in interactions while occupying affective

I note that in this Affect Control Theory based P12 and P14 are quite distinct propositions. InAffect Control Theory, deflec tions can create emotions that are positive or negative, empowering or deflating, enlivening formulation, or quieting (Smith-Lovin and Robinson 2006; and Smith-Lovin Robinson, 2005). Rogalin The prediction in P14 is that our responses in situations where we are acting simultaneously in two or more identities will be characterized

119 ANDSITUATED IDENTITY SELF

by mixes of quite different emotions, rather than a consistently positive or negative emo tion. The sense of disquiet created by deflec tion inAffect Control Theory is quite different (and analytically separate) from the emotions experienced as the result of events. that the connectionist repre is also quite of sentation identity processing consistent with Affect Control Theory's view of the relationship between individuals and the culture from which they derive identity mean ings. Consider the view that each individual (iden represents a variety of self-conceptions tities) within a parallel distributed processing associated with these system. The meanings are with other individ shared self-conceptions uals and represented symbolically by cultural artifacts like books, films, and language use. This distributed cognition model captures sev eral features that are central toAffect Control Theory sociological grew out of Meadian symbolic interactionism. First, the model accurately represents the rela tionship between the individual and the col lective. Individual meanings are developed out of contact with and other theories that I will note stronger on describing how society shapes selves than on describing how selves and interactions shape society. This bias is appro priate, since it is the stability of social interac tion that allows society to have its recogniz able,
how

extra-individual
these

patterns do change,
changes

character. Still, social and we need to explain

occur.

My suggestion is that cultural meanings associated with identity labels change when in the same direction. repeatedly deflected Major events that simultaneously
cause such change.

affect
For

large
exam

populations

can

and Luke (2002) find that a ple, MacKinnon number of false accusation and wrongful large news cases in conviction the Canadian between evaluation identities
Mountie

1981 and 1995 led to a decline

in the

and potency of criminal justice and like Judge, Juror, Policeman,

among Canadian undergraduates.

is the co But another important mechanism occurrence of identities and the meaning
maintenance problems that this co-occurrence

society (in both personal and individuals artifactual forms). Furthermore, act as both learners, carriers, and (within lim of innovators cultural meanings. its) Therefore, the ideas laid out here come back up to the system level at both ends. I call for an ecology of identity to discover the connec tions among identities that are created by the complex selves that individuals create under varying social structures. Then, I suggest a connectionist model of individual processing that I think more accurately represents how individual actors operate as part of an inter connected cultural system. They process mul in tiple parts of that system simultaneously their own interactions. At the same time, they carry partial representations of a larger inter connected cultural system in their self struc
tures.

implies. When an actor is faced with support simul ing two inconsistent identity meanings taneously, deflections of meaning are bound to occur. If many actors face the same problem of changing organiza routinely tional demography), repeated deflections can (e.g., because
change. patterns create meanings cultural change, When of our action cultural and emo

tional distributions
assumptions of

change as well
structural symbolic

(under the
interac

tionism). situations Many of the multiple-identity in our experiential sampling study are focused on work or family settings where people have relatively little control over their (multiple) audiences. These are institutional domains that have undergone major demographic changes in the last decades, as women have entered the labor force and families have been reshaped through divorce one and non-marital childbearing. For example,

S IV S, ?MOTIONS, AND CHANG? SOCIAL

One system important feature of our return to the level is the potential of individual for creating societal change. As social psychologists, we are much

a large occu distance between two simultaneously we observed in the experi pied identities that situation with ential sampling study occurred in theMinority Retention Committee described meeting above. The young Latina staff member describes her situationally relevant identities

experience sociological

120 SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY QUARTERLY

that she occupies as Teacher (a self-structure identity) and Student (a non-self identity). The situation causes considerable tension, because these identities are quite different (as rated by on both the respondent) the evaluation and potency (good-bad) (powerful-power She is feeling quite good less) dimensions. and powerful in her role as an instructor in the Minority Retention effort and advisor to the others on racial sensitivity, but this role-iden tity sits uneasily with the status relationship that she occupies with the other person who is leading the seminar with her (her former men tor). If this situation leads only to local change (e.g., a shift in the staff person's relationship to it will have only local impor her mentor), tance. But if such situations occur over a large institutional scope, itmight change the posi tion of minority employees and their identities more generally (e.g., they have a type of expertise that has organizational usefulness). Another situation with substantial dis tance between two identities occurs in a fami ly setting where a woman readies her family for church attendance. The distance between theWife and Mother identities occurs almost entirely on the potency dimension and is sub stantial. She feels quite powerless as aWife, but relatively powerful as aMother. The inter esting thing about both of these situations is the inability of the actors to segregate audi ences, given the multiple roles present within the institutional setting. I suggest that these situations are the most likely to lead to cultur al change in a postmodern society. Mixed
emotions, when experienced over a large num

the evaluation, potency, or activity dimen sions. As an Affect Control Theorist, I assume is much stronger than meaning maintenance
self-enhancement. In addition, new evidence

to move suggests that people are as willing a as in a in direction self-conceptions negative positive direction coming). self-enhancement to social change. (Cast and Cantwell, forth I am not convinced that Therefore, will provide directionality

MacKinnon and Heise (forthcoming) focus on fundamental self-feelings (the funda mental affective meaning of "myself as I real ly am") as the force that creates continuity in the complex, postmodern self. To extrapolate from their argument, one might change identi in a direction that ismost consis tymeanings tent with self-meaning. If most people think well of themselves, this would effectively con vert to a self-enhancement motive. If there is a distribution of self-meanings, this process would produce individual change in meaning but not accumulate to larger social, cultural change. I tentatively propose a more structural solution. I build again on Stryker's conception of commitment, the degree to which a self identity is implicated in many relationships that are important to an actor. Some identities are more embedded in our cultural system
than others. When many other role relation

wider

ships depend on a focal identity, it will be much harder to change its meaning. When an identity is rich in connections (cognitive and our cultur to other within concepts affective) al system, itwill be difficult tomove in affec tive space. Too many other terms would have tomove with it. When power structures have a strong vested interest in themaintenance of an of identity's meaning (e.g., the derogation it will be more diffi workers by capitalists), cult to change. When actors that are experi encing local change are more in contact with one another, they are more likely to develop a subcultural understanding that can withstand cultural meanings. I is of This the study social movements. applaud recent attempts by structural symbol ic interactionists to enter this domain (Heise the inertia of mainstream

ber of
change.

actors

and

interactions,

signal

this

ments

identity enact where does the change, more Do Women become occur? pow change erful, or Judges less so? Do ethnic minorities in and potency receive higher evaluation or do they get resegre employment settings, If it is the tension between that drives

gated in new organizational roles? Do Wives less so, become more powerful, or Mothers can no longer be when these role-identities interactionally isolated? A straightforward
enhancement. People may

prediction
change

is

self

the mean

ing of the identity thatmoves

them upward on

andBritt 2000; Stryker2000)

121 RNDSITURT6D ID6NTITY S6LF CONCLUSIONS

I argue here for an ecological theory of social self and identity, where large-scale structures (population distributions, correla influ tion of social dimensions, homophily) ence the availability and occupancy of identi ties. These
selves as they Attributions, Mathematical Barker, Roger Concepts Environment Stanford Barker, and Emotions." Journal of 13:103-132 Sociology G. 1968. Ecological Psychology: the and Methods for Studying Stanford, CA:

Behavior. of Human Press. University

Boy

1951. One F. Wright. Roger. G. and Herbert s Day New York: Harper & Row. G. and and Herbert Its Children: F Wright. 1959. The Psychological IL: Town. Evanston, Robert Jr. Z. Norman, Status An York:

identities
are

get

incorporated
in networks of

into
sta

enacted

Barker, Roger Midwest Ecology Row, Berger,

ble, recurring relationships. But they also get elicited by situations, even when they are not part of a self-structure. The decline of stable, over the relationships long-term, multiplex evolution of human society, added to the and expansion of increasingly differentiation social space, has led to more complex selves but simpler situations. Our complex selves are in introspection, as we pon available mostly der autobiographical narrative and conflicting role obligations. Weak ties pull us into and out of institutional and group settings at a higher rate. Selves are complex but fluid. On the other hand, situations are largely of meaning simple. Our traditional models within the context of a well maintenance situation do a remarkably good job of handling everyday interaction. Only institu tions that restrict our ability to segregate audi defined ences (like family and work) confront us with situations in which multiplex relationships, multiple interaction partners, or other features force the simultaneous occupancy of identities that have distinctly different meanings. While rare, these complex situations are key for social change, if they are experienced by many people over a substantial time period. themeaning of one identity Since maintaining will necessary create systematic deflections in the other, we expect shifts in one or both cul stress tural identity meanings. Physiological this and mixed emotions will accompany social change, as an individual-level manifes tation of the interactional source of the cultur and Smith-Lovin, (Robinson, This is the mechanism Rogalin 2004). through which self and interaction can affect society. al tension

of an American and Co. Peterson Hamit Fisek, Zelditch and States

Joseph, M. and Morris Characteristics Expectation Elsevier.

1972.

Social Approach.

Interaction.: New

Blau,

Peter M. New York:

1977 Inequality Free Press.

and Heterogeneity.

Breiger,

of Persons and Ronald L. 1974. "The Duality 53: 181-89. Groups." Social Forces T. Serpe, J. Owens, Richard Burke, Peter J., Timothy in eds. 2003. Advances and Peggy A. Thoits, Identity Theory Kluwer/Plenum. Cast, Alicia D. and Allison and Research. New York:

M.

Cantwell.

"Identity Negative Quarterly. Mark. Chaves, Boston,

of Effects Change: Feedback." Social 2004.

Forthcoming. Positive and Psychology

MA:

Goffman, Erving. on the Social Notes Glencoe, Granovetter, Ties." S.

in America. Congregations Press. Harvard University in Public Places: 1963. Behavior

Organization of Gatherings. IL: Free Press of Glencoe. 1973 "The Strength of of Weak 78:

Mark

American

Journal

Sociology

1360-80. Heise, Events: R. 1979. Understanding the Construction Action. of Social Press. York: Cambridge University David and David. Solidarity." Solidarity: Patrick Amsterdam: Heise, David R. Sentiments R. 1998. "Conditions for 197-211 in The Pp. and Models, Theories Doreian Gordon 2007. in and Thomas and Breach. Affect New

Heise,

Empathie Problem of edited by Fararo.

Order: Confirming Expressive Actions. New Social York:

Heise,

Springer. David R. and Lori Britt. Pride Identity, Sheldon W. White. in

2000.

"From

Shame

to in

Politics." Identity Pp. and Social Movements, Self Stryker, Timothy MN:

252-270 edited

J. Owens,

Minnesota Heise, David R.

Minneapolis, Press. and Lisa

by and Roger of University

Thomas.

R F R NC S
Averett, Christine "Modified P. Social and David R. Heise. 1987. Identities: Amalgamations,

Impressions Emotion and Social Quarterly Michael Hogg, 52: A.

Created

by Identity." Social 141-148. and A D. Abrams. Social

1989. "Predicting of Combinations Psychology 1988. Psychology Social of

Identifications:

PSYCHOLOGY 122 SOCIAL QUARTERLY

Intergroup Relations York: Routledge. and Group Processes. New to an Ecology of Affiliation," Prolegomenon 13: 263-280. and Corporate Industrial Change and Sonja Pamela A. Popielarz, McPherson, Miller, and Organiza 1992. "Social Networks Drobnic. tional Review Dynamics." 57:153-170. and on a American Sociological 1991.

Yoshihisa, Kashima, Foddy, and M. Margaret eds. 2001. Self and Identity: Personal,

Platow, Social

New York: Erlbaum. and Symbolic. 1999. To Thine Own Self (And One's Keeton, Shirley. Be True: The Strategic Management Associates) Academic Identities Among of Competing dissertation. Women. doctoral Unpublished Louisiana Lin, Nan. 2001. State University, Social Capital: and Action. New Baton Rouge, LA. A Theory of Social York: Cambridge as of

Miller McPherson, "Evolution Organizations Space." Social Miller McPherson, a Dynamic Diversity American

James

Ranger-Moore.

Dancing Landscape: in Dynamic Blau and Networks 70: 19-42. Forces Rot?lo. Social 1996. "Testing

and Tomas Model of

Structure

Composition:

MacKinnon,

Press. University Interactionism J. 1994. Symbolic Neil Affect Control. Albany, NY: State University New York Press. Neil J. and David Selves, and R. Heise. Social

in Voluntary and Change Groups." Review 61: 179-202. Sociological 1981 and Lynn Smith-Lovin. Miller McPherson, in the "Women and Weak Ties: Sex Differences Size Journal McPherson, of Voluntary of Sociology Miller and Lynn Associations" 87: 883-904. Smith-Lovin. 1986. "Sex American

MacKinnon,

Identities,

Forthcoming. Un Institutions.

published manuscript. J. and Michelle Neil MacKinnon, 2006. The "The Affect Case of

M.

Goulbourne.

Purpose, Theories McClelland

of Emotions: Control Theory in Pp. 237-266 Depression." and Action: Control Systems Meaning, A. in Sociology, edited by Kent and Thomas J. Fararo. New York:

in Voluntary Associations." Segregation 51: 61-79. American Review Sociological Smith-Lovin. 1987. Miller and Lynn McPherson, Status in Voluntary Organizations: "Homophily of Face-to-Face Distance and the Composition Groups." 370-79. American Sociological Review 52:

Palgrave Macmillan. Neil J. and Alison MacKinnon,

Luke.

2002.

as Reflections in Identity Attitudes Cultural Canadian Change." 27: 299-337. Sociology Mark, Noah P. 1998. "Birds of Social Forces Together." Noah P. 1999. "Beyond Social American Mark, Noah Lovin. Formation Mayhew, Bruce Structure." 137?43. Differentiation 11: 455-85. Individual from Review First

"Changes of Social and Journal of

Miller and Lynn McPherson, and Membership "Cohesion and Relations, Groups, Ecology Processes of Affiliation." 19: 1-35.

Smith-Lovin. Duration: Individuals Advances

2002. Linking in an in Group

a Feather

Sing

Mark,

Differences:

and Matthew McPherson, Miller, Lynn Smith-Lovin, in America: 2006. "Social Brashears. Isolation Changes Years." 71:353-75. McPherson, Miller, Cook. 2001. Social Lynn Smith-Lovin, "Birds of a Feather: Annual Review and James M. Homophily of Sociology Problems Journal in of 2000. in in Discussion American Networks Sociological over Twenty Review

Sociological P., Cecilia Ridgeway, Unpublished of Consensual H. 1974.

Principles" 63: 309-30. Smith "The

and Lynn

manuscript. Status Beliefs." Models

"Baseline

of Social Review 39: Merton,

Networks."

American

Sociological

27: 415^44. Robert Sociological K. 1957. "The Role-set: British

J. Miller L. Levinger, H., Roger Mayhew, Size 1972. "System and T.F. James. McPherson in Formal Differentiation and Structural Bruce A Organizations: Theoretical Major Sociological Kent McClelland, Meaning, in Sociology. Review Baseline Generator for Two American

Sociology Bernice Pescosolido, of "The Web Social American Life,

Theory." 8: 106-120. A.

and Beth

A.

Rubin.

Propositions." 37: 629-633. Fararo. Control 2006.

Affiliations Group and Postmodernism Review

Revisited:

Sociological

Sociology." 65: 52-76.

and Thomas and Action: New

Systems

Purpose, Theories

Robinson,

Miller. McPherson, American Sociological

Palgrave-MacMillan. of Affiliation." 1983. "An Ecology Review 48: 519-532.

York:

and Christabel T., Shirley A. Keeton, the and 2002. "Network Density Rogalin. of Social Identities." Paper pre Organization the at of the Annual sented Meetings Dawn International Network for Social Network

in Fields 2000. "Modeling Miller. McPherson, Change Results." Some Simulation of Organizations: in Computational 134-44 Modeling of Pp. Behavioral in Organizations, edited Processes Charles Hulin. and Daniel Washington, Ilgen by Association D.C.: American Psychological Press. Miller. 2004. "A Blau Space Primer:

in New Orleans, LA. Analysis L. Rogalin, and Lynn Dawn T., Christabel Robinson, Measures of 2004. "Physiological Smith-Lovin. Theoretical Deflection During Processes Robinson, Dawn Some Ideas Concepts: to Physical and Emotion Interaction." Advances 21:77?115. T. and Lynn Smith-Lovin. 1992. for Linking Responses in Group

McPherson,

SELF ANDSITUATED IDENTITY 123

"Selective Maintenance: Interaction An Affect as a Strategy for Identity Control Model." Social J. Burke, Timothy J. Owens, A. and Thoits. Peggy Kluwer/Plenum. Smith-Lovin, Richard New T. Serpe York:

55: 12-28. Psychology Quarterly T. and Lynn Smith-Lovin. Dawn 2006. Robinson, in "Affect Control 137-64 Pp. Theory." Social Theories, Contemporary Psychological edited University Thomas Rot?lo, by Peter J. Burke. Press. and Miller Stanford, McPherson. CA: Stanford "The

and David. R.Heise. 1988. Lynn inAffect Social Interaction: Advances Analyzing Control Theory. New York: Gordon and Breach Science Publishers.

2001.

of Occupations: System Modeling Occupations in Sociodemographic 79: Space." Social Forces 1095-1130. Serpe, Richard T. 1987. and Change in Self: "Stability Interaction Explanation." "The of

1993 "You Smith-Lovin, Lynn and Miller McPherson. on Are Who You Know: A Network Perspective on in Gender." 223-41 Pp. Theory Gender/Feminism England. New on Theory, edited by Paula York: Aldine de Gruyter. T. Robinson. 2006. and Dawn of of Identity, Testable and Action, Differences

A Structural Social Serpe,

Symbolic

Smith-Lovin, Lynn "Control Theories Emotion: between Control

Psychology T. and Richard

Construction Social Processes Serpe, Richard Social

50: 44-55. Quarterly 1987. Sheldon Stryker. of Self and the Reconstruction Advances

In Search Affect

Relationships." 4: 41-82. T. and Sheldon Ties and Advances

in Group 1993. into "Prior New

Meaning, in Sociology, Thomas Press.

Control and Identity Theory in Purpose, 163-188 Theory." Pp. and Action: Control System Theories edited and by Kent McClelland York: Palgrave MacMillan

Stryker. Movement in Group

Fararo. New

Relationships." 10: 283-304. Simon, Robin W. Meaning, and Social Simon, Robin W. Vulnerability

Processes

Sheldon. A 1980. Symbolic Interactionism: Stryker, Social Version. Menlo Structural Park, CA: Benjamin Stryker, Sheldon. Differential in 21-40 edited Cummings. 2000. "Identity Key to competition: Involvement." Pp. and Social Movement, J. Owens, Timothy MN: University of and Then

1995. "Gender, Multiple Roles, Role and Mental Health." Journal of Health Behavior 1998. 36: 182-94. Sex Differences Parents: Journal The of

Social Movement Self

"Assessing

in Identity,

Importance Health and Social Smith-Lovin, Lynn.

Among Employed Status." of Marital Behavior

by Sheldon Stryker, and R. White. Minneapolis, Minnesota Press.

39: 38-54. and Settings Social Scenarios." Journal

1979.

"Behavioral

-.

Formed from Impressions Social Psychology 42:31^2. Quarterly 1987a. "Impressions from Events." of Mathematical Sociology 1987b. "The Affective within 13: 35-70. Control

"A Peek Back2003. Sheldon. Stryker, in Advances 217-23 Ahead." Pp.

in Identity edited by Peter J. Burke, Theory and Research, J. Owens, Richard T. Serpe, and Peggy Timothy A. Thoits. New York: Kluwer/Plenum.

-.

of

Events

-.

Journal of Mathematical Settings." 13: 71-101. Sociology as the Confirmation 1990. "Emotion and Pp. 238-70 Control of Identity: An Affect in Research in the Agendas D. edited by Theodore of Emotions, of New Albany, NY: State University "The

and Peter J. Burke. 2000. "The Past, Sheldon and Future of an Identity Theory." Present, Social Psychology 63: 284-97. Quarterly Sheldon and Richard T. Serpe. 1982. Stryker, Stryker, "Commitment, A Behavior: Pp. 199-218 Salience Identity and Research Theory in Personality, Roles, by W Ickes and Role

Disconfirmation Model. Sociology

Example." and Social

Kemper. York Press. -. 1995. Emotion."

Behavior, New York:

edited

and E.S. Knowles. O. The

of Affect and Sociology in 118-48 Pp. Sociological on Social edited by Perspectives Psychology, Karen S. Cook, Gary A. Fine, and James S. House. and Bacon. Boston, MA: Allyn 2001. "Role-identities, Action and Emotion: of Mixed Parallel Processing and the Production Pp. Social, 125?44 and in Self Symbolic, and Identity: edited by and Foddy,

Spring-Verlag. T. Serpe and Matthew Richard Sheldon, Stryker, on a Promise: Hunt. 2005. "Making Good

on of Structures Social Larger Impact in Group Processes Committments." Advances 22: 93-123. Thoits, A. Peggy Accumulation 179-194 Research, in the "Personal Agency of Multiple Role-identities." Pp. in Advances in Identity and Theory edited by Peter J. Burke, Timothy J. and Peggy Real A. Thoits. 2003.

-.

Emotions." Personal, Yoshihisa Michael -.

Kashima, Margaret J. Platow. New York: Erlbaum.

Richard T. Serpe, Owens, New York: Kluwer/Plenum. Turner, Ralph Institution Sociology H. to 84: 1976. "The

2003. in an "Self, Identity and Interaction of Identities." Pp. 167-178 in Advances Ecology in Identity Theory and Research, edited by Peter

Self: Journal

From of

Impulse." 1-23.

American

124
Lynn Smith-Lovin at Duke interpersonal a is the Robert University. action,

SOCIAL PSVCHOLOGV QUART RIV

L. Wilson research emotion. Professor focuses Current Her and in the Department and Sciences of Arts of on the relationship between social structure, a study include processes, projects of justice

Sociology identity,

identity disconfirmation,
Warner), and study of

and emotion
the coevolution

(in collaboration
of networks and

with Dawn
voluntary

T. Robinson
association

and Jody Clay

memberships

group

(in collaboration with Miller McPherson). Both projects are supported by the National Science Foundation. She has served as President of the Southern Sociological Association, Vice-President of theAmerican Sociological Association, and Chair of both theASA Sections on Social Psychology and on Emotions. She received theASA Section on Emotions Lifetime Achievement Award in 2002.