A conceptual model of multiple dimensions of identity

Pg 405 – “Development of socially constructed identities has received increasing attention within literature and research in psychology and student affairs within the past decade. Racial identity (e.g., Cross, 1995; Helms, 1990, 1992, 1995), ethnic identity (Phinney, 1990, 1992), sexual identity (Cass, 1979; McCarn & Fassinger, 1996), and gender identity (Ossana, Helms, & Leonard, 1992; O’Neil, Egan, Owen, & Murry, 1993) have received primary focus.”

~ Identity is constantly brokendown in studies rather than looked at through the ways identities interact with each other.

Pg 405 – “Yet, most developmental models and related research have addressed only a single dimension of identity, such as race or sexual orientation.”

~ This is the same problem I have with most development models.

Pg 405 – “In terms of models regarding multiple identities, the only frequently acknowledged model is that of Reynolds and Pope (1991). However, Reynolds and Pope’s model concerns primarily multiple oppressions (not identities in general) and possible ways that one can negotiate multiple oppressions.”

~ Interesting that this is the only one out there that exists.

Pg 405-406 – “Reynolds and Pope (1991) drew attention to the importance of multiple identities through their discussion of multiple oppressions. They used several case studies to provide examples of how individuals might deal with their multiple oppressions and then extended Root’s (1990) model on biracial identity development to multiple oppressions. Specifically, Reynolds and Pope (1991), in creating the Multidimensional Identity Model, suggested four possible ways for identity resolution for individuals belonging to more than one oppressed group. These four options were created from a matrix with two dimensions – - the first concerns whether one embraces multiple oppressions or only one oppression, and the second concerns whether an individual actively or passively identifies with one or more oppressions. Thus, the four quadrants or options become:

1. Identifying with only one aspect of self (e.g., gender or sexual orientation or race) in a passive manner. That is, the aspect of self is assigned by others such as society, college student peers, or family.

2. Identifying with only one aspect of self that is determined by the individual. That is, the individual may identify as lesbian or Asian Pacific American or a woman without including other identities, particularly those that are oppressions.

3. Identifying with multiple aspects of self, but choosing to do so in a “segmented fashion” (Reynolds & Pope, 1991, p. 179), frequently only one at a time and determined more passively by the context rather than by the individual’s own wishes. For example, in one setting the individual identifies as Black, yet in another setting as gay.

4. The individual chooses to identify with the multiple aspects of self, especially multiple oppressions, and has both consciously chosen them and integrated them into one’s sense of self.”

~ Interesting model, I don’t necessarily think this is how development of multiple selves exists, though. I think that it still is too focused on breaking down just one identity when they all interact with each other.

Pg 406 – “…Their attention to the possible danger of considering an individual’s identity development too narrowly by only using identity development models that address singular dimensions of one’s identity, and their attention to identity resolution in the context of multiple oppressions.”

~ The problems of focusing too narrowly on one identity is that the others might also be causing issues and they are not being addressed.

Pg 406 – “In addition, theoretical discussions by Deaux (1993), a social psychologist, relate to the conceptual model of multiple dimensions of identity presented here. She conceptualized identity as both defined internally by self and externally by others, which provides a foundation for understanding multiple identities. Other recent research (Ferguson, 1995; Finley, 1997; Kiely, 1997) underscored the importance of relative salience, sociocultural context, and overlapping identities. A strength in these studies lies in examining multiple identities; however, none provided a model of multiple identities nor suggested a process by which multiple identities are developed and negotiated.”

~ Foundation to understand identities interplay is external and internal definitions. Also, sociocultural context, salience, and overlap.

Pg 408 – “The key categories that emerged from analysis of data from the interviews with participants were (a) relative salience of identity dimensions in relation to difference; (b) the multiple ways in which race matters; (c) multiple layers of identity; (d) the braiding of gender with other dimensions; (e) the importance of cultural identifications and cultural values; (f) the influence of family and background experiences; (g) current experiences and situational factors; (h) relational, inclusive values and guiding personal beliefs; (i) career decisions and future planning; and ( j) the search for identity.”

~ I am looking into the following: A, C, E, F, G, H, I (?) while trying to do research.

Pg 408 – “At the center of multiple dimensions of identity is a core sense of self. This center, or core identity, is experienced as a personal identity, somewhat protected from view, which incorporates “valued personal attributes and characteristics” (Jones, 1997, p. 383).”

~ Global self is very important. Global self holds only valued attributes or all attributes? Interesting to think about.

Pg 408- “The core was frequently described by participants as their “inner identity” or “inside self” as contrasted with what they referred to as their “outside” identity or the “facts” of their identity. Outside identities were easily named by others and interpreted by the participants as less meaningful than the complexities of their inside identities which they guarded and kept close to themselves and made less susceptible to outside influence.”

~ Inner self is “real” and outer self is “false” relates back to Yoshino and covering. Outside identities are those defined by others while inner self is internally defined.

Pg 410 – “Participants perceived identity dimensions as both externally defined and internally experienced, and also influenced by different contexts. When identities are imposed from the outside, dimensions are not seen as integral to core. However, when interacting with certain sociocultural conditions such as sexism and racism, identity dimensions may be scrutinized in a new way that resulted in participants’ reflection and greater understanding of a particular dimension.”

~ Threat to identity creates better understanding of identity.

Pg 411 – “Personal identity is defined, at least in part, by group memberships, and social categories are infused with personal meaning” (p. 5).” (From Deaux)

~ How personal identity is formed.

Jones, S. R, McEwen, M. K. (2000). A conceptual model of multiple dimensions of identity. Journal of College Student Development, 41(4). Retrieved November 19, 2008, from Muse database.