Identity Control Theory Essay ⋆ Sociology Essay Examples ⋆ EssayEmpire

This sample Identity Control Theory Essay is published for educational and informational purposes only. If you need help writing your assignment, please use our research paper writing service and buy a paper on any topic at affordable price. Also check our tips on how to write a research paper, see the lists of research paper topics, and browse research paper examples.

Identity control theory (ICT) is that part of identity theory that focuses on the relationships among a person’s identities, their behavior, and their emotions. An identity is a set of meanings used to define the self as a group member (e.g., American), as a role occupant (e.g., student), or as a unique individual (e.g., honest). While people possess multiple identities, each identity is made up of meanings that are understood and shared by members of society.

In ICT, a stimulus in a situation evokes meaning or a response in an individual. When people share common responses to a stimulus, they understand each other through these shared meanings. For example, thinking about oneself as a student (stimulus) calls up a set of responses (meanings) similar to those called up in others who understand what it means to be a student, e.g., being studious, responsible, or social. These common responses lead to common expectations and understandings about what a student is, does, and the position of a student in the university — what it means to be a student.

Each identity is viewed as a control system with four components: an identity standard, perceptions, a comparator, and behavioral outputs. The identity standard is the set of meanings defining the identity. Input perceptions are of meanings in the situation that are relevant to an identity (mostly feedback from others about how we are coming across). The comparator is a mechanism that compares the input perceptions with the meanings in the identity standard and emits any difference as a discrepancy. Behavior is a function of the discrepancy.

In situations, persons enact behaviors that convey meanings consistent with their identity meanings, but modified by the discrepancy. If there is no discrepancy, people continue acting as they have been. If there is a disturbance to meanings in the situation and the discrepancy moves away from zero, people feel negative emotions including distress, and they change their behavior to counteract the disturbance and reduce the discrepancy toward zero. By changing their behavior, people change meanings in the situation that are again perceived and compared to the meanings in the identity standard in a continuous cycle.

When perceived self-relevant meanings in the situation are congruent with the meanings in the identity standard, the identity is verified and people feel good. The meanings in the identity standard represent goals or the way the situation is ”supposed to be.” People behave in the situation to realize these goals by creating and maintaining the situation in the way it is supposed to be. By verifying identities, people create and maintain the social structure in which the identities are embedded. Note that by controlling perceived situational meanings people are bringing about and maintaining perceptions of the situation, not behaviors. It is the outcome that is important, not the means that accomplishes the outcome.

ICT distinguishes between three identity bases. These are role identities, based on roles such as father, social identities, based on groups or categories such as American, and person identities, based on characteristics of the individual such as being honest. Identities formed on each of these bases operate in the same way, adjusting situations to seek verification. Verification of a role identity leads to feelings of efficacy; verification of a social identity leads to feeling of worthiness; verification of a person identity leads to feelings of authenticity.

In ICT, the multiple identities a person has are arranged into a control hierarchy. Higher-level identities act as general principles that guide the programs of lower-level identities. Higher-level identities include such master statuses as one’s gender, race, or class, and many person identities that are enacted across situations, roles, and groups.

Identities act quickly counteracting disturbances to meanings in the situation. However, when people are in situations in which they cannot change their behavior to fix a discrepancy, ICT recognizes that the identity standard itself will also change slowly to match the meanings in the situation thereby reducing the discrepancy to zero. Both processes occur simultaneously to verify identities.

Bibliography:

Burke, P. J. (2004) Identity and social structure: the 2003 Cooley-Mead Award Address. Social Psychology Quarterly 67: 5—15.
Burke, P. J. and Stets, J. E. (2009) Identity Theory. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Stryker, S., & Burke, P. J. (2000). The past, present, and future of an identity theory. Social Psychology [Quarterly Special Issue: The State of Sociological Social Psychology 63 (4): 284—97.