Identity And Behavior

Leary, Wheeler and Jenkins (1986) conducted two studies to examine the relationship between an individual’s salient aspects of identity, and behavioral preferences. Both social and personal aspects of identities were considered for the purpose of these studies. According to Cheeks and Briggs (1982), the characteristics that form a person’s identity can be dichotomized into social and personal elements. Personal elements are those components of one’s self-definition that uniquely “belong” to an individual. These may include one’s beliefs, goals, abilities, and feelings, among other things. Social elements, on the other hand, reflect an individual’s role and relationships with others. While people’s identities are composed of both these elements,

Reitzes (1980) observed that the description of identity, in the context of college students, refers to the multidimensional self-meanings in a particular role. To elucidate this observation, he claimed that three characteristics distinguish identities form other formulations of self or personality. First, identity refers to self meanings in a particular social context or role (McCall and Simmons, 1966). Second, identity refers to contextual meanings. Third, identities are multidimensional. In a study conducted to explore the relationship between identity dimensions and the three outcome variables (educational expectations, participation in social activities, and academic performance), undergraduate students were asked to participate to help create a college student identity measure. The Burke-Tully (1977) procedure was used, taking into account seven identity dimensions. Four hypotheses were tested, reflecting the expectation that students scoring high on the identity dimensions would be encouraged in their behavioral performances. The results indicated that each of the identity dimensions were related to at least one of the outcome variables, and that identity may help individuals select behavior and plans consistent with self meanings (Reitzes,

The relationship between the identity processes and academic achievement was also explored, comparing the results for black and white college students, who were attending an urban, predominantly white public university. The research attempted to fill gaps between identity theory and empirical investigation of the consequences of identities. Identities themselves were seen in their role, social and personal aspects (Burke, 2004). The student identity (role), ethnic identity (social), and interpersonal identity (personal) of the students were investigated with regard to the affect they had on their self-esteem, self-efficacy and self-authenticity. The findings showed that while identities did indeed have an impact on the social-psychological well-being of the students, the relationships varied in both direction and strength. College student identities were found to negatively influence self-esteem, whereas ethnic identities gave a mixed result. High-energy personal identities were seen to have a positive impact on well-being. For the comparison between black and white students, ethnic identity was further categorized into “black positional identity” and “black identity affiliation” (Blumer, 1958). The results did not support the predictions of black students’ self-esteem being