Obligatory and Voluntary Identity Discrepancies, Self-Esteem, and Psychological Distress

• In Event: 606 - Section on Social Psychology Roundtable Session (co-sponsored with Section on Sociology of Emotions)
  In Refereed Roundtable: Table 07. Mental Health

Abstract

Identity theories specify the process through which identity discrepancies, or stressors representing inconsistencies between reflected appraisals and self-views related to identities, impact well-being. One factor determining how a discrepancy influences well-being is the type of identity involved. Identity theory classifies identities as role, group, or person-based. Within the category of role-based identities, an important theoretical distinction exists between those that are obligatory versus voluntary. Obligatory identities are characterized by long-term, affectively intense ties to others that involve strong mutual rights and responsibilities among role partners. Voluntary identities are characterized by relatively shorter-term, less affectively intense ties to others that involve fewer responsibilities to role partners. Using telephone survey data (N=501) from a national probability sample of adults in the U.S., this study compares the impact of discrepancies in obligatory and voluntary identities on self-esteem and psychological distress. Results confirm that discrepancies associated with these identities are differentially related to distress. Obligatory identity discrepancies have a direct association with distress, while voluntary identity discrepancies are indirectly related to distress through the self-worth component (but not the self-efficacy component) of self-esteem. The implications of these findings, study limitations, and directions for future research are discussed.

Author

• Mary Gallagher, Kent State University-Stark