The Affective Structure of the Self: EPA Differences as Predictors of Identity Facilitation and Interference

• In Event: Student Forum Roundtables Session
  In Refereed Roundtable (90 minute): Roundtable 20: Sociological Theory and Methods

Abstract

Identity theory holds that the relationships among a person’s multiple identities depend on whether those identities share meanings: identities with similar meanings should be easier to hold together, while identities with conflicting meanings should interfere with one another. Although this idea has been extensively theorized, it has rarely been tested empirically, in part because identity meanings are usually measured one identity at a time rather than compared across the multitude of identities a person holds. This study addresses that gap by measuring each identity’s meaning with evaluation, potency, and activity (EPA) ratings, drawing from affect control theory, so that the meanings of any two identities can be compared as a difference in EPA scores. Approximately 400 adults recruited through Prolific will list the identities they hold, select the ones that are most central to their lives, rate how much each of these identities makes the others easier or harder to be (facilitation and interference), and rate each identity on EPA scales. For each identity pair, I compute the differences in evaluation, potency, and activity and use multilevel models with identity pairs nested within respondents to test whether these differences predict facilitation and interference. I expect that identities with more similar EPA profiles will facilitate one another, while identities with larger EPA differences will interfere. Support for these predictions would provide direct evidence for identity theory’s claim that whether identities fit together depends on the meanings they share.

Author

• Daniel Reich, Duke University