For Erikson, the most important stage of development in terms of identity is adolescence, a time during which a relatively stable and fixed identity should be achieved. He believed that many young people struggle with a period of ‘identity crisis’ where they are unable to commit to adult roles and responsibilities.
Whilst Erikson used clinical observations and the study of biographies of famous men (both research methods which employ an ‘outsider viewpoint’) to develop his theory, James Marcia developed research methods to measure Erikson’s theory from an ‘insider viewpoint’. From this he proposed a variant on Erikson’s theory which could be used to assess how identity changed over adolescence.
An ‘outsider viewpoint’ refers to anything which can be observed from the outside, whether that be behaviour, material data or the categorisation of answers from a questionnaire. An ‘insider viewpoint’, on the other hand, is peoples own account of their experiences, their thoughts and their feelings.
Marcia’s research method, the Identity Status Interview, was used to study development in 18 – 25 year old college students. It uses a semi structured interview technique. This sets out particular themes and questions to be covered, but it is not rigid in the form of words used or the order in which the questions are to be asked.
The semi structured interview technique encourages introspection (asking people to think about and report on their inner feelings and experiences) on the part of the participants and from that sense it employs an ‘insider viewpoint’. However, these interviews are analysed and often answers are categorised so statistical analysis can be carried out. As soon as the data is in any way categorised, it takes on an outsider viewpoint
Social Identity Theory (SIT) was developed by Henri Tajfel and John Turner in 1979. Rather than focussing on individual identity, it focuses on the identity that is derived from membership of social groups. Tajfel believed we have both a personal identity and a social identity, but his work on SIT focussed on the social identity. According to SIT, we define our identities in terms of the social groups to which we believe we belong and our attitudes and behaviours are influenced by what we believe to be appropriate behaviour to those group(s). Just sharing characteristics with a group of people is not central to SIT, what is important is that we identify with a particular group and feel we belong (Turner, 1987).
In contrast to psychosocial theory, research methods associated with SIT are experimental methods and quasi-experiments, both research methods utilising an ‘outsider viewpoint’.
In a laboratory setting, Tajfel conducted experiments on artificially created groups to study whether people identify with a group just because they have been told they are a member of that group, and whether they are willing to discriminate against members of other groups (the outgroup) simply because they do not belong to the same group as them (the ingroup). The experiments, which were conducted on artificially created groups, had randomly allocated participants . These experiments were known as “minimal group” experiments as they sought to identify the minimum conditions needed to form group identities.
As well as researching the discrimination between groups, Tajfel believed we have a need to belong to social groups that we perceive have a higher social status than other groups. He argued that people within groups would try to improve the social status of their group either by working for a more positive image of their group (such as the feminist movement which strived, among other things, to improve women’s standing in society) or by moving up into a social group with a perceived higher status (such as getting a better education and so moving ‘up the social ladder’).
It can be seen from the theories outlined above, that different research methods are appropriate to support different theories. Research coming from an ‘insider viewpoint’ is appropriate when you want to find out more about how people feel and what people think about different situations. Research coming from an ‘outsider viewpoint’ allows the researcher to observe, categorise and analyse data. In situations
where people may not be aware of a particular behaviour (as in the discrimination against members of other groups), it is necessary to use methods that support the ‘outsider viewpoint’. On the other hand, when research aims to discover what people think and how people see themselves (as in research on psychosocial theory), it may be necessary to employ methods which use an ‘insider viewpoint’. Care must be taken, however, with ‘insider viewpoint’ methods because as soon as the researcher analyses or categorises the data in any way, then they are subjecting that data to an outsider viewpoint.
Number of words : 1007
References:
Chambers online dictionary
