Two different psychological approaches to identity

Summary

The question of identity is a central field in psychology. Through a critical synthesis, this article explores two major approaches to identity: Erik Erikson's psychosocial theory, further developed by James Marcia, and the social constructivist approach. These perspectives shed light on how individuals construct their sense of identity, either through internal and developmental processes or via social interaction, language, and power dynamics. The analysis highlights the convergences and divergences between the two theoretical frameworks, as well as their contribution to understanding human behavior.

Introduction

Understanding identity is a fundamental issue in psychology. It aims to explain how individuals construct their self-perceptions and how this influences their behavior. William James (1890) was among the first thinkers to address this issue. Since then, numerous theories have emerged. Three of these are particularly influential: psychosocial theory, social identity theory, and the social constructivist approach. This article focuses on psychosocial theory and the constructivist approach to analyze their foundations, contributions, and limitations.

The psychosocial approach to identity

Theoretical foundations

Erik Erikson is the main representative of this approach. For him, identity is based on a central identity stable and consistent over time, providing the individual with a sense of belonging and continuity (Phoenix, 2007). Identity development occurs throughout life, according to eight psychosocial stages, each marked by a normative crisis that the individual must resolve in interaction with society.

Adolescence is a key phase: the individual becomes aware of himself through a crisis of the self (ego crisis). This period, described as psychosocial moratorium, allows you to explore different roles before committing to a defined identity trajectory. This process is essential for achieving lasting psychological balance.

Empirical contributions

James Marcia (1966, 1980, 1994) enriched this theory by introducing a methodology based on semi-structured interviews among young adults. He identifies four identity statuses based on the degree of exploration and engagement: diffusion, moratorium, foreclosure, and identity realization. This model has provided a better understanding of the diversity of identity journeys in adolescence and among young adults.

The social constructivist approach to identity

Founding principles

Unlike the psychosocial approach, the social constructivist approach asserts that identity is produced through social interactions and shaped by language. Language does not simply translate experience; it structure reality and social categories. Thus, the same person can be perceived differently depending on the social groups: terrorist or liberator, as the example of Nelson Mandela shows.

The individual exists because he is recognized by others. Identity is therefore dynamic, multiple, and depends on the social and historical context. There is no distinction between personal identity and social identity: identity is a resource that can be mobilized according to the groups to which one wishes to belong. Identity construction is also crossed by power relations, and certain roles may be imposed on the individual, regardless of his or her will.

Theoretical implications

This approach emphasizes that identity choices are not always free: they depend on collective representations and dominant norms. Stuart Hall (1996) even asserts that one can reconstruct the past so that it corresponds to the identity that one wishes to adopt. Thus, identity is a process in constant recomposition, influenced by interactions, discourse, and institutions.

Comparison of the two approaches

Both theories lie at opposite poles :

However, they share several common points :

• Identity is a evolutionary process ;

• She is socially and historically situated ;

• Social interactions play a central role, although their interpretation differs.

For example, in a war context, a soldier can redefine his identity in the face of threat (identity crisis for Erikson), while for the constructivist, the identity of the good soldier is socially defined and subject to variation over time.

Contributions to psychology

These two approaches have contributed greatly to psychological research:

• Psychosocial theory sheds light on adolescent identity development and mental health.

• The constructivist approach emphasizes the importance of social dynamics and language in the formation of multiple identities.

They allow for a better understanding of the diversity of individual journeys, the tensions between roles, and the processes of belonging. Although they have been criticized—particularly regarding their universality or empiricism—they remain essential for thinking about identity in both its personal and social dimensions.

Conclusion

Psychosocial theory and the social constructivist approach offer two complementary visions of identity. One emphasizes individual trajectories and internal crises, the other focuses on social, cultural, and discursive influences. Together, they provide a better understanding of the mechanisms of self-construction, recognition issues, and power dynamics. Their articulation provides a rich framework for understanding human behavior in all its complexity and diversity.

References 

Erikson, EH (1968). Identity: Youth and Crisis. New York: WW Norton & Co.

Hall, S. (1996). Who needs “identity”? In S. Hall & P. du Gay (Eds.), Questions of cultural identity (pp. 1–17). London: SAGE Publications.

Marcia, J.E. (1966). Development and validation of ego-identity status. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 3(5), 551–558.

Marcia, J.E. (1980). Identity in adolescence. In J. Adelson (Ed.), Handbook of adolescent psychology (pp. 159–187). New York: John Wiley.

Marcia, J.E. (1994). The empirical study of ego identity. In H. Bosma, T. Graafsma, H. Grotevant, & D. de Levita (Eds.), Identity and development: An interdisciplinary approach (pp. 281–321). London: SAGE.

Phoenix, A. (2007). Identities and diversities. In D. Miell, A. Phoenix, & K. Thomas (Eds.), Mapping psychology (2nd ed., pp. 43–95). Milton Keynes: The Open University.