Ethnic Identity

Historical Perspectives

The conceptualization and operationalization of ethnic identity have undergone numerous changes over the years. Historically, ethnic identity was defined according to membership in a given ethnic group, whether ascribed by the individual or by others. Early definitions also focused heavily on ethnic group preferences and attitudes. For example, the famous doll studies by Kenneth B. Clark and Mamie P. Clark in the late 1940s revealed that African American girls were more likely to assign positive attributes to white dolls, not black dolls. However, early methods of studying ethnic identity often conflated notions of ethnicity and ethnic identity, privileged the opinion of others over the individual, and conceptualized ethnic identity as a relatively static construct. The dynamic process of ethnic identity development and its multidimensional nature were largely overlooked.

Ethnic identity is now conceptualized within the framework of Henri Tajfel's social identity theory, which postulates that people have an innate need to belong, and identification with a group contributes to a positive overall self-concept and sense of well-being. But, as the Clark and Clark doll studies revealed, membership in a devalued ethnic group can lead people to distance themselves from their ethnic group or to report a greater preference for the dominant group. An alternative strategy when excluded or threatened by another group is for people to identify more strongly with their ethnic group, develop a sense of ethnic pride, and emphasize the distinctiveness of their own group. This perspective of ethnic identity places a greater emphasis on personal agency and a subjective sense of self, as well as psychological and emotional affiliation with an ethnic group.

There remains an ongoing debate over the similarities and differences between ethnic identity and racial identity. Although the two constructs share much in common (e.g., both ethnic identity and racial identity are types of social identities), racial identity is believed to emerge based on experiences with racism and oppression due to phenotypic differences, such as skin color or facial features. Ethnic identity, by contrast, is believed to develop from a more basic need to belong and identify with similar others. Although prejudices and cultural pressures are significant in understanding ethnic identity, the primary emphasis is not on oppression and sociopolitical stratification as it is in the case of racial identity.

Various developmental models have emerged to explain the formation of ethnic identity. In general, these models propose that one's ethnic identity initially starts as an unexamined aspect of one's self that eventually becomes examined. The individual subsequently goes through a period of exploration of and immersion into the group's beliefs, traditions, and behaviors until the process concludes with ethnic identity achievement and clarity. One problem with these stage models, however, is that they imply that individuals go through a fairly predictable trajectory of ethnic identity development. It is more likely the case that people cycle through these different aspects [Page 1136]of identity negotiation depending on personal circumstances and the social context.

...