Etic/Emic

Kenneth Pike developed the terms etic and emic, which are two different approaches to examining culture. An etic approach assumes that culture can be examined with predetermined categories that can be applied to all cultures in the search for cultural universals. In contrast, an emic perspective approaches each culture as a unique entity that can only be examined by constructs developed from inside the culture. This entry explores etic and emic approaches and their relationship to social identity.

Etic accounts of social identity assume people develop and maintain social identities in similar ways regardless of their cultural background. For example, Henri Tajfel, who developed social identity theory, proposed that human beings develop their identities by being members of social groups. To retain a positive self-identity, people generally perceive their own groups favorably and the groups they are not members of less favorably. This is a universal process, according to Tajfel, which can lead to prejudice and discrimination because people exaggerate differences between groups to elevate their self-identity and worth. Consider the classic research on racial difference in the United States and how Black Americans are often viewed negatively by prejudiced White Americans in order for White Americans to bolster their own self-esteem. Skinheads and neo-Nazis also link their self-identities to false claims of superiority to Jews, African Americans, and others.

Tajfel's etic theory of social identity is based on three universal premises of how identity is constructed. First, human beings categorize everything they experience in order to understand and identify those experiences. For example, cultural categories such as African American, Polish, and Brazilian are applied to groups, and certain traits are associated with each category. Second, people engage in social identification, which consists of categorizing themselves as members of particular groups and adopting group identities and adhering to the behavior and norms of those groups. The third stage of the theory is social comparison, which involves comparing the group one identifies with to other groups and making positive or negative evaluations of the “others.”

Mary Jane Collier developed an etic approach to social identity that is grounded in culture. She proposes that people have multiple cultural identities, such as gender, ethnicity, religion, and nation of origin, that emerge from two etic processes: avowal and ascription. Avowal is how individuals view their own social identities, whereas ascription is the perception of a person's identities by others. For example, people who are Jewish may perceive themselves in particular ways (avowal), whereas the public may view them differently (ascription). A person's social identities are a blend of perceptions of avowal and ascription. Moreover, although each of us has multiple social identities, one of those identities is usually more prominent in a particular situation; Collier calls this salience. For example, while traveling out of country, U.S. Americans are often aware of how American they are, while the other identities they may have, like gender and ethnicity, are not thought about.

An emic approach to social identity is quite different than either Tajfel's or Collier's theory. Emic theorists assume that social identity is unique to a culture and can only be understood by identifying indigenous factors within a culture that lead to identity. For example, Scandinavian identity is linked to an emic value that is called Janteloven, which means roughly: “Don't be impressed with yourself.” Historically, Swedes, Danes, and Norwegians are conditioned early in childhood to subordinate themselves to the larger cultural group with which they identify. As a result, shyness and humility are valued traits in Scandinavia and so is being quiet. Standing out and bringing attention to oneself are anathema to Scandinavian cultural norms and clearly violate Janteloven. In contrast, U.S. American cultural identity is based on individualism, which influences the construction of the self quite differently than does Janteloven. Because the individual is paramount in the United States, extroversion and self presentation are highly valued, and speaking rather than silence is prized.

...