Identities in Northern Ireland: A Multidimensional Approach

Journal ojSocial Issues, Vol. 54. N o . 4. 1998. p p 725-740

Identities in Northern Ireland: A Multidimensional Approach

Clare Cassidy and Karen Trew Queen s University of Belfast

The conflict in Northern Ireland is o f en described in terms of a clash of identities, national and religious. This study aimed to determine the relative importance of these identities using a multidimensional approach to examine the identity structures of students ( N = 216). Analyses revealed that national and religious identities were accorded low salience and centrality relative to other identities. The study also investigated relations between a variety of identity dimensions derived from two identity traditions, social identity theory and identity rheory. The differing patterns of relationships to emerge across groups and across identities suggest that the process of identification in Northern Ireland is a complex one. The implications of these$ndings for the analysis of the Northern Ireland conflict are discussed.

Identity is increasingly recognized to be at the heart of the schism in Northern Ireland, which is commonly assumed to be between the Protestant British, who wish to remain part of the United Kingdom, and Irish Catholics who desire the unifi- cation of the whole of the island of Ireland. A history of grievances and tensions, derived from violent conflict as well as issues of nationhood and civil rights, have combined to provide a view of the problems of the region as intractable. This per- ception was shattered in May 1998 by the people’s endorsement of the agreement reached during multiparty negotiations sponsored by the Irish and British governments.

The Belfast Agreement, which provides a framework for developing a viable pluralistic society in Northern Ireland, acknowledges and respects the fact that the region is shared by people who are divided in their national allegiances. As Article 1 asserts, the British and Irish governments:

recognize the birthrights of all the people of Northern Ireland to identify themselves and be accepted as Irish or British or both, as they may so choose, and accordingly confirm that their rights to hold both British and Irish citizenship is accepted by both Governments and would

725

0 19% The Socicty for the Psyuhohgicsl Study of Social lssucc

726 Cassidy and Trew

not be affected by any future change in the status of Northern Ireland (Northern Ireland Of- fice, 1998, p. 2).

The specific proposals in the Agreement for the development of institutions and constitutional procedures legitimize aspirations for a united Ireland that are funda- mental to the Catholic nationalist community as well as acknowledge the wish of the majority Protestant unionist community to retain Northern Ireland’s status as part of the United Kingdom.

Although the Belfast Agreement recognizes diversity of identities and traditions, it also affirms the division of the people of Northern Ireland into two mutually exclusive communities according to whether they are Catholic or Protestant, nationalist or unionist. A body of survey evidence from a series of population sur- veys (for reviews, see Trew, 1996,1998) supports the view that there is a deep frac- ture in Northern Ireland society centered on religion that has an impact on social, political, and national identities. At the same time, consensus is also growing among the multidisciplinary academic community that concern about the diversity within the communities and similarities between Catholics and Protestants should accompany the acceptance of sociopolitical differences between Catholics and Protestants (Boal, Keane, & Livingstone, 1997; Darby, 1997).

Psychologists are among the social scientists who have attempted to chart the diversity of sociopolitical identities (Waddell & Cairns, 1986) as well as the changing, nuanced definitions of identity that have accompanied the changing events in Northern Ireland (Gallagher, 1989; Trew, 1992). But most importantly, and perhaps uniquely, psychologists have been involved in exploring the processes of identification and the meaning of sociopolitical identities in Northern Ireland.

Until recently, social identity theory has dominated this research (Cairns, 1982; Trew, 1992). Within this framework, identity derives from people’s knowledge that they belong to a certain social group and the subjective meaning associated with this knowledge (Tajfel, 1981). The theory explains how identity emerges from the processes of social categorization and comparison and how it influences intergroup relations. The primary motivation at the heart of these processes is the individual’s need for positive self-esteem. To maintain positive self-esteem, it is argued, we engage in intergroup comparisons that allow us to construe our groups as both different from and superior to groups to which we do not belong. A group’s relative status within society may determine the extent to which group membership is posi- tively evaluated. When we find ourselves in a group that cannot be evaluated posi- tively, we may choose to leave that group or, in the case of ascribed categories such as race and ethnicity, to reduce group identification.

A number of studies have examined how individuals in Northern Ireland evaluate the group to which they belong (e.g., Stringer & Cairns, 1983). Other studies sought to test the hypothesis, derived from social identity theory, that intergroup dis- crimination results in increased levels of self-esteem (e.g., Hunter, Platow, Howard, & Stringer, 1996; Hunter, Stringer, & Coleman, 1993). These studies have supplied


commitment,” the number of relationships affected if an identity is given up, and “affective commitment,” which refers to the emotional cost involved in losing an identity. This concept of commitment allows Stryker to build social structure explicitly into his identity model. Increasing levels of commitment to a particular identity increase the salience of that identity and its impact on what the individual thinks, feels, and does. More recently, Stryker (Stryker & Serpe, 1994) has intro- duced the concept of psychological centrality into his model. This concept refers to the subjective importance of an identity within the individual’s repertoire and, like salience, is believed to mediate the relationship between commitment and behavior. Stryker criticizes researchers who have used the terms salience and centrality inter- changeably. He argues that, unlike salience, the concept of centrality is defined psy- chologically, presumes more self-awareness on the part of the individual, and favors positive identities. Despite these conceptual differences, Stryker does not specify to what extent, if at all, commitment is differentially linked to centrality and salience.

A study by Trew and Benson ( 1996; Benson & Trew, 1995) represents one of the first to explore identity in Northern Ireland within this microsociological framework. Trew and Benson combined concepts from symbolic interactionism and social identity theory to investigate undergraduate students’ national and religious identities. They found that these identities were accorded only moderate salience and commitment, and that the relationships among these dimensions and collective self-esteem were strong, positive, and significant.

The Present Study

This study builds on the work of Trew and Benson (1996; Benson & Trew, 1995), but by examining a range of identities, it also extends existing identity research in Northern Ireland, which has tended to focus exclusively on national and religious identities. The need to examine such identities in the context of the individual’s multiple social group memberships has been highlighted as an important issue for identity researchers (e.g., Frable, 1997; Phinney, 1996). Because Stryker’s identity model allows us to examine the individual’s identity structure, it represents a useful means of investigating the relative importance of particular identities.

The present study was designed to draw on the two conceptual traditions of identity theory and social identity theory to examine arange of personal and collective identities in a Northern Ireland context. The aims of this article are threefold: first, to examine the importance of national and religious identities relative to other identities among Catholic and Protestant students; second, to examine differences between Protestants and Catholics in multiple identity dimensions, including affective and interactional commitment, self-esteem, self-prototypicality, and identity importance with regard to their national and religious identities; and finally, to explore the relationships among these identity dimensions for Catholics and Protestants.

Identities in Northern Ireland 729

Method

Participants

The respondents for this study, 284 first-year psychology undergraduates at Queen’s University of Belfast, were asked to complete a questionnaire at the end of a lecture. Eighteen percent of the original sample were from outside Northern Ire- land. Data from these respondents (n = 52), primarily from Great Britain and the Republic of Ireland, have been removed from the present analysis. Also excluded from the analyses were those who indicated that they were married (n = 6 ) . Respon- dents were asked to identify themselves as “Catholic,”, “Protestant,” or “other.” Because the analyses focus on the two main communities in Northern Ireland, those who described themselves as “other” (n = 7) and those who did not answer this question (n = 3) were not included.

Seventy-five percent of the final sample (n = 2 16) were female. Fifty-five percent of the sample described themselves as “Catholic,” 45% described themselves as “Protestant.” The gender ratio for both groups did not differ significantly from the gender ratio of the sample as a whole. There was a significant difference in relation to residence. Fifty-six percent of Protestants were living at home with parents and 44% were living elsewhere. This contrasted with 30% of Catholics living at home and 70% resident elsewhere. This pattern reflects the geographical distribution of the two groups in Northern Ireland.

Measures

Each of the measures was used to assess six identities, associated with family, friends, boy/girlfriend, university, nationality, and religion. Previous studies have suggested that these represent the identities most frequently claimed by students (e.g., Ethier & Deaux, 1990) and by people in Northern Ireland (e.g., Benson & Trew, 1995). For scales with more than one item, the scores for each respondent were averaged to give a respondent-specific indicator of the variable. Respondents completed the identity salience measure first and the psychological centrality measure last. The pages containing the other measures, a separate page for each identity, were randomly ordered.

Identity salience. The salience of each identity, adapted from a measure used by Stryker and Serpe (1 994), was based on a paired-comparison procedure in which each identity (e.g., family) was rated against each other identity (e.g., nationality). The respondent was asked to think about meeting people for the first time and to choose one identity over another, using all possible unique pairs, in terms of what he or she would tell them “SO that they’ll really know you.” This measure asked for behavioral reports, whereas the centrality measure below required evaluative


responses. The identity salience scores ranged from 0 (meaning that the identity was not selected in any of the comparisons) to 4 or 5 , depending on whether or not the individual claimed the boy/girlfriend identity (meaning that the identity was selected in each of the comparisons). For those respondents who did not claim the boy/girlfriend identity (n = 78), this measure was rescaled to allow comparability with those who claimed all six identities. After rescaling, all responses ranged from 0 (not salient) to 1 (salient).

Psychological centrality. This measure comprised a series of concentric cir- cles, the center circle (containing the word “me” in boldface type) representing the core self. Respondents were asked to “show how close each of the identities are to your inner self-the innermost circle-by placing each one in the appropriate circle.” This measure was adapted from one used by Brown and Torres ( 1 997) to examine the relative centrality of social groups for the individual. For those respondents who did not claim the boy/girlfriend identity, psychological centrality was rescaled to allow comparability with those who claimed all six identities. The centrality scores ranged from 1 (for the identity located farthest from the center circle, or least central) to 6 (for the identity closest to the center circle, or most central).

Afective commitment. This measure was adapted from the work of Stryker and Serpe (1994). The two-item scale had a nine-point response format and tapped the emotional significance of the relationships associated with each identity. For example, respondents were asked how close they felt to other students. It is assumed that the more attached the individual is to relationships associated with a particular identity, the greater the emotional cost that is involved in giving up that identity. The scale ranged from “not at all committed/close” ( 1) to “extremely committedclose” (9). Cronbach’s alpha coefficient was computed for each identity and ranged from .80 for the friend and national identities to .90 for the boy/girlfriend identity.

Interactional commitment. This concept was measured using a two-item ver- sion of a measure developed by Stryker and Serpe (1982). Respondents were required to estimate the percentage of relationships associated with each identity. For example, respondents were asked what percentage of people they would lose contact with “if you no longer thought of yourself as a student.” Cronbach’s alpha coefficient for this sample ranged from .82 for the family identity to .90 for the religious identity.

Self-evaluation. This variable was measured using a three-item semantic differential scale developed for this research. Respondents were asked to evaluate themselves in terms of each identity using the bipolar adjectives good/bad, compe- tenthncompetent, and proudashamed. The maximum possible range of scores for the scale was 1 (most negative evaluation) to 100 (most positive evaluation).


Cronbach’s alpha coefficient for this sample ranged from .75 for the friend identity to .87 for the national identity.

Selj-prototypicality. This measure was adapted from one used by Hogg and Hardie (1991). The two-item scale had a nine-point response format and required respondents to rate how typical they were of the group associated with each identity. The scale ranged from “not at all typical” (1) to “extremely typical” (9). Cron- bach’s alpha coefficient for this sample ranged from .90 for the religious identity to .95 for the family identity. This measure was not used in relation to the boy/girlfriend identity.

Results

Identity Hierarchies

Table 1 reports the mean salience and centrality rankings of each identity in Catholic and Protestant students’ hierarchies. Identities are listed in order of sample mean salience scores. For both groups, the identities considered most important were clearly those based on primary relationships. Religious and national identities were accorded low importance, placed at the bottom of the hierarchy on both measures. Frequency analysis of the centrality rankings showed that 2 students ( .5%) gave the national identity the top rank and 11 students (5.3%) gave the religious identity the top rank. The majority of students assigned the national identity and the religious identity to the lowest two ranks, 75% and 72% respectively. These findings are consistent with the work of Trew and Benson (Benson & Trew, 1995; Trew

Table 1. Mean Identity Salience and Centrality Rankings by Religious Group

Salience Centrality

Protestants Catholics Protestans Catholics

Identity M SD M SD M SD M SD

Friend 0.72 0.22 0.73 0.23 4.13 1.08 4.19 0.90 Boy/Girlfriend 0.75 0.23 0.70 0.24 4.70 1.07a* 4.18 1.51 University 0.67 0.22 0.68 0.24 2.92 1.06 2.78 1.13 Family 0.58 0.21 0.61 0.23 4.85 1.06 5.02 1.00 Nationality 0.21 O.lga* 0.27 0.22 1.85 0.97 1.96 1.01 Religion 0.13 0.22”* 0.07 0.13 2.15 1.19 2.09 1.02

Note: Scores range from 0 (never salient) to 1 (always salient) on the salience scale and from 1 (not at all central) to 6 (maximum centrality) on the centrality scale. aA two-tailed f-test indicates a significant difference between religious groups. * p < .05.

732 Cassidy and 'hew

& Benson, 1996), which has shown that these identities are generally accorded low salience and authenticity. When comparing the identity structures elicited by both measures, it is interesting to note that the family identity was ranked much lower on the salience measure (fourth) than on the centrality measure (first).

Two sample t-tests were performed to determine differences in salience and centrality by religious background. A significant difference was found for the salience measure only in relation to the national and religious identities. Catholics rated their national identity higher in salience than Protestants, t (213) = -2.36, p < .05, whereas the reverse was true for the religious identity, t (213) = 2 . 2 8 , ~ < .05. These differences were not obtained for the centrality measure. For centrality, the only significant difference was in relation to the boy/girlfriend identity. Protestant students tended to rate this identity higher in centrality than their Catholic counterparts, t (133) = 2 . 3 1 , ~ < .05.

Dimensions of Identity

Here we narrow our focus to the two identities of particular interest in Northern Ireland, the national and religious identities (see Table 2). Two sample t-tests were performed to determine differences in affective and interactional commitment, self-prototypicality, and self-evaluation by religious background.

Table 2. Means for Affective and Interactional Commitment, Self-Prototypicality, and Self-Evaluation for the National and Religious Identities by Religious Group

~~~~~~~~ ~ ~~

National Identity Religious Identity

Protestants Catholics Protestants Catholics

Affective commitment M 5.29"* 5.86 4.79 5.28 SD 1.89 I .72 2.38 1.84

M 20.77'* 30. I I 17.88 25.24 SD 30.44 34.61 27.61 29.87

M 4.79a* 5.38 4.03a* 4.61 SD 1.90 1.94 2.2 1 2.06

M 64.92"** 77.18 59.73"* 66.68 SD 19.77 17.27 19.79 21.18

Interactional commitment

Self-prototypicality

Self-evaluation

Note: Scores range from I (minimum) to 9 (maximum) on the affective commitment and self- prototypicality scales and from I (minimum) to 100 (maximum) on the interactional commitment and self-evaluation scales. "A two-tailed t-test indicates a significant difference between religious groups. *I, < .05. **p < .01.


Affective commitment. Differences of religious background emerged for the national identity only, with Catholics scoring higher than their Protestant counterparts, t (21 1) = -2.32, p < .05.

Interactional commitment. Significant differences of religious background emerged for the national identity, I (204) = -2.03, p < .05. Catholics displayed higher levels of interactional commitment than their Protestant counterparts. This finding is consistent with the Trew and Benson (1996) study, in which those who defined themselves as Irish showed significantly higher levels of commitment than those holding a British identity.

Se,!f-prototypicality. Differences between Catholics and Protestants were found far the national identity, t (209) = -2.23, p < .05, and the refigbus identity, t (2 1 1) = -1 .98 ,~ < .05. Catholics reported perceiving themselves as more prototypi- cal in terms of both identities than Protestants. This finding can be explained in terms of the more fragmented nature of the Protestant community in Northern Ire- land. One of the main divisions is between the numerous denominations, a division that has no counterpart within the Catholic community (Whyte, 1990).

Identity-specific self-evaluation. For both identities Protestant students scored lower on self-evaluation than their Catholic counterparts. Again, these results are similar to those presented by Trew and Benson (1996; Benson & Trew, 1995). In their study, respondents selecting the “Irish” and “Catholic” identities had significantly higher collective self-esteem than those selecting the “British” and “Protestant” identities.

Relationships Between Dimensions

The results presented here are again limited to the national and religious identities. Tables 3 and 4 report the bivariate relationships between affective

Table 3. Zero-Order Correlations Between Salience, Centrality. and the Four Identity Dimensions by Religious Group for the National Identity

Protestants Catholics

Salience Centrality Salience Centrality

Affective commitment . I 1 .I6 .2 I * .19* Interactional commitment .I4 .I5

Self-evaluation .21* . I4 Self-prototypicality .26* . I 7

.os .21**

.23* .19*

. I 1 .3o**

* p < .os. **p < .o1.


commitment, interactional commitment, self-prototypicality, self-evaluation, and identity salience and centrality. Examining the national identity first (Table 3), stronger correlations tended to obtain for the centrality variable among Catholic respondents than among Protestant respondents. The salience measure had a significant positive relationship with affective commitment for Catholics, with self- evaluation for Protestants, and with self-prototypicality for both groups. The findings overall indicated that there was a positive relationship between these dimensions of identity, as predicted by social identity theory and identity theory.

The pattern of correlations for religious identity (Table 4) among Protestants was very different than that obtained for national identity. All of the correlations with both salience and centrality were significant and positive. Among Catholic students, significant positive relationships emerged for the centrality measure but not for the salience measure. We then examined the bivariate relationships between salience and centrality for the two identities. For the national identity, the correlation was moderately positive and significant for both Catholics ( Y = .36,p < ,001) and Protestants (Y = .34, p < .001). There was, however, a significant difference between the correlations for the religious identity, with Protestants showing a significantly higher correlation (Y = .54,p < .OO 1) between the dimensions than Catho- lic students ( r = .23, p < .05), z = 3.67, p < .05.

Stryker and Serpe (1994) have suggested that under some conditions, centrality and salience are almost wholly independent and under others, they overlap considera- bly. One condition might relate to the degree to which individuals can choose how they behave while holding a particular identity. For identities about which there is little choice, salience and centrality would be expected to be independent. Although the limitations of post hoc analysis are acknowledged, it is worth reporting that the variable “identity choice” was operationalized in this research with a two-item scale rang- ing from 1 (no choice) to 9 (complete choice) on which respondents rated how much choice they felt they had in what they did as a member of the group associated with each identity. Catholics were found to perceive significantly less choice in relation to their religious identities than Protestants, t (212) = 2.85, p < .01. There was no difference between the two groups in the amount of choice associated with the national identity.

Table 4. Zero-Order Correlations Between Salience, Centrality, and the Four Identity Dimensions by Religious Group for the Religious Identity

Protestants Catholics

Salience Centrality Salience Centrality

Affective commitment .29** .42*** -.I4 .24** Interactional commitment .39*** .35** . I7 .17

Self-evaluation .22* .42*** .02 .48*** Self-prototypicality .2 1 * .30** -.07 .35***

* p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < ,001.

Identities in Northern Ireland

Discussion

135

The conflict in Northern Ireland is often described in terms of a clash of identities, national and religious. This study aimed to determine the relative importance of these identities using a multidimensional approach to examine the identity structures of Northern Ireland students. The analyses also investigated relations between a variety of identity dimensions derived from two traditions, social identity theory and identity theory. It was found that national and religious identities were accorded low salience and centrality relative to other identities. Analysis of other dimensions of identity, including affective and interactional commitment, self-evaluation, and self-prototypicality, revealed some differences between Catholics and Protestants in relation to their national and religious identities. Finally, different patterns of relationships among the various identity dimensions emerged across groups and across identities.

Perhaps the most striking aspect of these data is how low the national and religious identities feature in these students’ identity structures. Previous research suggests that this finding is not unique to this particular group of undergraduate students or to this time period. A study by Trew (1983), carried out at a time of con- siderable political tension in Northern Ireland, indicated that religious denomina- tion was not a salient dimension in the self-descriptions of university students.

What does this finding imply? A recent study (Aries et al., 1998), found that those participants for whom race was more important had higher scores across various situations on awareness of race than did those for whom race was less important. Stryker (1987) further argued that identities low in salience have fewer implications for behavior than those higher in salience. Despite the background of political violence, the identities of student, friend, and family member are much more likely to pervade the everyday lives of these young people than those identities based on nationality or religion.

These findings also suggest, however, that these students accept and value national and religious identities to some extent. Trew and Benson (1996) remarked on a similar finding in their study and suggested that Northern Ireland students have a reservoir of identity commitment that can readily become mobilized whenever the social context elicits these identities. In the absence of comparative studies examining the identities of students in other countries. it is difficult to establish to what extent this pattern is unique to Northern Ireland. Future research might also investigate the identity structures of other groups within Northern Ireland, groups that vary by geographical location, socioeconomic status, and age.

Analysis of affective and interactional commitment, self-prototypicality, and self-evaluation revealed some differences between the two religious groups. Catho- lic students tended to display higher levels of affective and interactional commitment in relation to their national identity than their Protestant counterparts. Catholics also tended to display higher levels of self-evaluation and self-prototypicality in relation


to their national and religious identities. The finding in relation to self-evaluation is not easily explained in terms of social identity theory, which would predict that Prot- estants, who have majority status, would exhibit higher levels of self-esteem than Catholics. Alternatively, it may reflect the difficulty in establishing which group has majority status in Northern Ireland. Our finding may be consistent with what some authors have termed the triple-minority model (e.g., Douglas & Boal, 1982), an alternative to the double-minority model that suggests that Northern Protestants are a minority notjust in Ireland but in the United Kingdom as well. Protestants thus might be expected to show the psychological characteristics of a minority even more sharply than Catholics do (Whyte, 1995).

Analysis of the relationships among the various dimensions indicated differences across identities and across groups. These findings suggest that the process of identification in Northern Ireland is a complex one. The different patterns among the dimensions for the national and religious identities for Protestant students, for example, may reflect a lack of unity between these two identities. For the Protestant community, the religious identity may be more secure because it defines the group within Northern Ireland, whereas the security of the national identity requires support not only within Northern Ireland but within Britain (Gallagher, 1989). The need to use multiple dimensions to distinguish between identities (Deaux, Reid, Mizrahi, & Ethier, 1995) and to explore differences between and within groups is highlighted.

The difference between Catholics and Protestants in the relationships between salience and centrality for their national and religious identities is noteworthy. The finding raises the question of when and why these two dimensions are not related. One possibility, tentatively suggested by the data, relates to the amount of behavioral choice associated with each identity. Alternatively, if salience is regarded as a more public expression of identity importance than centrality, then a lower correlation between these two concepts among Catholics might suggest a separation between public and private evaluations of their group. Crocker, Luhtanen, Blaine, and Broadnax (1 994) have argued that this may be adaptive for members of a deval- ued minority group that has experienced prejudice and negative stereotyping. A study on intergroup communication in Northern Ireland would appear to support this conclusion. Stringer and Hvattum (1990) found that Catholic students discussed religion significantly less with outgroup members and reported much poorer perceived outcomes of such interactions than their Protestant counterparts.

The use of the two concepts, salience and centrality, is beginning to gain favor in the racial identity literature. Sellers, Smith, Shelton, Rowley, and Chavous (1998) incorporate both concepts in their newly proposed Multidimensional Model of Racial Identity. They use the concept centrality as a relatively stable indicator of the comparative importance that individuals place on the identity in defining themselves. Salience, on the other hand, they conceptualize as a process variable, a func- tion of situational cues and more stable characteristics of identity, specifically


centrality. Stryker’s concept of salience, used in the present study, is somewhat different from that described by Sellers and his colleagues. Because Stryker focuses on behavioral indicators, however, the influence of contextual factors is an inevitable feature of his conceptualization. The research in Northern Ireland therefore provides empirical evidence for the need to introduce both concepts, salience and centrality, into our models of identity.

The differences observed between groups and across identities confirm the merits of combining a sociological perspective with the social identity theory approach in Northern Ireland research but also raise issues for the two conceptual traditions. The findings suggest important differences in the type of identities that people claim, differences both social identity theory and identity theory largely ignore. Furthermore, neither theory adequately explains the different patterns of relationships among concepts to emerge for Catholics and Protestants. It is suggested that more theoretical work is needed in relation to individual differences and properties of identity to give both theories a broader level of generalizability.

In this study we have heeded Frable’s (1997) call for the identity research to “see people as whole,” to view identity as a “personalized social construction that includes multiple social categories.” The identity structures of this student sample suggest that sociopolitical identities are not important in the students’ everyday lives. The conflict and dissensus in society may serve as a backdrop to daily events, but it does not necessarily impinge on their activities (Cairns, 1987; Darby, 1995). In some senses, this finding is not unexpected. These students were starting out on a new stage of life, but in a transition that did not involve a major change in their cul- tural milieu. Their new environment, therefore, may not pose any challenge for the national and religious identities they take for granted. At college, the lack of group distinctiveness and availability of a more inclusive category, that of student, may attenuate rather than highlight group boundaries. These findings may point not only to differences between populations, as already suggested, but to differences within the individual across the life cycle.

We suggest that our approach, with its focus on individual processes involved in constructing social identities, complements the work of sociologists, historians, and political scientists who turn to macrosocial causes in their analyses of the role of identity in political and social life in order to understand and intervene in intergroup conflict in Northern Ireland and other places in which strong social cleavages accompany sustained political violence. As one commentator acknowledged in 1995:

In a society divided by nationalist and ethnic tensions, identities are also partly determined by the need to mark out the differences from one’s ethnic opponents. Energies are devoted to emphasizing the distinctions between groups rather than the features they hold in common. When tensions run high, the simple test is: are you for us or against us? There is little space for those caught in the middle. (Darby. 1995 p. 24)

As the peace process continues to make progress, the space for those who, like these students, occupy the middle ground will hopefully increase. Commentators and


academics will be forced to counter the tendency to portray the two communities in Northern Ireland as “two monolithic opposing blocks” (Boal et al., 1997). Our approach, which emphasizes multiple identities and multiple dimensions, facili- tates this move by articulating analyses of different levels to arrive at explanations that are both intraindividual and social (Doise, 1997).

References

Aries. E.. Olver, R. R., Blount. K., Christaldi, K., Fredman. T.. & Lee. T. (1998). Race and gender as components of the working self-concept. Journal qf’Socici1 Psychology, 138, 277-290.

Benson. D. E.. & Trew, K. T. ( 1 995). Facets of self in Northern Ireland: Explorations and further ques- tions. In A. Oosterwegel & R. A. Wicklund (Eds.), The selfin European arid North American culture; Development undprocesses (pp. 291-307). Dordrecht. the Netherlands: Kluwer Aca- demic Publishers.

Bod, F. W., Keane, M. C., & Livingstone, D. N. (1997). Them and us: Atritudinul vuriotions in church- g0er.s in Belfast. Belfast, Northern Ireland: Institute of Irish Studies.

Brown. R., & Torres, A. ( I 997, April). ExplorinRRmirpdiversirv. Paperpresented at the Annual Confer- ence of Social Psychology Section of the British Psychological Society, Brighton, England.

Cairns, E. ( 1982). Intergroup conflict in Northern Ireland. In H. Tajfel (Ed.), Sociul identity and intergroup relutions (pp. 277-298). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Cairns, E. ( I 987). Caught in crossfire: Children und the Northern Ireland conflict. Belfast, Northern Ireland: Appletree.

Crocker. J . , Luhtanen, R., Blaine, B., & Broadnax, S. (1994). Collective self-esteem and psychological well-being among White, Black and Asian college students. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 20. 503-5 13.

Darby, J. ( 1995). Northern Ireland; Munqying diflerence. London: Minority Rights Group. Darby, J. ( 1997). Scorpions in a bottle: Conflicting cultures in Northern Irelund. London: Minority

Rights Group. Deaux, K.. Reid. A,, Mizrahi, K., & Ethier, K. (1995). Parameters of social identity. Journul ofperson-

ality and S ~ ~ c i a l Psychology, 68,280-29 1 . Doise, N. (1997). Organizing social psychological explanations. In C . McGarty & S. A. Haslam (Eds.),

The messqe [f social psycholog>>: Perspectives on mind in society (pp. 63-76). Oxford, En- gland: Blackwell Publishers.

Douglas, J . N. H.. & Boal. F. W. (1982). The Northern Ireland problem. In F. W. Boa1 and J . N. H. Doug- las (Eds.), Integration arid division: Geogruphical perspective.r on the Northern Ireland problem (pp. 105-136) London: Academic.

Ethier, K., & Deaux. K. (1990). Hispanics in Ivy: Assessing identity and perceived threat. SexRoles, 22, 427440.

Frable, D. ( 1997). Gender, racial, ethnic, sexual and class identities. Annual Review ($Psychology, 48, 139-162.

Gallagher, A. M. (1989). Social identity and the Northern Ireland conflict. Human Relations, 42. 9 17-935.

Hogg, M. A,, & Abrams, D. (Eds.). ( 1993). Group motivation: Socialps~chologicalperspecri~~es. Lon- don: Harvester Wheatsheaf.

Hogg, M. A,. & Hardie, E. A. ( I 991). Prototypicality. conformity and depersonalized attraction: A selfcategorization analysis of group cohesiveness. British Journal of Social Psychology, 31,41-56.

Hunter, J. A.. Platow, M. J., Howard, M. L., & Stringer, M. (1996). Social identity and intergroup evaluative bias: Realistic categories and domain specific self-esteem in a conflict setting. Euro- p u n Journd of Social P.sycholog?i, 26, 63 1 4 4 7 .

Hunter, J . A,, Stringer. M., & Coleman. J. T. (1993). Social explanations and self-esteem in Northern Ireland. Journal ojSocial P.rychologv, 5. 643-650.


Jackson, H. (1971). The two Irelands-A dual study c~fintergroup tensions. Report no. 2. London: Mi- nority Rights Group.

Moreland, R. L., Levine, J., & Cini, M. (1993). Group socialization: The role of commitment. In M. A. Hogg & D. Abrams (Eds.), Group motivation: Sociulps?.cho/oRicu//~ers/~ective.F (pp. 105-129) London: Harvester Wheatsheaf.

Northern Ireland Office. ( 1998). The Agreement: Agreement reached in nnilti-purh negotiations. Bel- fast, Northern Ireland: HMSO.

Oakes, P.,Haslam, S. A,, & Turner, J. C. (1998). The role ofprototypicality in group influence andcohe- sion: Contextual variation in the graded structure of social categories. In S. Worchel, J. F:Mo- rales, D. Pie,, & J. C. Deschamps (Eds.), Socicrl identify: International per,spectives (pp. 75-92). London: Sage Publications.

Phinney, J. S. (1996). When we talk about American ethnic groups, what do we mean‘? Anierictrn Ps,v- chologist, 51 , 9 18-927.

Sellers, R. M., Smith, M. A,, Shelton. J. N., Rowley, S. A. J., & Chavous. T. M. (1998). Multidimen- sional model of racial identity: A reconceptualization of African American racial identity. Per- sonality and Social Psychology Review. 2, 18-39.

Stringer, M., &Cairns, E. ( I 983). Catholic and Protestant young people’s ratings of stereotype Catholic and Protestant faces. British Journal of Social Psvchologv. 22, 24 1-246.

Stringer, M., & Hvattum, 0. (1990). Intergroup communication on religion and the troubles among university students in Northern Ireland. Irish Jourmd qfEducation, 24, 48-61.

Stryker, S. (1980). S,wbolic interactionism: A social srrcrctural ver.siori. Menlo Park, CA: Benjamin Cummings.

Stryker, S. (1987). Identity theory: Developments and extensions. In K. Yardley & T. Honess (Eds.), Self und identity: P.sychosocia/pers/,ecriwe.s (pp. 83-101). New York: Wiley.

Stryker, S., & Serpe, R. (1982). Commitment, identity salience and role behavior: Theory and research example. In W. Ickes & E. S. Knowles (Eds.), Personalirv, roles and social bel7avior (pp. 199-218). New York: Springer Verlag.

Stryker, S., & Serpe, R. ( 1 994). Identity salience and psychological centrality: Equivalent, overlapping or complementary concepts? Social Psychology Quarterly, 57. 16-35.

Tajfel, H. (198 1). Humun groups and social categories: Studies in social psychology. Cambridge, En- gland: Cambridge University Press.

Trew, K. ( I 983). A sense of national identity: Fact or artefact‘? Irish Journal of’Psychology, 6, 28-36. Trew, K. (1992). Social psychological research on the conflict. Psychologist, 5, 343-344. Trew, K. (1996). National identity. In R. Breen, P. Devine, & L. Dowds (Eds.), Socia1uttitude.s in North-

ern Ireland: The Fifth Report (pp. 140-1 52). Belfast, Northern Ireland: Appletree. Trew, K. (1998). The Northern Irish identity. In A. Kershen (Ed.). A question rgidentify (pp. 60-76).

Aldershot, England: Ashgate. Trew, K., & Benson, D. E. (1996). Dimensions of social identity in Northern Ireland. In G. Breakwell &

E. Lyons (Eds.), Changing European identities: Socirrl-ps~~cholo~ic~rl an(rl.vse.s of social change (pp. 123-143). Oxford, England: Butterworth-Heinemann.

Turner, J. C., Hogg, M. A,, Oakes, P. J., Reicher, S. D., & Wetherell, M. S. (1987). Rediscovering the social group: A selfcategorization rheory. Oxford, England: Blackwell.

Waddell, N., &Cairns, E. (1986). Situational perspective on social identity in Northern Ireland. British Journal of Social Psychology, 25, 25-3 I .

Whyte, Jean. (1995). Changing times: Challenges to identity. Aldershot, England: Avebury. Whyte, John. ( 1990). Interpreting Northern Ireland. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.

CLARE CASSIDY is currently a doctoral student in social psychology at the Queen’s University of Belfast. Her research interests are intergroup relations, self and identity change.

KAREN TREW is a senior lecturer in the School of Psychology at the Queen’s Uni- versity of Belfast. Her area of speciality is in applied social psychology. Her recent


research has included studies of intergroup relations in Northern Ireland, gender and school achievement, and adolescent involvement in sport.

Identities in Northern Ireland: A Multidimensional Approach

Documents

Transcript of Identities in Northern Ireland: A Multidimensional Approach