Chapter I

THE PROBLEM AND ITS BACKGROUND

Introduction

Today, people tend to ask a question about their self. Most people are satisfied with

whatever they have right now. Some are not contented of who they are right now. Some of

them are trying to change their identity and some also involve themselves into actions of

changing their belief, culture, or especially sexual orientation in life. Truly, we found that this

world is changing. And as researchers who observe what is happening around them, we find

many things that will make them curious with the rise of their aspect of identity.

Identity is a fundamental psychosocial task for young people. Beginning in their early

teens, adolescents start to ask questions such as “Who am I?” “What am I doing in my life?”

“What kind of relationships do I want?” “What kind of work do I want to do?” and “What are

my beliefs?” (Archer, 1982). The consideration of alternative possibilities often coincides

with the advent of formal operational thought during adolescence (Krettenauer, 2005). As

young people develop the ability to consider an abstract idea such as who and what they

could be, they may begin to imagine new and different possibilities for themselves.

Identity is the construct that defines who or what a person is, and people’s view of

their identity can encompass any combination of expressions of individual uniqueness,

personal relationship, labels that refers to social roles, and group membership (Gordon,

1985). In psychology, it is the qualities, belief, personality, looks and/or expressions that

make a person (self-identity) or group (particular social category or social group). Identity

refers to our sense of self, meaning the ideas we have about who we are and how other people

see us. Our sense of identity is often shaped by the people feel similar to. Meeting people
who are similar to us can confirm our sense of identity but often it is reinforced more strongly

by people who we are because that make us realize that some of our characteristics are not

shared by everybody. Identity often has a lot to do with the groups we are part of. Self-

identity comprises a number of “self-images” that lie on a continuum, with personalized self-

schemata at one extreme and self-characteristics related to social categories at the other

(Hagger, Anderson 2007).

The purpose of this study is to identify the aspect of identity of lesbian, gays and

straight adolescents using Aspects of Identity Questionnaire (AIQ-IV) Test. Cheek (1989)

made somewhat similar distinction between personal, social, relational, and collective

identity orientations. He defined Personal Identity as a private self-conception and subjective

feelings and Social Identity as public image and social roles and relationships while

Relational Identity as direct personal contact with other people. Finally, he defined Collective

Identity as membership in and identification with different groups and collectives, such as

religious, national, or ethical groups. Each of these conceptions of self, the personal or

individual, the social and collective-theoretically coexist in a single individual. The

researchers come up with this idea to understand and know more about the different aspects

of identity and to understand and help adolescents in this stage of their life where confusion

and questioning about themselves challenges them.

Conceptual Framework

From the moment a child is born, various labels are used as markers of his or her

identity. The name given to a child is the forms of one aspect of identity. Others relevant

factors that play a major role in the development of identity may include: institutional

affiliations, family lineages, religion, culture, cast, creed, ethnicity, gender and profession.

Ferguson (2015) explains identity and how it shaped and affect by different aspect,

such as gender, race, and class. Identity is derived from our experience that can also shape

our own identity. It is very unique just like one’s signature that allows him/her identity with

the world around. Race is a very relevant aspect that could form one’s identity because if a

person is associated with a racial group, the person’s race would affect how he/she is seen

and treated by others. Furthermore, racial identities could bring discrimination and inequality.

At the same time, it could be the source of pride, motivation and belonging. As the gender

identity, it refers to one’s inner sense of oneself as female or male refers to the behaviors and

personality characteristics that are produced culturally. As for social class, it has a significant

role in forming one’s identity by which he/she can belong to a certain group that has the same

social status in which he/she could be recognized differently in relation to others; it also may

be a source of discrimination or a pride. Ferguson argues that our environment and society

are the elements that affect the aspect that helps shape our identity for which they decide

what appropriate and what is not.

Research Paradigm

Independent Variables Dependent Variables

Age Aspects of Identity

Civil Status
Gender
Religion
Figure 1. The research Paradigm

This paradigm shows the relationship of the variables in the study. The gender

preferences (Males, Females, Gays and Lesbians) are the independent variables, it is a factor

that can affect or make changes in the dependent variable which is the Aspects of Identity.

Statement of the Problem

The focus of this study is the aspect of identity of the respondents. The researchers

attempt to answer the following:

1. What is the profile of the respondents in terms of:

1.1 Age

1.2 Civil Status

1.3 Gender

1.4 Religion?

2. What particular aspects of identity is common to the respondents:

2.1 Personal Identity Orientation

2.2 Social Identity Orientation

2.3 Relational Identity Orientation

2.4 Collective Identity Orientation?

3. Is there a significant difference between the aspect of identity of lesbians, gays and

straight adolescents?

Hypothesis

There is no significant difference between the aspects of identity of lesbians, gays and

straight adolescence.

Significance of the study

 The result of this research will be significant to the following:

Family. To provide information and understanding of the aspects of identity of lesbians and

gays to straight adolescents.

Future Researcher. To serve a source of data and resources to the next researcher that can

lead to a new study.

Students. To help the students in what aspect of identity they have in themselves.

Teachers. To serve a guide and have a better understanding their students’ aspects of

identity.

Scope and Delimitation

The scope of the study is concerned with the aspects of identity of the respondents.

The research will conduct at Cagayan State University- Carig Campus. The respondents will

be randomly selected among different colleges in the said campus.

Definition of Terms

Collective Identity Orientation. It refers on how individual represent their different group

identity. It ranges from 0.67 to 0.77 scale using the Cronbach’s Alpha.

Identity. It refers to an individual and / or group define themselves.

Personal Identity Orientation. It refers to the personal belief of the individual about

psychological traits and abilities. It ranges from 0.80 to 0.83 scale using the Cronbach’s

Alpha.

Relational Identity Orientation. It refers to how individuals see themselves in the context of

their intimate relationship. It ranges from 0.82 to 0.91 scale using Cronbach’s Alpha.

Social Identity Orientation. It refers on how individual reflect on their self in general

interpersonal context. It ranges from 0.80 to 0.82 scale using Cronbach’s Alpha.
 Chapter II

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE AND STUDIES

This chapter presents the literature and studies that are related to this study which

helped in the analysis gather data. Some of these literature and studies are as follows:

Identity Orientations

The concept of identity is not limited to one field of study, but numerous applications

can be found in such diverse academic disciplines as chemistry, art, mathematics, biology,

history, psychology and sociology (Bosma et al., 1994). Psychologists, psychiatrists and

sociologists specifically have applied this concept when aiming to understand and

conceptualize individuality or selfhood (Archer, 1994; Breakwell, 1992; Kroger, 1993;

Lapsley & Power, 1988; Yardley & Honess, 1987).

According to Adams and Marshall (1996) studied the investigations of several

researches. They conclude their study with the following functional suggestions that they

believe are essential to comprehending selfhood in the study of identity:

1. Identity is proposed to be a social-psychological construct. In this view, the

formation of what is vital to the self and to others is represented by social

influences by means of imitation and identification processes and dynamic self-

constructions.

2. The active self-constructive aspects of identity are based upon cognitive or ego

operations. These operations are believed to arrange structure and create/recreate

information about the self.

 3. When viewed as a psychological structure, identity is a self-regulatory system that

functions to focus attention, manage impressions, filter or process information and

select suitable behaviors.

4. Identity, as a construct, contains its own useful purpose similar to all social

psychological constructs.

They further investigate the concept of identity and propose five most commonly

renowned roles of identity that include the following:

1. Identity aids in providing a basis and structure for comprehending and knowing

oneself.

2. It presents a means of both personal control and free will.

3. Through values, commitments and goals, it presents a sense of meaning and

direction.

4. It aims toward consistency, unity and harmony between values, beliefs and

commitments.

5. It facilitates the acknowledgment of potential through a sense of future,

opportunities and various choices.

These orientations or aspects of the self-have been described by referring to personal

identity, social identity, relational identity and collective identity.

Cheek (1989) argues that people have several identity orientations and memberships

that are not fixed but vary in relative importance in the self-concept. Depending on the level

of importance of these orientations and memberships, they can have various implications for

self-esteem. Several theories have been developed to explain these different identity

orientations in order to describe individuals’ behavior in social settings.

Personal identity
 According to Brewer and Garner (1996), people may prefer different identity

orientations at different stages, with the specific preference rooted in the way the focal person

defines him/herself. They propose that a personal identity orientation is triggered and

reflected when the self is defined as a unique being.

The individual self, also known as the personal, private or idiocentric self is involves

the formation of oneself as independent and unique, possessing a definite and clear boundary

that distinguishes one from others (Markus & Kitayama, 1991).

Gaertner, Sedikides, Vevea and Luzzini (2002) they also echo this viewpoint by

defining the individual self as consisting of those characteristics that represent the person as

unique from fellow in-group members. This view of the self is recognized to be connected

with a sense of personal agency. It is seen as autonomous from others and the social milieu,

and contains a perception that the self is in general different to others.

By separating and distinguishing the person from others, the individual or personal

self is attained. That is, the individual self includes those aspects of the self-concept that

separate the person from other persons as a distinct collection of qualities and features. These

aspects differentiate the individual within his or her social environment. This process of self-

representation is based on interpersonal comparison processes and is focused on the intention

of enhancing or protecting the person psychologically (Brewer & Gardner, 1996; Markus,

1977; Sedikides, 1993).

While Markus and Kitaya (1991) argue that the culturally based representation of the

person forms the view individuals have of themselves. This leads to the establishment of an

autonomous self-construal. Related to this view, there is said to be a single “true” nature to a

person, or “real” self. The foundation of defining and validating the true or real self is formed

by consistent expression of established traits, attitudes, abilities, and other personal

characteristics. People that are capable to behave autonomously and not be influenced by

others around them are those who are confident that they know their real self. Inconsistency

in viewing the personal self presents a risk to the core, constant, and real self that can cause

self-concept uncertainty, lack of clarity, or a sense of possessing a divided self.

When taking this into account, individual stability is an indication of maturity, self-

integrity, and unity, and therefore related to positive dimensions of well-being (Allport, 1937;

Lecky, 1945).

In addition, Ellemers (2002) it is emphasize the importance of the individual self and

aspects of personal identity as a basis for clarifying and understanding social behavior. These

aspects direct theoretical studies and empirical work even when group processes and

intergroup affairs are the focus of research.

The first example is the way that group cohesion is often conceptualized as

originating from interpersonal links between individual group members (Prentice, Miller &

Lightdale, 1994).

Secondly, effects of the group on people’s self-definitions are investigated by looking

at the expectations that individual in-group member’s harbor about each other (Swann,

Milton & Polzer, 2000).

Lastly, explanations on the inclination to either identify with or detach the self from

specific groups are based on a consideration of how membership in the group may be

favorable for the particular individual (e.g. Luhtanen & Crocker, 1991).

Social identity

The concept of social identity has significant potential to clarify and predict a diverse

range of social behaviors. This potential originates from the idea that the social identity of
individuals associates them with social groups and roles that influence their behavior and

actions. Unfortunately, the concept of social identity and its impact has not been completely

exploited because of the complexity of this concept and the difficulty to measure and

analyses the data.

Social identity is described as a concept that is triggered and developed in a

continuous exchange process among the individual and the group, which contains enduring

central and tangential components.

Jenkins (2004) describes the process of social identity as continuous interaction

between the individual and the in-group, and between the individual and out-groups. In his

view, it relates to an ongoing process and not an entity or label. This processual nature

facilitates and guides the rationalization of the multifaceted and dynamic characteristics of

identity in social interactions. The emphasis on process distinguishes the dynamic, relational,

contextual and constructed character of social identity. The resulting identity is based on the

context and the relative strengths of internal and external categorizations at that moment.

A fundamental starting point in the social identity approach is the idea that without

incorporating the broader social context in which individuals operate and function, one

cannot comprehended and rationalize the impact of social groups on the way people view and

perceive themselves and others around them.

The individualistic, independent model of the self is not sufficient to completely

describe the definitions of the selves of all people. Investigations performed in cross-cultural

studies show that members of various collectivist cultures see the person as being part of a

social network, completely human only in the context of personal relationships, and defined

by their social roles and ranks (Markus & Kitayama, 1991).

 Every person has a variety of distinct and overlapping social identities. Social

identities include those that develop from highly significant and clearly defined categories as

well as those that refer to more intangible and ambiguous social groups. A very important

outcome may be the appearance of differing perceptions of self and others and this depends

on which identity is most prominent (Crisp & Hewstone, 2001; Haslam & Turner, 1992; Van

Rijswijk & Ellemers, 2002). Therefore, the degree to which group characteristics and

processes have effects on the social self may perhaps not be similar for all members of the

group, but depend on the degree to which each group member observes him/herself in terms

of that specific group membership (Ellemers et al., 1999c).

Brewer (1991), Deaux (1992), and Turner (1984) said that all propose that purely to

belong to a group and to be seen as a member, does not qualify the category as significant

and identifying. For the criterion to be significant in terms of social identification, the

membership must be acknowledged and accepted by the member as self-defining. If a

member has a specific social identity that is significant, it refers to becoming one with that

group, being and behaving similar to other group members, and making the groups’

viewpoint your own.

Individuals make similar positive assessments of a group along attitudinal lines when

they become members of the group. Evidently, social identity investigators show that when

members identify with the group, independent of individual attachments within the group,

they feel a strong attraction to belonging to the group as a whole (Hogg & Hardie, 1992).

Corresponding with this, others find that even when the group’s status is viewed and

experienced to be somewhat low, greater commitment and loyalty to the group and desire to

remain part of the group are strengthened by the effects of in-group identification (Ellemers,

Spears & Doosje, 1997).

 In addition, the self is conducted in agreement with a group with which individuals

identify and feel they belong to. In a low-status minority group, for example, individuals who

identify with the group status and describe and express themselves with reference to that

group, are more likely than not to share in the culture of the group, to differentiate themselves

from the out-group, and to demonstrate similar behavior (Ethier & Deaux, 1994; Ullah,

1987). Also, the appearance of groupthink or high consensus in managerial groups is to a

large extent more likely to be evident under circumstances where members identify highly

with the social group (Turner, Pratkanis, Probasco, & Leve, 1992). Furthermore, social

identification is one of the principal platforms and a strong motivation for group members to

participate in social movements (Simon et al., 1998).

Adding to these views, considerable evidence exists in studies that report on incidents

that demonstrate the influential impact of individuals’ social identities on their perceptions,

emotions and behavior. These are illustrated in related examples, such as members of sports

teams who blame themselves after their team has lost (Taylor & Doria, 1981); participants in

research studies who remain to stand by each other within an unsuccessful group, even when

there is no hindrance to depart from the group (Ellemerset al., 1997); or campaigners who put

themselves in danger for beliefs or causes that are not likely to improve their own current

circumstances, like animal rights and environmental activists (Drury & Reicher, 2000).

As seen above, there is several in society of influential social behavior that sometimes

fails to directly and easily provide justifications for behavior by simply focusing on the

characteristics of individual self or personal identity. Instead, such behavioral observations

are more concurrent with the concept that in some situations people’s collective selves and

social identities exceed the influence of the personal identity to direct perceptual, affective,

and behavioral responses in significant ways (Ellemers, Spears & Doosje, 2002).
Relational identity

The relational self encapsulates definitions of the self-based on bonds with significant

members, the quality of the relationships, interpersonal roles, and traits that an individual

shares with significant others (A. Aron, E. Aron, & Smollman, 1992). This view of the self-

place emphasis on interpersonal relatedness, intimacy and interdependence, and would

commonly be connected with a psychological orientation to belong (Baumeister & Leary,

1995).

Brewer and Gardner (1996), explain that the relational self is accomplished by

relating with significant others. The relational self includes those features of the self-concept

that are shared with relationship partners and characterizes the position and role of the person

within his/her significant relationships. The relational self is therefore assimilated with

personalized ties of attachment. Examples of these ties include parent-child relationships,

friendships, romantic relationships and also particular role relationships such as teacher-

student or clinician-client. This type of self-representation is coupled with the objective of

maintaining the relationship itself and protecting or enhancing the significant other and

therefore relies on the process of reflected appraisal.

Collective identity

The collective self, also known as the social or socio-centric self, refers to self-

definitions developed from being a member of groups or social categories. Such views of the

self goes hand-in-hand with the tendency to place emphasis on group association, in-group

norms, roles and status as defined by collectives (Kluckhohn & Strodtbeck, 1961).

Collective identification is primarily seen as a description of a member as defined by

a category. A specific group of individuals, who evidently possess a number of common

characteristics, share this identity. Collective identity is described as “a place in the social
world”. This shared category can be built on recognized traits, like race and gender, or on

attained positions, like profession or political orientation (Deaux, 1996; Sedikides & Brewer,

2001). These mutual categories do not require a member’s direct contact or interaction with

every one of the other members of the category. The member is psychologically part of the

categorical group.

Deaux (1996) proposed the defining of collective identity is based on a prejudiced

rationalization or acceptance when the individual’s identity is at risk. Specifically, even

though an individual is seen as belonging to a specific social category, that category only

develops into a collective identity if the individual recognizes that the category defines the

self to a certain extent.

Ashmore, Deaux and McLaughlin-Volpe (2004), find that collective identity has a

multidimensional nature. Diversely applied, collective identity indicates recognition by the

member to be part of a specific category (i.e., qualities are shared within a group). In

addition, it indicates a collection of cognitive values related to the category, for example,

stereotypic characteristics assumed to be common to all members, or ideas that direct group

objectives, expectations and actions.

Tajfel (1981) disagrees that collective identity furthermore includes “value and

emotional significance”. The emotional component of collective identity includes the way

one assesses a category and the supposed importance that other members connect to the

category and the emotional loyalty and intimacy one experiences toward other category

members. Collective identity also has behavioral repercussions. Individual behavior is

reflective of membership of the group, for example the use of a specific language with regard

to cultural belonging, or church attendance with regard to religious belonging, is indicative of

what is meant by collective identity.

 Poletta and Jasper (2001) oppose that although collective identities are conveyed by

certain components related to culture, such as name, vocal style, narrative, symbol, sign,

clothing or ritual, they are not conveyed by all cultural components. And contrary to

“interest”, collective identity excludes a logical formula for calculating options. Collective

identity is also associated with optimistic emotions for group members.

Erikson’s Theoretical Ideas about Identity

One of the earliest theoretical conceptualizations of identity was the notion of “ego

identity” which arose from the extension of psychoanalytic theory known as “ego

psychology” (Kroger & Marcia, 2011).

Erikson (1950) a neo-psychoanalytic, proposed a lifespan theory of psycho-social

development and personality. Subsequently, his central concept of ego identity has gained

much popularity in adolescent research and became a highly generative construct. Erickson

(1968), identity formation is one of the major development challenges that adolescent and

young adults must negotiate effectively to regulate and govern their lives. Erikson (1968)

specified two issues confronting the relate adolescent: “the choice of an occupation” and “the

formation of an ideology”. A failure that resolve these issue at this stage of adolescence leads

to a psychological crisis of late adolescence that Erikson described as “identity versus

identity diffusion” (or confusion, in Erikson’s later writings).

Based on Erikson’s ideas of confronting these psycho-social issues during the age of

adolescence, two criteria for the prese1nce of identity formation were proposed, namely

“exploration” (originally called “crisis”) and “commitment” (Marcia, 1966).

Marcia (1966) suggested that exploration involves an active consideration of

alternative possible identity elements in order to make a coherent and complete sense of self.
Meanwhile, he defined commitment as representing a decision to adhere to a specific set

goals, values, and belief, whether self-initiated or adapted from others.

Identity takes its roots from the birth of a person and follows a developmental course

throughout the lifespan. However, in Erikson’s (1950) view, although the identity formation

process starts during childhood, a new form of identity emerges during adolescence. This

newer identity formation is conceptualized as having an adaptive function, in which earlier

identifications of childhood are shifted, subordinated and altered in order to produce a new

identity configuration (Erikson, 1950, 1968).

Kroger and Marcia (2011) added that the psycho-social task of identity development

is fundamentally one of “integration”. They further argued that the achievement of ego

identity involves a synthesis of childhood identifications in the individual’s own experiences,

and that by doing so a reciprocity and a relationship is established between society and the

individual.

In addition, James E. Marcia, a psychologist, figured well on researches that dealt

with identity issues during adolescence. For him, identity is internal, self- constructed,

dynamic organization of drives, abilities, and individual history.

In Marcia’s system, there are four different statuses of identity, with each correspond

to a stage in the process of exploring and committing to an ideology:

1. Identity achievement (crisis leading to commitment). Those with identity

achievements are characterized by flexible strength and tendency to be thoughtful,

although not into introspective. These individuals function well under stress, have

sense of humor, are receptive to new ideas not ready for intimate relationships in

accordance to their own standard.

 2. Identity Diffusion (no commitment). They are those who are shy from commitment.

As carefree individual, they drift in the absence of focus. Oftentimes they are carefree,

thus, in the absence of intimate relationship they are unhappy.

3. Identity Moratorium (in crisis). They may not be necessary in good relationship but

express preference of intimacy. They are characteristically talkative, competitive,

lively, and anxious.

4. Identity Foreclosure (commitment without crisis). Characterized by rigid strength;

self-assurance, self-satisfied and strong sense of family ties. These are the people who

recognized the need for the law and order, as well as obedience to a leader. They can

be dogmatic when their ideas are put to test.

Identity affords the individual to know himself better, prepare for his future and

realize his dreams and ambitions. The perception of the self includes how others see us, and

the importance they attach to the values and accomplishments.

In defining identity, Erickson also considered three domains to be paramount

importance: sexuality as expressed in an adult gender role, occupation, and ideology or

religious and political beliefs (Acero, Javier, and Castro, 2011).

Building on the identity status model, and adopting a constructivist

epistemological approach where people are viewed as active agents who develop their

own identities. Berzonsky’s (1989a) theory of identity styles focuses on the cognitive

processes that individuals use to formulate a sense of who they are and the reality within

which they live. Berzonsky (1989a) described these processes as giving rise to three

identity styles, labelled as informational, normative and diffuse-avoidant.

According to Berzonsky (1988, 1989a), people with an Informational Style actively

and deliberately seek out, elaborate and evaluate self-relevant information, whereas those
with a Normative Style conform to the normative expectations held by significant others and

reference groups, and those with a Diffuse-Avoidant style tend to procrastinate or avoid

confronting identity -related issues.

Perspectives on Identity Orientations

Literature on identity comes mainly from two lines of research; cross-cultural identity

research (e.g. Triandis, 1989; Markus & Kitayama, 1991) and the social identity theory

(Tajfel, 1978; Tajfel & Turner, 1979). Both of them contain valuable information on defining

identity orientation in this study and will therefore be discussed. In both lines of research a

distinction is made between a personal or individuated self (aspects of the self that are

distinct and differentiate the self from others) and a collective self (aspects of the self that

reflect assimilation to others or significant social groups). In both lines of research identity

resides within the individual. Different identity orientations coexist within each individual

and they can be activated, but the difference lies in how a certain identity is activated.

The social identity theory stated that people tend to organize social information by

categorizing individuals into groups. By comparison, social categorizations are given

meaning and the relative worth of groups as well as individuals is assessed. By relating

information about social groups to the self, people identify with a certain group (Tajfel, 1978;

Tajfel and Turner, 1979).They perceive themselves to be a representative of a group and by

doing so, they adopt a social identity, instead of a personal identity (Hogg and Terry, 2000).

According to the social identity approach, membership in social groups affects the

self-concept (Van Knippenberg, 2000) by internalizing the group membership as a part of

who you are‟ (Ashforth and Mael, 1989). An important implication of defining the self in

terms of the collective instead of the individual, is that the needs, goals and expected
outcomes which motivate behavior to become on behalf of the collective instead of the

individual self (Ellemers, de Gilder & Haslam (2004).

Tajfel (1972) introduced the concept of social identity as the individuals knowledge

that he or she belongs to a certain group together with some emotional and value significance

to him or her of the group membership‟. Adopting a social identity is motivated by self

enhancement, the need to evaluate your identity positively. In the social identity approach the

term „salience‟ is used to indicate the activation of a certain identity. Identity salience is

highly context defendant, making the social context a central feature in the social identity

approach (Hogg & Terry, 2000).

A social identity salience analysis specifies the processes that dictate whether people

define themselves in terms of personal or social identity, and when a social identity is salient,

which particular group membership serves to guide behavior (Haslam, Powell and Turner,

2000).

In this perspective, identity salience changes across situations, it is context defendant.

In cross-cultural psychology people have a certain identity orientation which is more or less

stable across situations. In this perspective culture determines the dominant identity

orientation. The way the self is construed depends on cultural values, belief systems and

socialization (Markus and Kitayama, 1991; Trafimow, Triandis and Goto, 1991). An often

used example in characterizing cultural differences in relation to how

individuals define themselves and their relationships with others is that people in western

cultures generally define themselves as individuals and in eastern cultures people primarily

define themselves in terms of a collective.

Vos, Van der Zee and Buunk (2009) stated that another view on identity

orientations can be distinguished. As in the cross-cultural perspective, they state that

differences in identity orientation are relatively stable over time and in different situations.

However, they are not determined by culture. Following recent studies on social personality

there are differences within cultures with respect to how the self is construed (Cross, Bacon

&Morris, 2000). This means that even within collective cultures there may be groups or

individuals who are more typically individualistic, and the other way around.

Vos, Van der Zee and Buunk (2009) and Vos and Van der Zee (2009) added that

different identity orientations represent individual differences. In this view different identity

orientations can still coexist within each individual, but they state that each individual may

also have a preference for a certain identity orientation, a dominant identity orientation that

guides behavior. This means that people who differ on their dominant identity orientation

respond differently in the same context.

An Extended Model of Identity Orientation

Both the social identity approach and the cross-cultural perspective in identity state

that there are two levels of self-representation. They distinguish a personal and a social self.

More recent work on identity orientation adds a third level of identity.

Brewer and Gardner (1996) present a classification of identification in which the link

between three levels of individuals' identity and their relations with others is described. They

state that there are two levels of social self: a relational and a collective self. The relational

self is derived from interpersonal relationships; connections and role relationships with

significant others. A relational identity can also be derived from membership in small face-to-

face groups functioning as networks for these dyadic relationships. The collective self is

derived from membership of a larger, more impersonal collective. It is comparable to the

social self in the social identity approach in which the individual comes to perceive himself
as interchangeable with other group members. So both identity orientations are social

extensions of the self but differ on the level of inclusiveness.

In adding the relational identity orientation on extended model includes three levels of

self-representation, a personal, a relational and a collective identity orientation. The

fundamental difference between these three orientations is how a person defines the self,

which is related to specific social motivations, types of significant self-knowledge and

sources of self-worth (Brewer & Gardner, 1996).

Defining the self as a unique individual reflects a personal identity orientation. For

this person the primary motivation is to enhance his own wellbeing, the most

relevant types of self-knowledge are his own personal traits and characteristics and for self-

evaluation he compares himself with other individuals. Defining the self in terms of his role

in relation to significant others reflects a relational identity orientation. He will be motivated

to enhance his relationship partners’ well-being, and the role standard is used for self-

evaluation. Finally, defining the self as a member of a social group reflects a collective

identity orientation. The motivation for a person with a collective identity orientation is to

ensure the wellbeing of the group. Group prototypes are used to characterize the self and

intergroup comparison is used for self-evaluation (Brewer & Gardner, 1996).

 Chapter III

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

This chapter presents the methodology to be used in carrying out the study. It includes

the locale of the study, respondents, sampling technique, research instrument, and statistical

analysis employed in the study.

Research Design

The descriptive research design will be used in the conduct of the study, to ascertain

the different Aspects of Identity among lesbian, gay and straight adolescents’ students of

Cagayan State University- Carig Campus.

Moreover, the descriptive method is used to determine the extent to which different

variables are related to each other in the population of interest.

Locale of the Study

This study will be conducted at Cagayan State University- Carig Campus.

Respondents and Sampling Technique

The respondents will be all lesbians, gays, and straight adolescents’ students of

Cagayan State University- Carig Campus. Selective purpose sampling technique will be used

in the conduct of the study. This sampling technique is used in selecting individuals as

respondents according to the purpose of the study.

Research Instrument
 In this study, the researchers will used the prepared Aspect of Identity Questionnaire

IV (AIQ- IV) as a major tool in gathering the data from the respondents. The purpose of the

AIQ-IV is used to measure of the relative importance people place on various identities when

constructing their self-definitions. The questionnaire consists of 45 items and the items are

allocated to an identity orientation as follows the four subscales:

1. Personal identity orientation (10 items) is measures the importance of goals, values,

feelings and internal mental life (e.g., “My personal values and moral standards” and

“My self-knowledge, my ideas about what kind of person I really am”).

2. Relational identity orientation (10 items) is measures the importance of social

relationships (e.g., “Being a good friend to those I really care about” and “Having

close bonds with other people”).

3. Social identity orientation (7 items) is measures the importance of external aspects

of the self (e.g., “My reputation, what others think of me,” and “My physical

appearance: my height, my weight, and the shape of my body”).

4. Collective identity orientation (8 items) is measures the importance of membership

in groups and social categories (e.g., “Being a part of the many generations of my

family” and “My sex, being a male or a female”).

There are ten items, called special items, included in the questionnaire, that are not scored on

scales. The respondents rate each item on a five-point Likert scale ranging from “Not

important to my sense of who I am” (1) to “Extremely important to my sense of who I am”

(5). The researchers averaged the scores across the items within each subscale. Regarding the

reliability for the AIQ-IV, it has Cronbach alpha ranged from 0.80 to 0.83 for the personal

identity orientation scale, 0.82 to 0.91 for the relational identity orientation scale, 0.80 to 0.82

for the social identity orientation scale and 0.67 to 0.77 for the collective identity orientation

scale. According to Antonia and Marcia (2000), reliability coefficients between 0.60 and 0.80
are acceptable. The widely accepted social science cut-off is that alpha should be 0.70 or

higher for a set of items to be considered acceptable (Nunnally & Bernstein, 1994).

Data Gathering Procedure

Before the researchers float the questionnaires, they prepared a letter seeking for the

approval of the Chief Executive Officer of the Cagayan State University- Carig Campus and

concern authorities to administer the questionnaires to the identified respondents. The

researchers personally distribute the questionnaire to the respondents. To ensure the reliable

and valid responses, the researchers made necessary exploration to the respondent’s

clarification. They collected the questionnaires after the respondents after the respondents had

been able to complete it. The data gathered from respondents will be collected, analyzed and

interpreted.

Statistical Analysis

The following were statistical tools were used to analyze the data:

1. Frequency and Percentage

This was used to determine the responds profile specifically age and gender.

2. Chi-square

This was used to determine if there is difference on the view of the respondents about

the aspect of identity according to their identity orientation.

3. Cronbach’s Coefficient alpha

This was used to measure the reliability or internal consistency of the composite

score.