A New Identity for Identity Research

I have been following the identity literature for more than 10 years and have been an active contributor to this literature since 1998. During the years that I have followed and contributed to the identity literature, I have had the opportunity to observe and take note of the general areas and themes that have been emphasized in this literature as well as important areas that have been neglected. In this editorial essay, I comment on some of the areas in which identity research has been lacking and on ways to expand identity research by focusing on these areas. I restrict my analysis to the literature rooted in Eriksonian and neo-Eriksonian theory because that is the area with which I am most familiar. I touch on a number of important areas, including methodological shortsightedness, reliance on a narrow and limiting theoretical approach, and lack of attention to important applied and social policy issues. However, I deliberately do not touch on another potentially problematic area in identity research—measurement issues—in this essay. I believe that measurement issues are secondary to theoretical issues, more broadly based research design issues, and applicability issues—and therefore that measurement issues should be raised only after these more important issues have been addressed. The measures that are selected for use in any given study are guided by the theoretical approach and research questions on which the study is based. As the identity literature expands to cover new ground, measures will be adapted or created to address the specific identity dimensions, research objectives, and populations being examined.