Identity is a key concept in practically all fields of the humanities and social sciences. However, different approaches diverge dramatically in their conceptualization of identity, which makes mutual dialogue and integration markedly challenging. In this article, I present two key approaches to identity—Social Identity Theory (SIT) and Dialogical Self Theory (DST)—and discuss the possibilities of combining them. While the two theories stem from different subfields of psychology, I argue that their key concepts can be meaningfully mapped onto one another. In particular, I argue that the I-positions and we-positions of DST can be understood as the personal and social identities of SIT, respectively. Combining DST and SIT terminology in this way helps to address the blind spots of both theories. What SIT adds to DST is a detailed outline of the causes and consequences of we-position activation. What DST adds to SIT, in turn, is a more elaborate conceptualization of intrapersonal identity work. While the integrated approach I propose here is useful for the study of identity in general, I argue that it is particularly beneficial for the psychology of religion. Unlike mainstream psychologists, psychologists of religion have been especially interested in investigating the identities of people long since dead. Biblical scholars in particular have employed SIT in their investigations. In this article, I suggest that a dialogical (or more broadly narrative) conceptualization of identity is more readily applicable to the textual sources used by biblical scholars than the more mainstream SIT approach.
Teemu Pauha (Tue,) studied this question.