-
Title
-
Intersectionality and the Development of Self and Identity
-
Author
-
Azmitia, Margarita
-
Thomas, Virginia
-
Research Area
-
Development
-
Topic
-
Self and Identity Development
-
Abstract
-
Intersectionality is a key theoretical, empirical, and applied construct in the social sciences and the humanities. In this essay, we review the origins of the construct and the foundational theory and research that served to cement its importance in these fields. We then present a brief overview of how intersectionality guides current theory, research, and social policy in education, feminist studies, politics, psychology, and sociology, concluding with a discussion of the key issues that need to be addressed for this construct to deliver in its promise to strengthen theory, research, and practice in the social sciences.
-
Related Essays
-
Neighborhoods and Cognitive Development (Psychology), Jondou Chen and Jeanne Brooks‐Gunn
-
The Inherence Heuristic: Generating Everyday Explanations (Psychology), Andrei Cimpian
-
Youth Entrepreneurship (Psychology), William Damon et al.
-
Resilience (Psychology), Erica D. Diminich and George A. Bonanno
-
Setting One's Mind on Action: Planning Out Goal Striving in Advance (Psychology), Peter M. Gollwitzer
-
Moral Identity (Psychology), Sam A. Hardy and Gustavo Carlo
-
Regulatory Focus Theory (Psychology), E. Tory Higgins
-
Cultural Neuroscience: Connecting Culture, Brain, and Genes (Psychology), Shinobu Kitayama and Sarah Huff
-
Media and the development of Identity (Psychology), Adriana M. Manago
-
Culture as Situated Cognition (Psychology), Daphna Oyserman
-
Born This Way: Thinking Sociologically about Essentialism (Sociology), Kristen Schilt
-
Temporal Identity Integration as a Core Developmental Process (Psychology), Moin Syed and Lauren L. Mitchell
-
Identifier
-
etrds0193
-
extracted text
-
Intersectionality and the
Development of Self and Identity
MARGARITA AZMITIA and VIRGINIA THOMAS
Abstract
Intersectionality is a key theoretical, empirical, and applied construct in the social
sciences and the humanities. In this essay, we review the origins of the construct
and the foundational theory and research that served to cement its importance in
these fields. We then present a brief overview of how intersectionality guides current
theory, research, and social policy in education, feminist studies, politics, psychology, and sociology, concluding with a discussion of the key issues that need to be
addressed for this construct to deliver in its promise to strengthen theory, research,
and practice in the social sciences.
INTRODUCTION
Theory and research on intersectionality addresses differences in social
locations as they create inequalities in power and resources in historical
and cultural contexts. Gender, race, class, sexuality, physical ableness, and
other dimensions of identity situate some individuals as more powerful
than others and consequently, perpetuate differential access to resources
and privileges (Azmitia, Syed, & Radmacher, 2008; Cole, 2009; Giles, 2013;
McCall, 2005; Stewart & McDermott, 2004). Although there is no scientific
reason for why people’s gender, skin color, social class, or religion affords
them special power and privileges, these cultural and social locations of
power and privilege are reproduced across generations through enculturation and socialization (Bordieu, 1989; Giles, 2013). An intersectional lens
challenges scholars to rethink dichotomies such as gender that essentialize
differences, power, and privilege (Stewart & McDermott, 2004), and commit
them to ask “The other question”—how variations in one domain of identity,
for example, gender, become more complex when another identity domain,
for example, race/ethnicity, is introduced into the theoretical and empirical
discussion (Davis, 2008).
Emerging Trends in the Social and Behavioral Sciences. Edited by Robert Scott and Stephen Kosslyn.
© 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. ISBN 978-1-118-90077-2.
1
2
EMERGING TRENDS IN THE SOCIAL AND BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES
FOUNDATIONAL RESEARCH
Intersectionality emerged from feminist and critical race theory and became
a key contribution to the humanities and the social sciences, particularly in
studies of identity and power. The term was coined by Kimberlé Crenshaw
(1991), a legal scholar, who proposed that theory, research, and practice
consider both gender and race in women of color’s, and in particular,
Black women’s struggles and experiences (Davis, 2008). Crenshaw’s (1991)
seminal piece on intersectionality built on the Combahee River Collective’s
(1995) manifesto written by a group of African-American feminists in which
they argued that race, class, gender, and sexual orientation are inseparable,
nonadditive, nonhierarchical dimensions of oppression. Feminist and critical
race scholars’ writings have provided a strong interdisciplinary foundation
for intersectionality theory and research. For example philosopher Butler’s
(1990) Gender Trouble, addressed the intersections of gender, sexuality, class,
and ethnicity in women’s lives, sociologists’ Hill Collins and Anderson’s
(1998) Race, class, and gender: An Anthology, social psychologists’ Stewart
and Cole (2007) and Shield’s (2008) work discussed the theoretical and
methodological challenges of viewing gender, sexual orientation, and power
through an intersectional lens, Hurtado and Cervantes’s (2009) provided
an overview of Latina feminist psychology, and Katsiaficas, Futch, Fine,
and Sirin’s (2011) discussed how pluralist methods can increase our understanding of how youth develop hyphenated selves (e.g., Muslim American)
in the context of global conflicts. Foreshadowing the increased interest in
intersectionality in psychology, in an oft-cited overview of gender theory
and research, Stewart and McDermot (2004) hailed it as one of the most
promising constructs for integrating individual, social, and cultural aspects
of gender and sexuality.
CUTTING-EDGE RESEARCH
Intersectionality has been key to theory, research, and current practice in
multicultural education; for example, Gibson (1982), Waters (1996), and Way,
Santos, Niwa, and Kim-Gervey (2008) highlighted the intersections of gender, ethnicity, social class, and immigration in the educational trajectories
and peer hierarchies of adolescents in St. Croix (Gibson) and New York City
(Waters and Way et al.), and Azmitia et al. (2008), analyzed these intersections in the surveys and narratives of young adults transitioning to college.
More recently, in one of the few quantitative, large-scale studies addressing
intersectionality, Cobarrubias (2011) used census data to identify places in
the educational pipeline where oppression and privilege contribute to gender and citizenship variations in educational outcomes and persistence.
Intersectionality and the Development of Self and Identity
3
In our own research, an intersectional analytic lens on adolescents’ transition to college has also revealed the nuances of gender, ethnicity, and social
class as they contour students’ identity development and educational pathways (see also Anthias, 2013; Ostrove, Stewart, & Curtin, 2011; Way et al.,
2008). To our surprise, for example, white working class women’s identity
narratives revealed their perception that they were more disadvantaged in
college and society than working class women of color because as a result
of the color of their skin, they said, they were not eligible for financial support and scholarships designated for students from historically oppressed
groups. Working class white women and men also viewed students of color
as more advantaged because they could form ethnicity-oriented organizations without being labeled as white supremacists or racists. Nevertheless,
as they moved through college, regardless of their gender, ethnicity, or class,
most students came to understand how their social locations afforded them
privilege or challenge, and how the egalitarian ideals of the American Dream
are more myth than reality (Azmitia et al., 2008; Radmacher & Azmitia, 2013;
Thomas & Azmitia, 2014, see also Lott & Bullock, 2007).
KEY ISSUES FOR FUTURE RESEARCH
Despite its promise and prominence, intersectionality is a concept that
everyone seems to acknowledge, and yet, to date has no agreed-upon definition (Davis, 2008; Nash, 2010, Phoenix & Pattynama, 2006). Davis (2008)
suggested that its definitional ambiguity and vagueness has paradoxically
cemented its centrality in the social sciences and humanities. As with other
powerful metaphors, such as Gilligan’s (1982) view that men and women
are socialized “in a different voice” and Deaux and Perkins’ (2001) conceptualization of the situational salience of social identities as a “kaleidoscope,”
intersectionality resonates with contemporary views of self and identity
and perhaps for this reason, scholars have been willing to overlook the fact
that theories of intersectionality are not falsifiable (Davis, 2008). To date,
empirical evidence for the construct has typically come from case studies or
small-scale studies (but see Covarrubias, 2011), and perhaps for this reason
and other conceptual and methodological challenges, intersectionality has
yet to get more traction in mainstream psychological theories (Cole, 2009;
Syed, 2010). Nevertheless, theory and research on self and identity, and more
broadly, culture and diversity, that considers only one domain of difference,
is currently viewed as outdated because it ignores the reality that people
simultaneously inhabit many categories of difference.
Intersectionality has been at the center of heated theoretical and empirical debates, with some wondering whether, given that it can generate endless lists of differences, the concept can be used productively in theory and
4
EMERGING TRENDS IN THE SOCIAL AND BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES
research (Cole, 2009, Davis, 2008; McCall, 2005; Nash, 2010). Some scholars
have also wondered whether it is possible to understand how each domain
of difference operates within hierarchies of power given that if one disaggregates them, one is violating the key assumption of intersectionality, that these
domains of identity are intextricably intertwined (Hancock, 2007; McCall,
2005).
Many recent publications in the humanities and social sciences have
addressed theoretical and methodological refinements that can salvage
the concept and help scholars advance theory and research. Levine-Rasky
(2011), for example, proposed a conceptual model to explain how the context
influences the situational salience of particular identity domains but still
leaves active other intersecting identity domains, even if individuals are
not immediately aware of them. Although her model provides a possible
blueprint for research that addresses the problem of endless lists of intersecting identities, it begs the question about whether these intersections
exist in the minds and everyday lives of children, adolescents, and adults
or whether they are simply fodder for academic and political debates—that
is, do ordinary folks articulate their multiple identities as intersecting in
the structural and more local contexts of their lives? Moreover, does an
intersectional approach to theory, research, and practice increase our ability
to predict developmental, educational, and more broadly, life trajectories,
and outcomes?
Feminist scholars Grabe and Else-Quest (2012) emphasize intersectionality’s importance in contributing to social change, and suggest the term
transnational intersectionality, which shifts the focus from individual differences onto the structural roots of inequality, namely, the social, economic,
and political forces that perpetuate interlocking systems of discrimination.
In an increasingly globalized world, research findings from a macro-level
perspective that involves multiple communities and nations not only
enhances our understanding of how, for example, gender oppression varies
depending on its intersection with particular cultural contexts, but can also
serve local social movements that draw on these data to create social change.
Bowleg (2008), Cobarrubias (2011), Cole (2009), Hancock (2007), and Syed
(2010) have also proposed conceptual and methodological solutions that may
advance intersectionality theory and research beyond qualitative case studies
to potentially more generalizable, large-scale investigations. Cole (2009), for
example, proposed three useful questions to guide psychological research on
intersectionality:
1. Who is included within a social category? This question focuses
attention on within-group variability and diversity, which has often
been treated as error variance obscuring between group differences, as
Intersectionality and the Development of Self and Identity
5
important in its own right. Cole suggests that attention to within-group
differences enriches theory and research by including groups that
have not received much attention, such as children, adolescents, and
adults who experience multiple categories of subordination and are
potentially at risk for adverse developmental outcomes.
2. What role does inequality play? Cultural, historical, and social inequalities and their associated structural differences in access to power and
resources profoundly affect individuals’ lives. White and Black working class men and women have long viewed each other with distrust
and animosity concerning access to jobs and interracial romantic relationships (Fine, Weiss, Addelston, & Marursza, 1997), and immigrant
Latinos (Nelson & Hiemstra, 2008; Schwartz, Montgomery, & Briones,
2006) and Asian Americans (Kitano & Nakaoka, 2000; Ngo & Lee, 2007)
have historically experienced discrimination in education and employment as a function of country of origin, receiving community, citizenship, and phenotypic characteristics.
3. Where are the similarities? Historically, intersectionality has focused
attention on differences within and between social categories. Cole suggests that asking whether there are any similarities in experiences that
cut across categories may be essential for moving beyond individual
experiences to considering how institutions and cultures contextualize
individuals’ experiences to create the much-needed common ground so
subordinated groups can come together for social change. Cole (2009)
supports her proposal with theory and research on disability, welfare
reform, and the heterosexual transmission of HIV. In our own research,
we have analyzed the experiences of first- and non-first generation of
college students transitioning to college to identify similarities in how
gender, race, and social class identities predict their adjustment over
their first year of college and in the class identity development narratives of upper class and working class college sophomores (Thomas &
Azmitia, 2014).
From the US suffragist movement that empowered Sojourner Truth to
spontaneously deliver her “Ain’t I a woman?” speech to the Civil, Women,
and Gay rights movements to the recent Occupy Movement in the United
States and the revolutions in Egypt, other African nations, and Asia, diverse
people have come together to work for social change. While applauding
Cole’s proposals for including intersectionality in psychological theory
and research, Syed (2010) raises methodological concerns about Cole’s
conceptualization of intersectionality as statistical interactions, an approach
also taken by Waters, 1996), because it deemphasizes the important role of
6
EMERGING TRENDS IN THE SOCIAL AND BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES
qualitative approaches to intersectionality and is likely to alienate the feminist and critical race theorists that carried out the foundational theory and
research on intersectionality. While “mixed methods” has become another
buzzword with many meanings in psychology and more broadly, the social
sciences, we concur with Syed’s (2010) and Hancock’s (2007) proposals for
an integrative, pluralist theoretical approach to intersectionality, its research
paradigms, and social policies designed to improve the everyday lives of
children, adolescents, and adults.
REFERENCES
Anthias, F. (2013). Hierarchies of social location, class, and intersectionality: Towards
a translocational frame. International Sociology, 28(1), 121–138.
Azmitia, M., Syed, M., & Radmacher, K. (2008). On the intersection of personal and
social identities: Introduction and evidence from a longitudinal study of emerging
adults. In M. Azmitia, M. Syed & K. Radmacher (Eds.) New directions for child and
adolescent development: The intersections of personal and social identities (Vol. 120, pp.
1–16). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Bordieu, P. (1989). Social space and symbolic power. Sociological Theory, 7(1), 14–25.
Bowleg, L. (2008). When black + lesbian + woman ≠ Black lesbian woman:
The methodological challenges of qualitative and quantitative intersectionality
research. Sex Roles, 59, 319–325.
Butler, J. (1990). Gender trouble: Feminism and the subversion of identity. New York, NY:
Routledge.
Cobarrubias, A. (2011). Quantitative intersectionality: A critical race analysis of the
Chicana/o educational pipeline. Journal of Latinos in Education, 10(2), 86–105.
Cole, E. R. (2009). Intersectionality and research in psychology. American Psychologist,
64(3), 170–180.
Combahee River Collective (1995). Combahee river collective statement. In B.
Guy-Sheftall (Ed.), Words of fire: An anthology of African American feminist thought
(pp. 232–240). New York, NY: New Press. (Original paper published in 1977).
Crenshaw, K. W. (1991). Mapping the margins: Intersectionality, identity politics, and
violence against women of color. Stanford Law Review, 43(6), 1241–1279.
Davis, K. (2008). Intersectionality as buzzword: A sociology of science perspective
on what makes feminist theory successful. Feminist Theory, 9(1), 67–85.
Deaux, K., & Perkins, T. S. (2001). The kaleidoscopic self. In C. Sedikides & M. B.
Brewer (Eds.), Individual self, relational self, collective self (pp. 299–313).
Fine, M., Weis, L., Addleston, J., & Marusza, J. (1997). (In) secure times: Constructing
White working-class masculinities in the late 20th century. Gender & Society, 11,
52–68.
Gibson, M. A. (1982). Reputation and respectability: How competing systems affect
students’ performance in school. Anthopology and Education Quarterly, 13(1), 3–28.
Giles, H. (January 19, 2013). Intersectionality, or, all the ways that we hurt matter. Retrieved from http://tenhundredwordsofscience.tumblr.com (filed under
Politics).
Intersectionality and the Development of Self and Identity
7
Gilligan, C. (1982). In a different voice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Grabe, S., & Else-Quest, N. M. (2012). Psychology of Women Quarterly, 36(2), 158–161.
Hancock, A.-M. (2007). When multiplication doesn’t equal quick addition: Examining intersectionality as a research paradigm. Perspectives on Politics, 5(1), 63–79.
Hill Collins, P., & Anderson, M. (1998). Race, class, and gender: An anthology. Belmont,
CA: Wardsworth Publishing Company.
Hurtado, A., & Cervantez, K. (2009). A view from within and from without: The
development of Latina feminist psychology. In F. A. Villarruel, G. Carlo, J. M. Grau,
M. Azmitia, N. J. Cabrera & T. J. Chahin (Eds.), Handbook of U. S. Latino psychology:
Developmental and community perspectives (pp. 171–190). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Katsiaficas, D., Futch, V. A., Fine, M., & Sirin, S. R. (2011). Everyday hyphens: Exploring youth identities with methodological and analytical pluralism. Qualitative
Research in Psychology, 8(2), 120–139.
Kitano, H. H., & Nakaoka, S. (2000). Asian Americans in the twentiesth century.
Journal of Human Behavior in the Social Environment, 3(3–4), 7–17.
Levine-Rasky, C. (2011). Intersectional theory applied to whiteness and middleclassness. Social Identities: Journal for the Study of Race, Nation, and Culture, 17(2),
239–253.
Lott, B., & Bullock, H. E. (2007). Psychology and economic injustice: Personal, professional,
and political intersections. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
McCall, L. (2005). The complexities of intersectionality. Signs: Journal of Women in
Culture and Society, 30(3), 1771–1800.
Nash, C. J. (2010). Trans geographies, embodiment and experience. Gender, Place, and
Culture, 17(5), 579–595.
Nelson, L., & Hiemstra, N. (2008). Latino immigrants and the renegotiation of place
and belonging in small town America. Social and Cultural Geography, 9(3), 319–342.
Ngo, B., & Lee, S. J. (2007). Complicating the image of model minority success: A
review of Southeast Asian American education. Review of Educational Research,
77(4), 415–453.
Ostrove, J. M., Stewart, A. J., & Curtin, N. L. (2011). Social class and belonging: Implications for graduate students’ career aspirations. The Journal of Higher Education,
82(6), 748–774.
Phoenix, A., & Pattynama, P. (2006). Editorial: Intersectionality. European Journal of
Women’s Studies, 13(3), 187–192.
Radmacher, K., & Azmitia, M. (2013). Unmasking class: How upwardly mobile poor
and working class emerging adults negotiate an invisible identity. Emerging Adulthood, 1(4), 314–329.
Shields, S. (2008). Gender: An intersectional perspective. Sex Roles, 59, 301–311.
Schwartz, S. J., Montgomery, M. J., & Briones, E. (2006). The role of identity in acculturation among immigrant people: Theoretical propositions, empirical questions,
and applied recommendations. Human Development, 49(1), 1–30.
Stewart, A. J., & Cole, E. R. (2007). Narratives and numbers: Feminist multiple methods research. In S. N. Hesse-Biber (Ed.), Handbook of feminist research: Theory and
praxis (pp. 327–344). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
8
EMERGING TRENDS IN THE SOCIAL AND BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES
Stewart, A. J., & McDermott, C. (2004). Gender in psychology. Annual Review of Psychology, 55, 519–544.
Syed, M. (2010). Disciplinarity and methodology in intersectionality theory and
research. American Psychologist, 65(1), 61–62.
Thomas, V. D., & Azmitia, M. (2014). Does class matter? The centrality and meaning
of social class identity in emerging adulthood. Identity, 14(3), 195–213.
Waters, M. C. (1996). The intersection of gender, race, and ethnicity in identity development in Caribbean teens. In B. J. Leadbetter & N. Way (Eds.), Urban girls: Resisting stereotypes, creating identities (pp. 65–81). New York, NY: NYU Press.
Way, N., Santos, C., Niwa, E. Y., & Kim-Gervey, C. (2008). To be or not to be: An exploration of ethnic/racial identity development in contex. In M. Azmitia, M. Syed &
K. Radmacher (Eds.), The intersections of personal and social identities: New directions
for child and adolescent development (pp. 61–78). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
MARGARITA AZMITIA SHORT BIOGRAPHY
Margarita Azmitia is a professor of psychology at the University of California at Santa Cruz. Her research focuses on the intersection of gender,
ethnicity/race, and social class in the educational trajectories, identity development, and mental health of adolescents and young adults. She is especially
interested in how family, friends, school, social media, and immigration contour these trajectories during the transitions to middle school, college, and
work. She can be reached at azmitia@ucsc.edu.
VIRGINIA THOMAS SHORT BIOGRAPHY
Virginia Thomas is a doctoral student at the University of California, Santa
Cruz who researches identity development during the transitions of adolescence and emerging adulthood. Her research has focused on the meaning and
centrality of social class identity, and her current research explores the effects
of solitude and social media for identity development and the factors that
influence the capacity to be alone. She can be reached at vdthomas@ucsc.edu.
RELATED ESSAYS
Neighborhoods and Cognitive Development (Psychology), Jondou Chen and
Jeanne Brooks-Gunn
The Inherence Heuristic: Generating Everyday Explanations (Psychology),
Andrei Cimpian
Youth Entrepreneurship (Psychology), William Damon et al.
Resilience (Psychology), Erica D. Diminich and George A. Bonanno
Setting One’s Mind on Action: Planning Out Goal Striving in Advance
(Psychology), Peter M. Gollwitzer
Intersectionality and the Development of Self and Identity
9
Moral Identity (Psychology), Sam A. Hardy and Gustavo Carlo
Regulatory Focus Theory (Psychology), E. Tory Higgins
Cultural Neuroscience: Connecting Culture, Brain, and Genes (Psychology),
Shinobu Kitayama and Sarah Huff
Media and the development of Identity (Psychology), Adriana M. Manago
Culture as Situated Cognition (Psychology), Daphna Oyserman
Born This Way: Thinking Sociologically about Essentialism (Sociology),
Kristen Schilt
Temporal Identity Integration as a Core Developmental Process (Psychology),
Moin Syed and Lauren L. Mitchell
-
Intersectionality and the
Development of Self and Identity
MARGARITA AZMITIA and VIRGINIA THOMAS
Abstract
Intersectionality is a key theoretical, empirical, and applied construct in the social
sciences and the humanities. In this essay, we review the origins of the construct
and the foundational theory and research that served to cement its importance in
these fields. We then present a brief overview of how intersectionality guides current
theory, research, and social policy in education, feminist studies, politics, psychology, and sociology, concluding with a discussion of the key issues that need to be
addressed for this construct to deliver in its promise to strengthen theory, research,
and practice in the social sciences.
INTRODUCTION
Theory and research on intersectionality addresses differences in social
locations as they create inequalities in power and resources in historical
and cultural contexts. Gender, race, class, sexuality, physical ableness, and
other dimensions of identity situate some individuals as more powerful
than others and consequently, perpetuate differential access to resources
and privileges (Azmitia, Syed, & Radmacher, 2008; Cole, 2009; Giles, 2013;
McCall, 2005; Stewart & McDermott, 2004). Although there is no scientific
reason for why people’s gender, skin color, social class, or religion affords
them special power and privileges, these cultural and social locations of
power and privilege are reproduced across generations through enculturation and socialization (Bordieu, 1989; Giles, 2013). An intersectional lens
challenges scholars to rethink dichotomies such as gender that essentialize
differences, power, and privilege (Stewart & McDermott, 2004), and commit
them to ask “The other question”—how variations in one domain of identity,
for example, gender, become more complex when another identity domain,
for example, race/ethnicity, is introduced into the theoretical and empirical
discussion (Davis, 2008).
Emerging Trends in the Social and Behavioral Sciences. Edited by Robert Scott and Stephen Kosslyn.
© 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. ISBN 978-1-118-90077-2.
1
2
EMERGING TRENDS IN THE SOCIAL AND BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES
FOUNDATIONAL RESEARCH
Intersectionality emerged from feminist and critical race theory and became
a key contribution to the humanities and the social sciences, particularly in
studies of identity and power. The term was coined by Kimberlé Crenshaw
(1991), a legal scholar, who proposed that theory, research, and practice
consider both gender and race in women of color’s, and in particular,
Black women’s struggles and experiences (Davis, 2008). Crenshaw’s (1991)
seminal piece on intersectionality built on the Combahee River Collective’s
(1995) manifesto written by a group of African-American feminists in which
they argued that race, class, gender, and sexual orientation are inseparable,
nonadditive, nonhierarchical dimensions of oppression. Feminist and critical
race scholars’ writings have provided a strong interdisciplinary foundation
for intersectionality theory and research. For example philosopher Butler’s
(1990) Gender Trouble, addressed the intersections of gender, sexuality, class,
and ethnicity in women’s lives, sociologists’ Hill Collins and Anderson’s
(1998) Race, class, and gender: An Anthology, social psychologists’ Stewart
and Cole (2007) and Shield’s (2008) work discussed the theoretical and
methodological challenges of viewing gender, sexual orientation, and power
through an intersectional lens, Hurtado and Cervantes’s (2009) provided
an overview of Latina feminist psychology, and Katsiaficas, Futch, Fine,
and Sirin’s (2011) discussed how pluralist methods can increase our understanding of how youth develop hyphenated selves (e.g., Muslim American)
in the context of global conflicts. Foreshadowing the increased interest in
intersectionality in psychology, in an oft-cited overview of gender theory
and research, Stewart and McDermot (2004) hailed it as one of the most
promising constructs for integrating individual, social, and cultural aspects
of gender and sexuality.
CUTTING-EDGE RESEARCH
Intersectionality has been key to theory, research, and current practice in
multicultural education; for example, Gibson (1982), Waters (1996), and Way,
Santos, Niwa, and Kim-Gervey (2008) highlighted the intersections of gender, ethnicity, social class, and immigration in the educational trajectories
and peer hierarchies of adolescents in St. Croix (Gibson) and New York City
(Waters and Way et al.), and Azmitia et al. (2008), analyzed these intersections in the surveys and narratives of young adults transitioning to college.
More recently, in one of the few quantitative, large-scale studies addressing
intersectionality, Cobarrubias (2011) used census data to identify places in
the educational pipeline where oppression and privilege contribute to gender and citizenship variations in educational outcomes and persistence.
Intersectionality and the Development of Self and Identity
3
In our own research, an intersectional analytic lens on adolescents’ transition to college has also revealed the nuances of gender, ethnicity, and social
class as they contour students’ identity development and educational pathways (see also Anthias, 2013; Ostrove, Stewart, & Curtin, 2011; Way et al.,
2008). To our surprise, for example, white working class women’s identity
narratives revealed their perception that they were more disadvantaged in
college and society than working class women of color because as a result
of the color of their skin, they said, they were not eligible for financial support and scholarships designated for students from historically oppressed
groups. Working class white women and men also viewed students of color
as more advantaged because they could form ethnicity-oriented organizations without being labeled as white supremacists or racists. Nevertheless,
as they moved through college, regardless of their gender, ethnicity, or class,
most students came to understand how their social locations afforded them
privilege or challenge, and how the egalitarian ideals of the American Dream
are more myth than reality (Azmitia et al., 2008; Radmacher & Azmitia, 2013;
Thomas & Azmitia, 2014, see also Lott & Bullock, 2007).
KEY ISSUES FOR FUTURE RESEARCH
Despite its promise and prominence, intersectionality is a concept that
everyone seems to acknowledge, and yet, to date has no agreed-upon definition (Davis, 2008; Nash, 2010, Phoenix & Pattynama, 2006). Davis (2008)
suggested that its definitional ambiguity and vagueness has paradoxically
cemented its centrality in the social sciences and humanities. As with other
powerful metaphors, such as Gilligan’s (1982) view that men and women
are socialized “in a different voice” and Deaux and Perkins’ (2001) conceptualization of the situational salience of social identities as a “kaleidoscope,”
intersectionality resonates with contemporary views of self and identity
and perhaps for this reason, scholars have been willing to overlook the fact
that theories of intersectionality are not falsifiable (Davis, 2008). To date,
empirical evidence for the construct has typically come from case studies or
small-scale studies (but see Covarrubias, 2011), and perhaps for this reason
and other conceptual and methodological challenges, intersectionality has
yet to get more traction in mainstream psychological theories (Cole, 2009;
Syed, 2010). Nevertheless, theory and research on self and identity, and more
broadly, culture and diversity, that considers only one domain of difference,
is currently viewed as outdated because it ignores the reality that people
simultaneously inhabit many categories of difference.
Intersectionality has been at the center of heated theoretical and empirical debates, with some wondering whether, given that it can generate endless lists of differences, the concept can be used productively in theory and
4
EMERGING TRENDS IN THE SOCIAL AND BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES
research (Cole, 2009, Davis, 2008; McCall, 2005; Nash, 2010). Some scholars
have also wondered whether it is possible to understand how each domain
of difference operates within hierarchies of power given that if one disaggregates them, one is violating the key assumption of intersectionality, that these
domains of identity are intextricably intertwined (Hancock, 2007; McCall,
2005).
Many recent publications in the humanities and social sciences have
addressed theoretical and methodological refinements that can salvage
the concept and help scholars advance theory and research. Levine-Rasky
(2011), for example, proposed a conceptual model to explain how the context
influences the situational salience of particular identity domains but still
leaves active other intersecting identity domains, even if individuals are
not immediately aware of them. Although her model provides a possible
blueprint for research that addresses the problem of endless lists of intersecting identities, it begs the question about whether these intersections
exist in the minds and everyday lives of children, adolescents, and adults
or whether they are simply fodder for academic and political debates—that
is, do ordinary folks articulate their multiple identities as intersecting in
the structural and more local contexts of their lives? Moreover, does an
intersectional approach to theory, research, and practice increase our ability
to predict developmental, educational, and more broadly, life trajectories,
and outcomes?
Feminist scholars Grabe and Else-Quest (2012) emphasize intersectionality’s importance in contributing to social change, and suggest the term
transnational intersectionality, which shifts the focus from individual differences onto the structural roots of inequality, namely, the social, economic,
and political forces that perpetuate interlocking systems of discrimination.
In an increasingly globalized world, research findings from a macro-level
perspective that involves multiple communities and nations not only
enhances our understanding of how, for example, gender oppression varies
depending on its intersection with particular cultural contexts, but can also
serve local social movements that draw on these data to create social change.
Bowleg (2008), Cobarrubias (2011), Cole (2009), Hancock (2007), and Syed
(2010) have also proposed conceptual and methodological solutions that may
advance intersectionality theory and research beyond qualitative case studies
to potentially more generalizable, large-scale investigations. Cole (2009), for
example, proposed three useful questions to guide psychological research on
intersectionality:
1. Who is included within a social category? This question focuses
attention on within-group variability and diversity, which has often
been treated as error variance obscuring between group differences, as
Intersectionality and the Development of Self and Identity
5
important in its own right. Cole suggests that attention to within-group
differences enriches theory and research by including groups that
have not received much attention, such as children, adolescents, and
adults who experience multiple categories of subordination and are
potentially at risk for adverse developmental outcomes.
2. What role does inequality play? Cultural, historical, and social inequalities and their associated structural differences in access to power and
resources profoundly affect individuals’ lives. White and Black working class men and women have long viewed each other with distrust
and animosity concerning access to jobs and interracial romantic relationships (Fine, Weiss, Addelston, & Marursza, 1997), and immigrant
Latinos (Nelson & Hiemstra, 2008; Schwartz, Montgomery, & Briones,
2006) and Asian Americans (Kitano & Nakaoka, 2000; Ngo & Lee, 2007)
have historically experienced discrimination in education and employment as a function of country of origin, receiving community, citizenship, and phenotypic characteristics.
3. Where are the similarities? Historically, intersectionality has focused
attention on differences within and between social categories. Cole suggests that asking whether there are any similarities in experiences that
cut across categories may be essential for moving beyond individual
experiences to considering how institutions and cultures contextualize
individuals’ experiences to create the much-needed common ground so
subordinated groups can come together for social change. Cole (2009)
supports her proposal with theory and research on disability, welfare
reform, and the heterosexual transmission of HIV. In our own research,
we have analyzed the experiences of first- and non-first generation of
college students transitioning to college to identify similarities in how
gender, race, and social class identities predict their adjustment over
their first year of college and in the class identity development narratives of upper class and working class college sophomores (Thomas &
Azmitia, 2014).
From the US suffragist movement that empowered Sojourner Truth to
spontaneously deliver her “Ain’t I a woman?” speech to the Civil, Women,
and Gay rights movements to the recent Occupy Movement in the United
States and the revolutions in Egypt, other African nations, and Asia, diverse
people have come together to work for social change. While applauding
Cole’s proposals for including intersectionality in psychological theory
and research, Syed (2010) raises methodological concerns about Cole’s
conceptualization of intersectionality as statistical interactions, an approach
also taken by Waters, 1996), because it deemphasizes the important role of
6
EMERGING TRENDS IN THE SOCIAL AND BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES
qualitative approaches to intersectionality and is likely to alienate the feminist and critical race theorists that carried out the foundational theory and
research on intersectionality. While “mixed methods” has become another
buzzword with many meanings in psychology and more broadly, the social
sciences, we concur with Syed’s (2010) and Hancock’s (2007) proposals for
an integrative, pluralist theoretical approach to intersectionality, its research
paradigms, and social policies designed to improve the everyday lives of
children, adolescents, and adults.
REFERENCES
Anthias, F. (2013). Hierarchies of social location, class, and intersectionality: Towards
a translocational frame. International Sociology, 28(1), 121–138.
Azmitia, M., Syed, M., & Radmacher, K. (2008). On the intersection of personal and
social identities: Introduction and evidence from a longitudinal study of emerging
adults. In M. Azmitia, M. Syed & K. Radmacher (Eds.) New directions for child and
adolescent development: The intersections of personal and social identities (Vol. 120, pp.
1–16). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Bordieu, P. (1989). Social space and symbolic power. Sociological Theory, 7(1), 14–25.
Bowleg, L. (2008). When black + lesbian + woman ≠ Black lesbian woman:
The methodological challenges of qualitative and quantitative intersectionality
research. Sex Roles, 59, 319–325.
Butler, J. (1990). Gender trouble: Feminism and the subversion of identity. New York, NY:
Routledge.
Cobarrubias, A. (2011). Quantitative intersectionality: A critical race analysis of the
Chicana/o educational pipeline. Journal of Latinos in Education, 10(2), 86–105.
Cole, E. R. (2009). Intersectionality and research in psychology. American Psychologist,
64(3), 170–180.
Combahee River Collective (1995). Combahee river collective statement. In B.
Guy-Sheftall (Ed.), Words of fire: An anthology of African American feminist thought
(pp. 232–240). New York, NY: New Press. (Original paper published in 1977).
Crenshaw, K. W. (1991). Mapping the margins: Intersectionality, identity politics, and
violence against women of color. Stanford Law Review, 43(6), 1241–1279.
Davis, K. (2008). Intersectionality as buzzword: A sociology of science perspective
on what makes feminist theory successful. Feminist Theory, 9(1), 67–85.
Deaux, K., & Perkins, T. S. (2001). The kaleidoscopic self. In C. Sedikides & M. B.
Brewer (Eds.), Individual self, relational self, collective self (pp. 299–313).
Fine, M., Weis, L., Addleston, J., & Marusza, J. (1997). (In) secure times: Constructing
White working-class masculinities in the late 20th century. Gender & Society, 11,
52–68.
Gibson, M. A. (1982). Reputation and respectability: How competing systems affect
students’ performance in school. Anthopology and Education Quarterly, 13(1), 3–28.
Giles, H. (January 19, 2013). Intersectionality, or, all the ways that we hurt matter. Retrieved from http://tenhundredwordsofscience.tumblr.com (filed under
Politics).
Intersectionality and the Development of Self and Identity
7
Gilligan, C. (1982). In a different voice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Grabe, S., & Else-Quest, N. M. (2012). Psychology of Women Quarterly, 36(2), 158–161.
Hancock, A.-M. (2007). When multiplication doesn’t equal quick addition: Examining intersectionality as a research paradigm. Perspectives on Politics, 5(1), 63–79.
Hill Collins, P., & Anderson, M. (1998). Race, class, and gender: An anthology. Belmont,
CA: Wardsworth Publishing Company.
Hurtado, A., & Cervantez, K. (2009). A view from within and from without: The
development of Latina feminist psychology. In F. A. Villarruel, G. Carlo, J. M. Grau,
M. Azmitia, N. J. Cabrera & T. J. Chahin (Eds.), Handbook of U. S. Latino psychology:
Developmental and community perspectives (pp. 171–190). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Katsiaficas, D., Futch, V. A., Fine, M., & Sirin, S. R. (2011). Everyday hyphens: Exploring youth identities with methodological and analytical pluralism. Qualitative
Research in Psychology, 8(2), 120–139.
Kitano, H. H., & Nakaoka, S. (2000). Asian Americans in the twentiesth century.
Journal of Human Behavior in the Social Environment, 3(3–4), 7–17.
Levine-Rasky, C. (2011). Intersectional theory applied to whiteness and middleclassness. Social Identities: Journal for the Study of Race, Nation, and Culture, 17(2),
239–253.
Lott, B., & Bullock, H. E. (2007). Psychology and economic injustice: Personal, professional,
and political intersections. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
McCall, L. (2005). The complexities of intersectionality. Signs: Journal of Women in
Culture and Society, 30(3), 1771–1800.
Nash, C. J. (2010). Trans geographies, embodiment and experience. Gender, Place, and
Culture, 17(5), 579–595.
Nelson, L., & Hiemstra, N. (2008). Latino immigrants and the renegotiation of place
and belonging in small town America. Social and Cultural Geography, 9(3), 319–342.
Ngo, B., & Lee, S. J. (2007). Complicating the image of model minority success: A
review of Southeast Asian American education. Review of Educational Research,
77(4), 415–453.
Ostrove, J. M., Stewart, A. J., & Curtin, N. L. (2011). Social class and belonging: Implications for graduate students’ career aspirations. The Journal of Higher Education,
82(6), 748–774.
Phoenix, A., & Pattynama, P. (2006). Editorial: Intersectionality. European Journal of
Women’s Studies, 13(3), 187–192.
Radmacher, K., & Azmitia, M. (2013). Unmasking class: How upwardly mobile poor
and working class emerging adults negotiate an invisible identity. Emerging Adulthood, 1(4), 314–329.
Shields, S. (2008). Gender: An intersectional perspective. Sex Roles, 59, 301–311.
Schwartz, S. J., Montgomery, M. J., & Briones, E. (2006). The role of identity in acculturation among immigrant people: Theoretical propositions, empirical questions,
and applied recommendations. Human Development, 49(1), 1–30.
Stewart, A. J., & Cole, E. R. (2007). Narratives and numbers: Feminist multiple methods research. In S. N. Hesse-Biber (Ed.), Handbook of feminist research: Theory and
praxis (pp. 327–344). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
8
EMERGING TRENDS IN THE SOCIAL AND BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES
Stewart, A. J., & McDermott, C. (2004). Gender in psychology. Annual Review of Psychology, 55, 519–544.
Syed, M. (2010). Disciplinarity and methodology in intersectionality theory and
research. American Psychologist, 65(1), 61–62.
Thomas, V. D., & Azmitia, M. (2014). Does class matter? The centrality and meaning
of social class identity in emerging adulthood. Identity, 14(3), 195–213.
Waters, M. C. (1996). The intersection of gender, race, and ethnicity in identity development in Caribbean teens. In B. J. Leadbetter & N. Way (Eds.), Urban girls: Resisting stereotypes, creating identities (pp. 65–81). New York, NY: NYU Press.
Way, N., Santos, C., Niwa, E. Y., & Kim-Gervey, C. (2008). To be or not to be: An exploration of ethnic/racial identity development in contex. In M. Azmitia, M. Syed &
K. Radmacher (Eds.), The intersections of personal and social identities: New directions
for child and adolescent development (pp. 61–78). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
MARGARITA AZMITIA SHORT BIOGRAPHY
Margarita Azmitia is a professor of psychology at the University of California at Santa Cruz. Her research focuses on the intersection of gender,
ethnicity/race, and social class in the educational trajectories, identity development, and mental health of adolescents and young adults. She is especially
interested in how family, friends, school, social media, and immigration contour these trajectories during the transitions to middle school, college, and
work. She can be reached at azmitia@ucsc.edu.
VIRGINIA THOMAS SHORT BIOGRAPHY
Virginia Thomas is a doctoral student at the University of California, Santa
Cruz who researches identity development during the transitions of adolescence and emerging adulthood. Her research has focused on the meaning and
centrality of social class identity, and her current research explores the effects
of solitude and social media for identity development and the factors that
influence the capacity to be alone. She can be reached at vdthomas@ucsc.edu.
RELATED ESSAYS
Neighborhoods and Cognitive Development (Psychology), Jondou Chen and
Jeanne Brooks-Gunn
The Inherence Heuristic: Generating Everyday Explanations (Psychology),
Andrei Cimpian
Youth Entrepreneurship (Psychology), William Damon et al.
Resilience (Psychology), Erica D. Diminich and George A. Bonanno
Setting One’s Mind on Action: Planning Out Goal Striving in Advance
(Psychology), Peter M. Gollwitzer
Intersectionality and the Development of Self and Identity
9
Moral Identity (Psychology), Sam A. Hardy and Gustavo Carlo
Regulatory Focus Theory (Psychology), E. Tory Higgins
Cultural Neuroscience: Connecting Culture, Brain, and Genes (Psychology),
Shinobu Kitayama and Sarah Huff
Media and the development of Identity (Psychology), Adriana M. Manago
Culture as Situated Cognition (Psychology), Daphna Oyserman
Born This Way: Thinking Sociologically about Essentialism (Sociology),
Kristen Schilt
Temporal Identity Integration as a Core Developmental Process (Psychology),
Moin Syed and Lauren L. Mitchell
Intersectionality and the
Development of Self and Identity
MARGARITA AZMITIA and VIRGINIA THOMAS
Abstract
Intersectionality is a key theoretical, empirical, and applied construct in the social
sciences and the humanities. In this essay, we review the origins of the construct
and the foundational theory and research that served to cement its importance in
these fields. We then present a brief overview of how intersectionality guides current
theory, research, and social policy in education, feminist studies, politics, psychology, and sociology, concluding with a discussion of the key issues that need to be
addressed for this construct to deliver in its promise to strengthen theory, research,
and practice in the social sciences.
INTRODUCTION
Theory and research on intersectionality addresses differences in social
locations as they create inequalities in power and resources in historical
and cultural contexts. Gender, race, class, sexuality, physical ableness, and
other dimensions of identity situate some individuals as more powerful
than others and consequently, perpetuate differential access to resources
and privileges (Azmitia, Syed, & Radmacher, 2008; Cole, 2009; Giles, 2013;
McCall, 2005; Stewart & McDermott, 2004). Although there is no scientific
reason for why people’s gender, skin color, social class, or religion affords
them special power and privileges, these cultural and social locations of
power and privilege are reproduced across generations through enculturation and socialization (Bordieu, 1989; Giles, 2013). An intersectional lens
challenges scholars to rethink dichotomies such as gender that essentialize
differences, power, and privilege (Stewart & McDermott, 2004), and commit
them to ask “The other question”—how variations in one domain of identity,
for example, gender, become more complex when another identity domain,
for example, race/ethnicity, is introduced into the theoretical and empirical
discussion (Davis, 2008).
Emerging Trends in the Social and Behavioral Sciences. Edited by Robert Scott and Stephen Kosslyn.
© 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. ISBN 978-1-118-90077-2.
1
2
EMERGING TRENDS IN THE SOCIAL AND BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES
FOUNDATIONAL RESEARCH
Intersectionality emerged from feminist and critical race theory and became
a key contribution to the humanities and the social sciences, particularly in
studies of identity and power. The term was coined by Kimberlé Crenshaw
(1991), a legal scholar, who proposed that theory, research, and practice
consider both gender and race in women of color’s, and in particular,
Black women’s struggles and experiences (Davis, 2008). Crenshaw’s (1991)
seminal piece on intersectionality built on the Combahee River Collective’s
(1995) manifesto written by a group of African-American feminists in which
they argued that race, class, gender, and sexual orientation are inseparable,
nonadditive, nonhierarchical dimensions of oppression. Feminist and critical
race scholars’ writings have provided a strong interdisciplinary foundation
for intersectionality theory and research. For example philosopher Butler’s
(1990) Gender Trouble, addressed the intersections of gender, sexuality, class,
and ethnicity in women’s lives, sociologists’ Hill Collins and Anderson’s
(1998) Race, class, and gender: An Anthology, social psychologists’ Stewart
and Cole (2007) and Shield’s (2008) work discussed the theoretical and
methodological challenges of viewing gender, sexual orientation, and power
through an intersectional lens, Hurtado and Cervantes’s (2009) provided
an overview of Latina feminist psychology, and Katsiaficas, Futch, Fine,
and Sirin’s (2011) discussed how pluralist methods can increase our understanding of how youth develop hyphenated selves (e.g., Muslim American)
in the context of global conflicts. Foreshadowing the increased interest in
intersectionality in psychology, in an oft-cited overview of gender theory
and research, Stewart and McDermot (2004) hailed it as one of the most
promising constructs for integrating individual, social, and cultural aspects
of gender and sexuality.
CUTTING-EDGE RESEARCH
Intersectionality has been key to theory, research, and current practice in
multicultural education; for example, Gibson (1982), Waters (1996), and Way,
Santos, Niwa, and Kim-Gervey (2008) highlighted the intersections of gender, ethnicity, social class, and immigration in the educational trajectories
and peer hierarchies of adolescents in St. Croix (Gibson) and New York City
(Waters and Way et al.), and Azmitia et al. (2008), analyzed these intersections in the surveys and narratives of young adults transitioning to college.
More recently, in one of the few quantitative, large-scale studies addressing
intersectionality, Cobarrubias (2011) used census data to identify places in
the educational pipeline where oppression and privilege contribute to gender and citizenship variations in educational outcomes and persistence.
Intersectionality and the Development of Self and Identity
3
In our own research, an intersectional analytic lens on adolescents’ transition to college has also revealed the nuances of gender, ethnicity, and social
class as they contour students’ identity development and educational pathways (see also Anthias, 2013; Ostrove, Stewart, & Curtin, 2011; Way et al.,
2008). To our surprise, for example, white working class women’s identity
narratives revealed their perception that they were more disadvantaged in
college and society than working class women of color because as a result
of the color of their skin, they said, they were not eligible for financial support and scholarships designated for students from historically oppressed
groups. Working class white women and men also viewed students of color
as more advantaged because they could form ethnicity-oriented organizations without being labeled as white supremacists or racists. Nevertheless,
as they moved through college, regardless of their gender, ethnicity, or class,
most students came to understand how their social locations afforded them
privilege or challenge, and how the egalitarian ideals of the American Dream
are more myth than reality (Azmitia et al., 2008; Radmacher & Azmitia, 2013;
Thomas & Azmitia, 2014, see also Lott & Bullock, 2007).
KEY ISSUES FOR FUTURE RESEARCH
Despite its promise and prominence, intersectionality is a concept that
everyone seems to acknowledge, and yet, to date has no agreed-upon definition (Davis, 2008; Nash, 2010, Phoenix & Pattynama, 2006). Davis (2008)
suggested that its definitional ambiguity and vagueness has paradoxically
cemented its centrality in the social sciences and humanities. As with other
powerful metaphors, such as Gilligan’s (1982) view that men and women
are socialized “in a different voice” and Deaux and Perkins’ (2001) conceptualization of the situational salience of social identities as a “kaleidoscope,”
intersectionality resonates with contemporary views of self and identity
and perhaps for this reason, scholars have been willing to overlook the fact
that theories of intersectionality are not falsifiable (Davis, 2008). To date,
empirical evidence for the construct has typically come from case studies or
small-scale studies (but see Covarrubias, 2011), and perhaps for this reason
and other conceptual and methodological challenges, intersectionality has
yet to get more traction in mainstream psychological theories (Cole, 2009;
Syed, 2010). Nevertheless, theory and research on self and identity, and more
broadly, culture and diversity, that considers only one domain of difference,
is currently viewed as outdated because it ignores the reality that people
simultaneously inhabit many categories of difference.
Intersectionality has been at the center of heated theoretical and empirical debates, with some wondering whether, given that it can generate endless lists of differences, the concept can be used productively in theory and
4
EMERGING TRENDS IN THE SOCIAL AND BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES
research (Cole, 2009, Davis, 2008; McCall, 2005; Nash, 2010). Some scholars
have also wondered whether it is possible to understand how each domain
of difference operates within hierarchies of power given that if one disaggregates them, one is violating the key assumption of intersectionality, that these
domains of identity are intextricably intertwined (Hancock, 2007; McCall,
2005).
Many recent publications in the humanities and social sciences have
addressed theoretical and methodological refinements that can salvage
the concept and help scholars advance theory and research. Levine-Rasky
(2011), for example, proposed a conceptual model to explain how the context
influences the situational salience of particular identity domains but still
leaves active other intersecting identity domains, even if individuals are
not immediately aware of them. Although her model provides a possible
blueprint for research that addresses the problem of endless lists of intersecting identities, it begs the question about whether these intersections
exist in the minds and everyday lives of children, adolescents, and adults
or whether they are simply fodder for academic and political debates—that
is, do ordinary folks articulate their multiple identities as intersecting in
the structural and more local contexts of their lives? Moreover, does an
intersectional approach to theory, research, and practice increase our ability
to predict developmental, educational, and more broadly, life trajectories,
and outcomes?
Feminist scholars Grabe and Else-Quest (2012) emphasize intersectionality’s importance in contributing to social change, and suggest the term
transnational intersectionality, which shifts the focus from individual differences onto the structural roots of inequality, namely, the social, economic,
and political forces that perpetuate interlocking systems of discrimination.
In an increasingly globalized world, research findings from a macro-level
perspective that involves multiple communities and nations not only
enhances our understanding of how, for example, gender oppression varies
depending on its intersection with particular cultural contexts, but can also
serve local social movements that draw on these data to create social change.
Bowleg (2008), Cobarrubias (2011), Cole (2009), Hancock (2007), and Syed
(2010) have also proposed conceptual and methodological solutions that may
advance intersectionality theory and research beyond qualitative case studies
to potentially more generalizable, large-scale investigations. Cole (2009), for
example, proposed three useful questions to guide psychological research on
intersectionality:
1. Who is included within a social category? This question focuses
attention on within-group variability and diversity, which has often
been treated as error variance obscuring between group differences, as
Intersectionality and the Development of Self and Identity
5
important in its own right. Cole suggests that attention to within-group
differences enriches theory and research by including groups that
have not received much attention, such as children, adolescents, and
adults who experience multiple categories of subordination and are
potentially at risk for adverse developmental outcomes.
2. What role does inequality play? Cultural, historical, and social inequalities and their associated structural differences in access to power and
resources profoundly affect individuals’ lives. White and Black working class men and women have long viewed each other with distrust
and animosity concerning access to jobs and interracial romantic relationships (Fine, Weiss, Addelston, & Marursza, 1997), and immigrant
Latinos (Nelson & Hiemstra, 2008; Schwartz, Montgomery, & Briones,
2006) and Asian Americans (Kitano & Nakaoka, 2000; Ngo & Lee, 2007)
have historically experienced discrimination in education and employment as a function of country of origin, receiving community, citizenship, and phenotypic characteristics.
3. Where are the similarities? Historically, intersectionality has focused
attention on differences within and between social categories. Cole suggests that asking whether there are any similarities in experiences that
cut across categories may be essential for moving beyond individual
experiences to considering how institutions and cultures contextualize
individuals’ experiences to create the much-needed common ground so
subordinated groups can come together for social change. Cole (2009)
supports her proposal with theory and research on disability, welfare
reform, and the heterosexual transmission of HIV. In our own research,
we have analyzed the experiences of first- and non-first generation of
college students transitioning to college to identify similarities in how
gender, race, and social class identities predict their adjustment over
their first year of college and in the class identity development narratives of upper class and working class college sophomores (Thomas &
Azmitia, 2014).
From the US suffragist movement that empowered Sojourner Truth to
spontaneously deliver her “Ain’t I a woman?” speech to the Civil, Women,
and Gay rights movements to the recent Occupy Movement in the United
States and the revolutions in Egypt, other African nations, and Asia, diverse
people have come together to work for social change. While applauding
Cole’s proposals for including intersectionality in psychological theory
and research, Syed (2010) raises methodological concerns about Cole’s
conceptualization of intersectionality as statistical interactions, an approach
also taken by Waters, 1996), because it deemphasizes the important role of
6
EMERGING TRENDS IN THE SOCIAL AND BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES
qualitative approaches to intersectionality and is likely to alienate the feminist and critical race theorists that carried out the foundational theory and
research on intersectionality. While “mixed methods” has become another
buzzword with many meanings in psychology and more broadly, the social
sciences, we concur with Syed’s (2010) and Hancock’s (2007) proposals for
an integrative, pluralist theoretical approach to intersectionality, its research
paradigms, and social policies designed to improve the everyday lives of
children, adolescents, and adults.
REFERENCES
Anthias, F. (2013). Hierarchies of social location, class, and intersectionality: Towards
a translocational frame. International Sociology, 28(1), 121–138.
Azmitia, M., Syed, M., & Radmacher, K. (2008). On the intersection of personal and
social identities: Introduction and evidence from a longitudinal study of emerging
adults. In M. Azmitia, M. Syed & K. Radmacher (Eds.) New directions for child and
adolescent development: The intersections of personal and social identities (Vol. 120, pp.
1–16). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Bordieu, P. (1989). Social space and symbolic power. Sociological Theory, 7(1), 14–25.
Bowleg, L. (2008). When black + lesbian + woman ≠ Black lesbian woman:
The methodological challenges of qualitative and quantitative intersectionality
research. Sex Roles, 59, 319–325.
Butler, J. (1990). Gender trouble: Feminism and the subversion of identity. New York, NY:
Routledge.
Cobarrubias, A. (2011). Quantitative intersectionality: A critical race analysis of the
Chicana/o educational pipeline. Journal of Latinos in Education, 10(2), 86–105.
Cole, E. R. (2009). Intersectionality and research in psychology. American Psychologist,
64(3), 170–180.
Combahee River Collective (1995). Combahee river collective statement. In B.
Guy-Sheftall (Ed.), Words of fire: An anthology of African American feminist thought
(pp. 232–240). New York, NY: New Press. (Original paper published in 1977).
Crenshaw, K. W. (1991). Mapping the margins: Intersectionality, identity politics, and
violence against women of color. Stanford Law Review, 43(6), 1241–1279.
Davis, K. (2008). Intersectionality as buzzword: A sociology of science perspective
on what makes feminist theory successful. Feminist Theory, 9(1), 67–85.
Deaux, K., & Perkins, T. S. (2001). The kaleidoscopic self. In C. Sedikides & M. B.
Brewer (Eds.), Individual self, relational self, collective self (pp. 299–313).
Fine, M., Weis, L., Addleston, J., & Marusza, J. (1997). (In) secure times: Constructing
White working-class masculinities in the late 20th century. Gender & Society, 11,
52–68.
Gibson, M. A. (1982). Reputation and respectability: How competing systems affect
students’ performance in school. Anthopology and Education Quarterly, 13(1), 3–28.
Giles, H. (January 19, 2013). Intersectionality, or, all the ways that we hurt matter. Retrieved from http://tenhundredwordsofscience.tumblr.com (filed under
Politics).
Intersectionality and the Development of Self and Identity
7
Gilligan, C. (1982). In a different voice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Grabe, S., & Else-Quest, N. M. (2012). Psychology of Women Quarterly, 36(2), 158–161.
Hancock, A.-M. (2007). When multiplication doesn’t equal quick addition: Examining intersectionality as a research paradigm. Perspectives on Politics, 5(1), 63–79.
Hill Collins, P., & Anderson, M. (1998). Race, class, and gender: An anthology. Belmont,
CA: Wardsworth Publishing Company.
Hurtado, A., & Cervantez, K. (2009). A view from within and from without: The
development of Latina feminist psychology. In F. A. Villarruel, G. Carlo, J. M. Grau,
M. Azmitia, N. J. Cabrera & T. J. Chahin (Eds.), Handbook of U. S. Latino psychology:
Developmental and community perspectives (pp. 171–190). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Katsiaficas, D., Futch, V. A., Fine, M., & Sirin, S. R. (2011). Everyday hyphens: Exploring youth identities with methodological and analytical pluralism. Qualitative
Research in Psychology, 8(2), 120–139.
Kitano, H. H., & Nakaoka, S. (2000). Asian Americans in the twentiesth century.
Journal of Human Behavior in the Social Environment, 3(3–4), 7–17.
Levine-Rasky, C. (2011). Intersectional theory applied to whiteness and middleclassness. Social Identities: Journal for the Study of Race, Nation, and Culture, 17(2),
239–253.
Lott, B., & Bullock, H. E. (2007). Psychology and economic injustice: Personal, professional,
and political intersections. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
McCall, L. (2005). The complexities of intersectionality. Signs: Journal of Women in
Culture and Society, 30(3), 1771–1800.
Nash, C. J. (2010). Trans geographies, embodiment and experience. Gender, Place, and
Culture, 17(5), 579–595.
Nelson, L., & Hiemstra, N. (2008). Latino immigrants and the renegotiation of place
and belonging in small town America. Social and Cultural Geography, 9(3), 319–342.
Ngo, B., & Lee, S. J. (2007). Complicating the image of model minority success: A
review of Southeast Asian American education. Review of Educational Research,
77(4), 415–453.
Ostrove, J. M., Stewart, A. J., & Curtin, N. L. (2011). Social class and belonging: Implications for graduate students’ career aspirations. The Journal of Higher Education,
82(6), 748–774.
Phoenix, A., & Pattynama, P. (2006). Editorial: Intersectionality. European Journal of
Women’s Studies, 13(3), 187–192.
Radmacher, K., & Azmitia, M. (2013). Unmasking class: How upwardly mobile poor
and working class emerging adults negotiate an invisible identity. Emerging Adulthood, 1(4), 314–329.
Shields, S. (2008). Gender: An intersectional perspective. Sex Roles, 59, 301–311.
Schwartz, S. J., Montgomery, M. J., & Briones, E. (2006). The role of identity in acculturation among immigrant people: Theoretical propositions, empirical questions,
and applied recommendations. Human Development, 49(1), 1–30.
Stewart, A. J., & Cole, E. R. (2007). Narratives and numbers: Feminist multiple methods research. In S. N. Hesse-Biber (Ed.), Handbook of feminist research: Theory and
praxis (pp. 327–344). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
8
EMERGING TRENDS IN THE SOCIAL AND BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES
Stewart, A. J., & McDermott, C. (2004). Gender in psychology. Annual Review of Psychology, 55, 519–544.
Syed, M. (2010). Disciplinarity and methodology in intersectionality theory and
research. American Psychologist, 65(1), 61–62.
Thomas, V. D., & Azmitia, M. (2014). Does class matter? The centrality and meaning
of social class identity in emerging adulthood. Identity, 14(3), 195–213.
Waters, M. C. (1996). The intersection of gender, race, and ethnicity in identity development in Caribbean teens. In B. J. Leadbetter & N. Way (Eds.), Urban girls: Resisting stereotypes, creating identities (pp. 65–81). New York, NY: NYU Press.
Way, N., Santos, C., Niwa, E. Y., & Kim-Gervey, C. (2008). To be or not to be: An exploration of ethnic/racial identity development in contex. In M. Azmitia, M. Syed &
K. Radmacher (Eds.), The intersections of personal and social identities: New directions
for child and adolescent development (pp. 61–78). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
MARGARITA AZMITIA SHORT BIOGRAPHY
Margarita Azmitia is a professor of psychology at the University of California at Santa Cruz. Her research focuses on the intersection of gender,
ethnicity/race, and social class in the educational trajectories, identity development, and mental health of adolescents and young adults. She is especially
interested in how family, friends, school, social media, and immigration contour these trajectories during the transitions to middle school, college, and
work. She can be reached at azmitia@ucsc.edu.
VIRGINIA THOMAS SHORT BIOGRAPHY
Virginia Thomas is a doctoral student at the University of California, Santa
Cruz who researches identity development during the transitions of adolescence and emerging adulthood. Her research has focused on the meaning and
centrality of social class identity, and her current research explores the effects
of solitude and social media for identity development and the factors that
influence the capacity to be alone. She can be reached at vdthomas@ucsc.edu.
RELATED ESSAYS
Neighborhoods and Cognitive Development (Psychology), Jondou Chen and
Jeanne Brooks-Gunn
The Inherence Heuristic: Generating Everyday Explanations (Psychology),
Andrei Cimpian
Youth Entrepreneurship (Psychology), William Damon et al.
Resilience (Psychology), Erica D. Diminich and George A. Bonanno
Setting One’s Mind on Action: Planning Out Goal Striving in Advance
(Psychology), Peter M. Gollwitzer
Intersectionality and the Development of Self and Identity
9
Moral Identity (Psychology), Sam A. Hardy and Gustavo Carlo
Regulatory Focus Theory (Psychology), E. Tory Higgins
Cultural Neuroscience: Connecting Culture, Brain, and Genes (Psychology),
Shinobu Kitayama and Sarah Huff
Media and the development of Identity (Psychology), Adriana M. Manago
Culture as Situated Cognition (Psychology), Daphna Oyserman
Born This Way: Thinking Sociologically about Essentialism (Sociology),
Kristen Schilt
Temporal Identity Integration as a Core Developmental Process (Psychology),
Moin Syed and Lauren L. Mitchell
