Identity as Unitary Personhood and a Source of Intercultural Conflict
Consistent with the above-described communication accommodation theory, Kim’s (2005a, 2009a) contextual theory of interethnic communication offers a theoretical argument that an individual’s identity plays a dual role in intercultural interaction as a factor that contributes to both conflictive and cooperative experiences.
Incorporating the concepts from the communication accommodation theory, convergence and divergence, along with various other related concepts employed in studies of intercultural communication, intergroup communication, social psychology, sociolinguistics, and related social science disciplines, Kim employs two integrative concepts, association and dissociation, to represent all-inclusive continuum of communication behaviors and actions that are likely to take place when individuals of differing ethnic (including cultural) backgrounds come into contact. Close to the associative end of this continuum are behaviors that foster understanding, cooperation, intimacy, and other forms of cooperation, or the “coming- together” of the involved parties. In contrast, behaviors at the dissociative end are defined as those behaviors and actions that introduce some form of relational conflict such as tension, misunderstanding, competition, hostility, and even violence, all of which contribute to a temporary state of conflict, or “coming-apart” of intercultural relationships.Kim’s theory then places the associative- dissociative behaviors in a reciprocal-causal relationship with eight key factors of the context in which intercultural encounters occur:
(1) two communicator factors (identity inclusiv- ity/exclusivity and identity security/insecurity,
(2) three situational factors (ethnic proximity/ distance, shared/separate goal structure, and personal network integration), and (3) three environmental factors (institutional inequity, relative in-group strength, and environmental stress).
Linking each of these eight contextual factors to associative/dissociative intercultural behavior, Kim presents eight theorems based on which specific research hypotheses can be generated. Regarding the issue of identity, Theorems 1 and 2 link identity inclusivity/ exclusivity and identity security/insecurity to association/dissociation in intercultural communication, thus, providing a basic profile of communicators who are more or less prone to engender intercultural cooperation or conflict.In positing Theorem 1, Kim argues that inclusive identity orientation serves as a motivational basis of associative behavior, whereas exclusive identity orientation fosters a more rigid differentiation of oneself from ethnically dissimilar others. Likewise, identity security/ insecurity, defined in terms of the degree of an individual’s overall self-confidence or selfefficacy, is explained as a key psychological force that tends to trigger defensive and, at times, even offensive, behaviors when dealing with individuals of dissimilar cultural backgrounds. The relationship postulated in Kim’s Theorem 1 between identity exclusivity and dissociative interethnic behavior echoes the observation by Sherif (1966) that conflict is more likely “whenever individuals belonging to one group interact, collectively or individually, with another group or its members in terms of their group identification” (p. 12). An extensive body of empirical evidence exists in support of Kim’s Theorem 1, including the finding from Franklin’s (1998) analysis of the beliefs and attitudes of Malcolm X, as described in the African American leader’s own words. Franklin reports that Malcolm X not only believed that the integration of African Americans into White society would destroy both races, but furthermore, steadfastly opposed most White attempts to help with the civil rights movement from inside African American organizations.
In Theorem 2, Kim identifies the reciprocal influence between an individual’s identity insecurity and dissociative interethnic behavior.
In presenting this theorem, Kim integrates a number of social psychological concepts of intergroup relations that have been found to be closely associated with various forms of intergroup conflict, including aggression, status anxiety (De Vos, 1990), and collective selfesteem (Crocker & Luthanen, 1990). Likewise, the theoretical link between identity insecurity and intercultural conflict identified in Theorem 2 is consistent with the core arguments made in at least two other social psychological theories of intergroup relations. One such theory is the realistic conflict theory (Sherif, 1966), which highlights the role of perceived or real threats to in-group resources (territorial, economic, and power or status interests) in creating or intensifying hostility toward members of one or more out-groups. More recently, the uncertainty-identity theory (Hogg, 2000, 2007; Hogg, Meehan, & Farquharson, 2010) stipulates that when people are faced with high levels of “self-uncertainty” or “identity threat” created by actual or potential in-group-threatening events and circumstances (e.g., terrorism incidents and bad macroeconomic times), they are likely to harbor prejudice against out-groups and are more likely to seek reassurance by turning to the solace of radicalism.