Abstract

In recent years, research on ingroup identification has followed a wide range of different theoretical and methodological perspectives that often lead to conceptual ambiguities and recurrent discrepancies. The present paper analyses and synthesizes previous studies investigating identification and underlines important points of agreement or disagreement about the main components of the identification process. We propose a model of ingroup identity that takes into account four core types of this construct. We also move the literature in this area forward by considering how different types of ingroup identification are related to phenomena such as culture, attachment style, and the type of group that is salient.