Abstract
The terms personality, identity, self or person and many others, are used in the literature in different ways. Sometimes the term implies the personality of the self and the person (Leary, 2004), and sometimes the identity (Harre, 2001). An important source of terminological confusion in the study of self and identity lies in a variety of different perspectives in the social sciences. The subject of this paper is to present the concept of identity in social constructionist paradigm. The paper focuses on works of social psychologist Kenneth Gergen (Gergen, 1991; Gergen, 2002; Gergen, 2009), Rom Harre (Harre, 2001, Harre, 2004; Harre & Tisaw, 2005) and John Shotter (Shotter, 1989; Shotter, 1997) whose speaking of the fragmented nature of identity. The similarities and differences between these approaches are shown. In conclusion, theoretical, methodological and political implications of adopting a new understanding of identity are reconsidered.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
