 Sociopolitical Identity of Turkish Emerging Adults: The Role of Gender, Religious Sect, and Political Party Affiliation Vanessa Victoria Volpe

Acknowledgements  Faculty Mentor: Dr. Selcuk R. Sirin  Dalal Katsiaficas  Dr. Gigliana Melzi  The Spencer Foundation

Sociopolitical Identity Individual Social Interaction Political Context

Sociopolitical Identity  Sociopolitical identity: the evaluation of one's political group identity as it is experienced through social interaction (Tajfel & Turner, 1979).  Maintaining a defined sociopolitical identity is an important developmental task for emerging adults ( e.g., Arnett, 2000; Flanagan & Sherrod, 1998; Schildkraut, 2005). Individual

Components of Sociopolitical Identity Public Regard Private Regard Importance to Identity Membership  A defined sociopolitical identity involves four components.  Sociopolitical identity has been linked with  civic and political engagement (Schildkraut, 2005)  the maintenance of interpersonal relationships (Neumann, 1993). (Luhtanen & Crocker, 1992)

The Risk of Social Identity Stress  Social identity stress: the social experience of being criticized for holding viewpoints of a distinct political group (Hayes, Scheufele, & Huge, 2006).  Often results in damaged personal relationships, feelings of displacement, and feeling that one's identity is not valuable (Neumann, 1993).  Might result in a lack of exploration for emerging adults, which may then lead to limiting social engagement with members of other political groups.

The Potential of Own-Group Preference  Own-group preference: limiting social and cultural engagement with members of political out-groups  Limiting engagement to in-group significantly enhances positive feeling about in-group (e.g., Brewer, 1979).  Own-group preference might buffer the impact of social identity stress on sociopolitical identity.

Current Study Rationale  Social identity stress and own-group preference have never been examined in a political context.  There is a paucity of research on how emerging adults experience and define their sociopolitical identity in political contexts.  Research on sociopolitical identity may inform future research on intergroup relations and political engagement practices.

The Case of Turkey  Turkish emerging adults represent the majority of the 75 million Turkish nationals.  Conflicting viewpoints on the nature of the political context: polarized vs. harmonious.  Three important contextual considerations:  Gender  Religious Sect  Political Party Affiliation

Research Questions 1. How do emerging adults in Turkey report their social identity stress, own-group preference, and sociopolitical identity? 2. Are there gender, religious sect, and/or political party affiliation differences on social identity stress, own- group preference, and sociopolitical identity?

Research Questions Own-Group Preference Social Identity Stress Sociopolitical Identity 3. Does own-group preference moderate the predictive relation between social identity stress and sociopolitical identity?

Participants  Diverse nationally representative sample of Turkish emerging adults (N=1242)  Between the ages of 18 and 28 (M=21.50, SD=2.29)  Gender: 50.6% female  Religious Sect: 65% Sunni, 11% Shafi, 9% Alevi  Political Group:  44% CHP (Secularist)  33% AKP (Moderate)  15% MHP (Islamist)  8% Other

Measures ConstructMeasure NameModificationReliability Social Identity Stress Societal, Attitudinal, Familial, & Environmental Scale (SAFE; Hovey & King, 1996) Stress due to political identity 15 items; α =.84 Own-Group Preference Acculturation, Habits and Interests Multicultural Scale for Adolescents (AHIMSA; Unger et al., 2002) Social and cultural preference across political groups 15 items; α =.84 Sociopolitical Identity Collective Self-Esteem Scale (CSE; Luhtanen & Crocker, 1992) Emerging adults’ report on how well defined their political group identity is in social interactions 16 items; α =.76

Procedure  Data were taken from a larger national study of Turkish emerging adults (Political Identity in Conflict Study, PI: Selcuk R. Sirin)  Self-report surveys collected in over 50 locations were adapted by a multidisciplinary team of Turkish researchers to be culturally and linguistically appropriate.

Results: Sample Characteristics NM (SD)Scale Range Social Identity Stress (.57)1-4 Some Own-Group Preference (3.66)1-15 Sociopolitical Identity (.47)1-5 Note: 131 participants reported no own-group preference

Social Identity Stress by Gender t(1240) = 4.45, p <.01

Own-Group Preference by Gender t(1109) = -4.05, p <.01

Sociopolitical Identity by Gender t(1240) = -2.21, p <.05

Social Identity Stress by Religious Sect F(2,1240) = 31.91, p <.01

Own-Group Preference by Religious Sect F(2,1109) = 3.12, p <.01

Sociopolitical Identity by Religious Sect F(2,1240) = 5.79, p <.01

Social Identity Stress by Political Party F(2,1240) = 17.39, p <.01

Own-Group Preference by Political Party F(2,1109) = 7.03, p <.01

Results: Moderation Model  Contrary to the first hypothesis, own-group preference did not predict sociopolitical identity when controlling for gender, religious sect, and political party affiliation, F(4, 1240) = 2.64, p =.71.  Therefore, the role of own-group preference was not assessed, ΔR 2 = 0, F(6, 1240) = 14.61, p =.51.

Discussion  The Rejection-Identification Model (Branscombe, Schmitt, & Harvey, 1999) may not be uniform for all national contexts or social identity domains.  The structure of identity as flexible and multi-dimensional (Katsiaficas, Futch, Fine, & Sirin, in press; Seider & Gardner, 2009; Sirin & Fine, 2007).  Researchers should consider the intersections of gender, religious sect, and political party affiliation in order to more fully map the sociopolitical identities of Turkish emerging adults.  Results may shed light on the co-existence of western and secular ideologies within the political landscape in Turkey and highlight a generational difference.

Thank you Questions?