Analyzing Identity Construction in Jewish Israeli Youth: Life Story Insights, Schemes and Mind Maps of Construction

Download Analyzing Identity Construction in Jewish Israeli Youth: Life Story Insights and more Schemes and Mind Maps Construction in PDF only on Docsity! International Journal of Qualitative Methods 3 (4) December 2004 My Story, my life, my identity Julia Chaitin Julia Chaitin, PhD, Assistant Professor, Department of Conflict Analysis and Resolution, Graduate School of Humanities and Social Sciences, Nova Southeastern University, Fort Lauderdale, Florida Abstract: In this article, the author looks at the use of the methods of life stories or biographical interviewing in research on personal and social identity. She presents the rationale behind the use of the method and its basic procedures and then moves on to a discussion of the concept of identity. To demonstrate the relevance of this method for the study of identity construction, she presents examples from three life story interviews with Jewish Israeli young adults, all born in the mid 1970s. The article ends with a discussion of the implications of using life stories for understanding an individual’s sense of identity. Keywords: life story, biography, identity Citation information: Chaitin, J. (2004). My story, my life, my identity. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 3(4), Article 1. Retrieved INSERT DATE from http://www.ualberta.ca/~iiqm/backissues/3_4/ pdf/chaitin.pdf Chaitin MY STORY, MY LIFE, MY IDENTITY International Journal of Qualitative Methods 3 (4) December 2004 2 Introduction In this article, I focus on using the life story method for exploring the expression of personal and collective identities. To gain a deeper understanding of how the life story method and the concept of identity can tie together, I will present examples of how identities are expressed in the life story interviews of three Jewish Israelis born in the early 1970s, around the time of the Yom Kippur War (1973). I chose to study this method and to demonstrate its use for understanding this cohort for two reasons—one more academic and one more personal. For academic reasons, I believe it is worthwhile to explore the use of life stories in the study of issues of identity, as the two areas can inform and enhance one another. By bringing the two areas together, we will not only learn sensitive approaches to the study of identity but also, I hope, learn more about aspects of identity. There are a number of reasons for choosing the population that I did, and they are detailed below. Academic and personal reasons for choice of cohort—Jewish Israeli young adults I have chosen to look at the identity of Jewish Israeli young adults who were born after the Israeli occupation of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip (in 1967), because this cohort grew up in an Israel that not only differed significantly from that of their parents’ generation but also differed from the commonly held perception of Israel, held by those of us living in the Diaspora (Chaitin, 2004). As opposed to their elders, the occupation of the Palestinian people, and the conflict that has ensued because of the continued occupation, has always been part of the “normal” social and political reality for these young adults. The social reality of these young adults is also connected to the fact that since the decade of their birth, Israeli society has been characterized by increased Westernization and has moved away from an emphasis on Zionist, socialistic, and communal needs and identity—which characterized the Yishuv (Jewish prestate Israel) and the early years of statehood (Eisenstadt, 1973; Sachar, 1996; Segev, 1998; Zerubavel, 2002)—to an emphasis on individual needs, aspirations, and development. Pre-1970 Israel manifestly proclaimed the value of socialistic and communal ways of life over capitalistic and individualistic lifestyles. During the first 25 years of statehood, Israel was busy with the establishment of its infrastructures, engaged in a number of wars with her Arab neighbors, and also taken up with absorbing and settling massive numbers of Jewish immigrants from around the world (Bickerton & Klauser, 2002). It is safe to assume that these national missions could be accomplished only through strong social support and reinforcement of common, supraordinate goals above individual ones. Jewish Israeli young adults have been the topic of prior research studies, albeit mostly from cohorts born before the years under discussion in this article. Published research has centered on the place of the Holocaust in young adult lives (e.g., Bar-On, 1995; Chaitin, 2004; Feldman, 2002), the connection between military service and issues such as the Arab/Palestinian/Israeli conflict and gender identities (e.g., Helman, 1999; Linn, 1986, 1996; Lomsky-Feder, 2004; Lomsky-Feder & Ben-Ari, 1999; Sasson-Levy, 2003); the impact of the assassination of Yitzchak Rabin on young people (Shapira, 2000 ), and the place of the Sabra identity in the construction of Jewish Israeli identity (Almog, 2000; Moore & Bar-On, 1996). In the section below on the concept of identity, I will take a closer look at the concept of the Sabra and its connection to the development of Jewish Israeli identity. Chaitin MY STORY, MY LIFE, MY IDENTITY International Journal of Qualitative Methods 3 (4) December 2004 5 There is much literature on the conceptualization and construction of identity that is rooted in the study of group identity. This literature reflects two basic assumptions. The first assumption is that an individual’s identity is composed of multiple identities: personal identity, which consists of personal, idiosyncratic aspects; and social identity, which is based on social aspects, such as group membership (e.g., Brown, 1997; Tajfel, 1972, 1981; Tajfel & Turner, 1986; Turner, 1985; Turner & Oakes, 1989). The self-concept can be conceived of as a cognitive structure consisting of a set of concepts subjectively available to a person in attempting to define him- or herself (Gecas, 1982; Gergen, 1971; Hogg & Abrams, 1988), or, as Burke (2004) has stated, Identities are the sets of meanings people hold for themselves that define “what it means” to be who they are as persons, as role occupants, and as group members. These meanings constitute…an identity standard…[which] serves as a reference with which persons compare their perceptions of self-relevant meanings in the interactive situation. (pp. 6, 9) The second assumption is that representations of the other and the self, and the changes over time concerning these representations, play a central role in the process of the creation of personal and collective identity. Over the life course, we meet different significant others that both influence and are influenced by us, and we construct our identity in relation to these others. As Stryker (1980) stated, many identities are based on people's locations within the overall social structure and the roles that they and others play within that system. However, Gergen (1991) has reminded us that these roles are not always stable, and therefore, the borders of the self will change, depending on circumstances and on time. According to postmodern approaches, the construction of one’s identity is a dynamic process that develops and changes over the life course of the individual (Bicket, 2001; Giddens, 1991). A crucial aspect of this theory is the fluctuating nature of identity. Although people tend to identify with many social groups, based on factors such as race, ethnicity, class, gender, national origin, and so on, these factors become salient at different times and in different ways, thus contributing to the fluid nature of identity construction. According to social identity theory (Tajfel, 1982), when a particular group identity becomes salient at a particular time—for whatever reason—the sentiments, emotions, and behaviors of a member of the salient group will tend to be affected and guided by the norms and aspirations of that group. However, the degree to which an individual identifies with a given social category is associated with the internalization of the social category’s goals, values, norms, and traits (Ashford & Mael, 1989); with the degree of commitment the person feels toward the group (Mowday, Porter, & Steers, 1982); and with the degrees of cohesion, cooperation, and altruism toward other group members (Billig & Tajfel, 1973). Another way to think about identity is to note that it is also a means by which the individual connects the real to the imagined and the concrete to the symbolic in his or her perception of the social world (Bhabha, 1990). This approach further emphasizes the ongoing dialogue that occurs between intrapersonal (psychological) and interpersonal (social and cultural) components in the construction and understanding of identity (Sarup, 1996). When we bring together the personal and the social aspects of identity, we can see that, at times, the individual will stress his or her personal identity and at others, his or her collective sense. As Brown (1997) has noted, an individual who is motivated to preserve and enhance his or her self- image based primarily on personal identity is operating as a unique person. In this instance, the need for self-esteem is unambiguously located at the level of the individual. On the other hand, an Chaitin MY STORY, MY LIFE, MY IDENTITY International Journal of Qualitative Methods 3 (4) December 2004 6 individual who is motivated to preserve and enhance his or her self-image based primarily on social identity is operating as a representative of a social category. In such a case, the person, in effect, behaves as that social category, and his or her need for self-esteem is also identifiable as the social category’s need for self-esteem. Thus, as Turner (1987) has noted, there is a continuous reciprocal interaction and interdependence between individuals’ psychological processes and their activity, relations, and products as groups. When the group replaces the individual as the center of concern, however, this does not disrupt the discourse of individuality. The group, like the individual, is perceived as being imbued with good and evil intent, held blameworthy, deemed worthy of rights, and so on. This approach reflects Vygotsky’s idea (1978) that the self is conceptualized not only as encompassing autonomous or self-contained cognitive processes but also in a more socialized way. According to this perspective, there is nothing in thought that is not first in society; the self is conceptualized as dialogically constituted (Hermans & Kempen, 1993; Sampson, 1993; Shotter, 1993). In sum, identity has both personal and collective aspects, and is a dynamic process that unfolds over the person’s lifetime. At times, the social aspect of identity will be highly stressed, whereas at others, the personal components will gain salience. The borders between the two will not always be clear and well defined; one often blurs into the other, adding a sense of fluidity, change, conflict, and acceptance. The construction and development of Jewish Israeli identity As Zerubavel (2002) has noted, in the early and mid years of Zionistic thought and philosophy, mainstream discourse often centered on the construction of a new Jewish identity, which was articulated most powerfully in Israelis’ desires to dissociate themselves from their Jewish past of exile. Influenced by anti-Semitic depictions of European Jews, exiled Jews were often portrayed as uprooted, cowardly, weak, and helpless in the face of persecution, and were also seen as being either interested mainly in materialistic gains or excessively immersed in religion. In contrast, the Sabra (Almog, 2000)—the new Jew—was characterized as young and robust, daring and resourceful, direct and down-to-earth, honest and loyal, ideologically committed and ready to defend his or her people to the bitter end. The Mythological Sabra was an ideal type; it was a fictive hegemonic identity that reflected the cultural and collective background, values, and aspirations of the European founders of the State (Zerubavel, 2002). Although this image did not often mesh with the actual cultural diversity of Israeli immigrant society, and often conflicted with traumatic parts of Jewish history, such as the Holocaust (Moore & Bar-On, 1996), it was a powerful cultural construct that, for many years, served as a self-image and educational model for the socialization of both Israeli-born youth and new immigrants. Bar-On (1999), in his work on the development of Jewish Israeli identity, has conceptualized this identity as going through three stages. The first stage, termed the monolithic stage of identity, recruited this image of the Sabra to the disdain and exclusion of all others who did not fit this mold (i.e., Mizrachi [Sephardic] Jews, ultrareligious Jews, Palestinians, etc.). The valued identity was that of this New Jew, leaving little, if any, place for others. The monolithic identity dominated Israeli culture and society for approximately 30 years after statehood. The second stage, termed the stage of hitporerut (the disintegration stage), heralded the disintegration of this dominant identity. Some signposts of this disintegration included the rise of social movements, Chaitin MY STORY, MY LIFE, MY IDENTITY International Journal of Qualitative Methods 3 (4) December 2004 7 such as the movement that embraced Mizrachi Jews (beginning with the Israeli Black Panthers movement), the mainstreaming of certain sectors of religious Jewish factions (as in the political rise of Gush Emunim [the Bloc of the Faithful]), and the questioning by Jewish young adults, at the time, who found it morally difficult to accept parts of the Israeli military and political agenda and actions, that occurred during the Lebanese War and the first Intifada. The third stage, which was an outgrowth of the second stage and which became evident during the years of the Oslo peace accords, was termed the multivoice stage. Bar-On (1999) sees this stage as one in which Jewish Israelis are willing and interested in embracing aspects of the “otherness” within themselves, no longer needing to separate themselves categorically from the previous “enemies.” Today, after nearly 4 years of renewed violence between the Israelis and Palestinians, signs of monolithic identity have appeared again, at least vis-à-vis the Palestinian other. This stage can be termed neomonolithic. In her essay on the changing identity of Jewish Israelis from prestate Israel until the assassination of Yitzchak Rabin (in 1995), Shapira (2000) asked if there is a common Israeli identity today and what is an Israeli? Is he or she a settler on the West Bank, in military fatigues and tallith, with skull cap and automatic rifle? An ultra-Orthodox youth from B'nei B'rak dutiful to the directives of his Hasidic rebbe? A youngster from the Sheinkin Street bohemian milieu in downtown Tel Aviv with a weird, attention-grabbing hair style? A newcomer immigrant from Russia proud of his language and culture? Or one from Ethiopia who has struggled for recognition as a Jew by the Chief Rabbinate? An Ashkenazi who loves classical music, or an Oriental Jew who prefers Eastern rhythms and riffs? Or maybe there exists a silent Israeli majority, secular in outlook yet wishing to keep a link to ancient Jewish tradition, who long for peace with security, who want economic progress—or simply just to get on with their lives, like any human being? And what about the Arab citizens of the state? And of course, we could have framed the whole passage in gendered terms, shifting the focus to the other 50 percent of the population that is not male. (pp. 663-664) When we look at the development of Jewish Israeli identity over the decades, then, we can see that it has undergone changes and that the hegemonic image of the Sabra can no longer capture the essence and dynamics of Jewish Israeli identity. This change and fluidity mirrors the conceptualization of identity in general, thus demonstrating that one’s sense of personal and social/collective identity is a process, one that changes and unfolds over time. The connection between the life story and construction of identity When a researcher asks a participant to relate his or her life story, the process of telling the story and its outcome (the completed life story interview) is a construction of the lived life. This includes both the experiences that the person has lived through and the ways in which the individual understands the meanings that these experiences have had for him or her. Some theoreticians have averred that the life story is not only a recounting of one’s life but is actually a process by which individuals construct their identity (Botella, 1997; Fischer-Rosenthal & Alheit, 1995). As the narratives unfold, the individuals validate their sense of self, thus reinforcing the feeling—both in themselves and in the listener—that an identity is in the process of being constructed through the vehicle of the storytelling. The life story method, which calls for the Chaitin MY STORY, MY LIFE, MY IDENTITY International Journal of Qualitative Methods 3 (4) December 2004 10 they knew who he was because I identified him from the [police] pictures, and he is a resident of the territories, and in the end they found him because the army searched for him…I was a child and in order to understand these things, it’s interesting…that I understood that this event was…it’s very funny today, I don’t understand…he said…“All of the Jewish women are whores”…for some reason I decided that it was due to political reasons…it was in the news a long time…and it was also…part of the turn that my family made, because after it, we decided to go into family therapy…my father had a very difficult time with this…that’s it, that’s how I had it for a number of years that…from a social standpoint, I blossomed…everyone knows and when everyone knows who I am…it created in them admiration. I don’t know how to understand this… but … during the years afterward, I had it…very good with everyone from a social standpoint, better than what I had in elementary school. When Lee told me her life story, her main narrative was quite short—about 15 minutes long. As I went back with her over the “headlines” she had given me (e.g., “I went to elementary school and then I went to middle school”), I asked her an intrinsic question; I asked if she could tell me about an experience from her elementary school years. Lee then chose the story of the attack and attempted rape. As soon as Lee told the story of this trauma from her youth, she then used this story to direct the rest of her life story. Every additional experience somehow tied back to this traumatic event and wove the personal (“I became very popular”; “We went for family therapy”) to the collective (“I decided that it was connected to political reasons”). When Lee discussed her army service, she continued to tie the experience of the attack to her opinions about the occupation of the Palestinian people. Lee spent a few weeks in the West Bank, serving in a jail that held Palestinian prisoners. When she walked by the prisoners, seeing them in their cells and behind the barbed wire, Lee noted that she felt deep discomfort at the sight of people caged “like animals.” Lee went on then to say that even though it had been a Palestinian man who had attacked her as a child, she did not bear the Palestinian people any ill will, and that it did not affect her political stance. On one level, Lee tries to separate her belief that the Palestinians are entitled to their own state and to full human and civil rights from her memories of being brutally attacked by a Palestinian man. However, if we choose not only to take Lee’s assertion at its face value but to look at other interpretations as well—ones that Lee might feel uncomfortable about or be unable to verbalize (Josselson, 2004)—we can also interpret her story as showing that the attack might have made her wary of and angry toward Palestinians in general, thus leading her to associate them with “animals.” In either case, the personal and the collective strands of identity here appear to run parallel to one another, neither meeting nor clashing. In short, what we hear in Lee’s story is a more separate sense of the personal and the social than we do in Amit’s narrative. A third and final example comes from Ziv’s interview. Ziv, who was born and raised on a kibbutz, was 27 at the time of his interview. Whereas I knew Amit and Lee from my work at the university, I knew Ziv from my kibbutz. Ziv, like Amit, ties his story to the collective—but this time, it is the kibbutz collective that takes center stage in the construction of his personal and collective identity. After I asked Ziv to tell me his life story, this is what he said: My life story, that is a difficult question…I was born in Israel, in a kibbutz, kibbutz, kibbutz X…life in the kibbutz…wow…I don’t like to answer this question because now I have to go over my life…kibbutz education with Chaitin MY STORY, MY LIFE, MY IDENTITY International Journal of Qualitative Methods 3 (4) December 2004 11 everything that this means, the regional school that is…a school for the agricultural settlements, a kibbutz school, I have more a tendency for the academic…afterward I did a year of national service in a town in the Negev, a chapter in life, afterward four and a half years in the army, in a battle unit…after being discharged I came to the kibbutz, I gave a year and a half for the good of the kibbutz, I took a trip abroad for a year, like most of the young adults…I came back, I worked a bit outside [of the kibbutz] in Haifa…I did not get everything that I could have out of this part and I returned to the kibbutz in order to be eligible for the study program that the kibbutz gives people who were born and raised on the kibbutz, now I am studying the first year of Chinese medicine, that’s it, you’ve got me now [laughter]. In Amit’s story, we saw his acceptance and embracing of his Israeli identity, and in Lee’s story we see how the personal and the collective intersect, when a personal trauma has a collective twist, and, at times, run parallel to one another, when she described her army experiences, her political views, and the attack she suffered when she was a child. In both cases, it appears as if she accepts equally both personal and collective aspects of her identity, with no expression of conflict between the two. However, in Ziv’s story, something else emerges. In his interview, we see a deep connection to his Israeli and kibbutz identity (in his very short main narrative, he mentions the word kibbutz 10 times!), but we also hear an expression of inner conflict that he has with this part of this identity. This is evident in his words, which note that he does not like to talk about it (“because now I need to go over my life”), and we get the sense that he feels that he might have “missed” something (“I did not get everything that I could have out of that part”). We can understand Ziv’s choice to study Chinese medicine as also reflecting his personal goals that mix both the personal and the collective. Later on in the interview, when Ziv talks about how he came to the decision to study Chinese medicine, he notes that it was important for him to find a profession that encompasses body and soul, one in which he can connect to and work with people on a daily basis—reflective, in no small part, of what he calls his kibbutz upbringing. With this, from his interview, it appears as if he is not considering making the kibbutz his permanent home, as he feels now that he wants to get more out of the personal expression of life that has yet to be fully realized or satisfied. From Ziv’s words, one gets the impression that he is engaged in an emotionally difficult task that he has not yet mastered. He appears to be trying to construct a coherent identity from a number of fragments: one that will take into account the different others that he feels are part of him (Bar- On, 1999) and the diverse aspects of Jewish Israeli identity (Shapira, 2000). His fluctuation and conflict between what he feels he “ought” to do (based on his strict kibbutz educational upbringing) and what he would like to do (based on his experiences outside of the kibbutz) is expressed throughout his story. Discussion In this article, two separate yet related concepts were brought together: the life story method and the concept of identity. As Fischer-Rosenthal and Alheit (1995) have noted, one’s biographical account is one’s identity; the two cannot be separated. Furthermore, as Rosenthal (1997) further stressed, people’s national and social identity is shaped and reshaped by their personal history as well as by the history of the world during their lifetime. People's identity is based on their life story, in the sense that by presenting an autobiography, they come to terms with the various Chaitin MY STORY, MY LIFE, MY IDENTITY International Journal of Qualitative Methods 3 (4) December 2004 12 components and conflicts of this identity, parallel to the lifelong process of becoming what and who they are. From the short examples presented from interviews with two Jewish Israeli young men and one young woman, we could see the interplay between the personal and collective aspects of identity. Sometimes, this was expressed as an almost complete enmeshment of the two (the case of Amit); sometimes expressed as intertwining or as running parallel to one another (the case of Lee), and sometimes expressed as a conflict and yearning (the case of Ziv). In all cases, the dynamic and evolving nature of the identity was also evident, though it was definitely more so in the life story interviews with Lee and Ziv than with Amit, who appears to have constructed his identity closely around his Israeli collective sense of self, one reminiscent of the dominant Sabra identity of earlier years (Almog, 2000; Shapira, 2000). If we tie these understandings to Bar-On’s (1999) conceptualization of the development of Jewish Israeli identity, we can aver that Amit tends more toward a monolithic stance, with Lee and Ziv expressing an identity that does not seek to embrace the “typical” Sabra identity, as they aim toward acquiring a more multivoiced identity. Furthermore, if we look at these young adults’ life stories through the prism of Shapira’s (2000) question of who is an Israeli, we can hypothesize that Amit’s sense of identity is reminiscent of the identity associated with the Palmach generation (the heroes around the time of the Israeli War of Independence), Lee’s identity mirrors a mixture of the Shenkin identity (a popular street in Tel Aviv with chic boutiques and cafés) with a desire to simply get on with her life, and Ziv appears to be striving for expression of his secular identity, which will culminate in the achievement of personal and professional peace of mind. If we assume that one’s identity is continually reconstructed over the life course (Bicket, 2001; Gergen, 1991), exploration of an individual’s sense of identity becomes a complex exploration. Therefore, it requires a method that is open to complexity and possesses strategies for capturing this complexity. The life story method provides a vehicle for such inquiry, because it not only perceives the person’s life story as a holistic representation of self—one that encompasses the personal and the social, inner motivations and goals with external norms and experiences—but also provides a strategy for getting at that holistic representation. The method does not attempt to guide the story in any clear or well-defined manner; it allows the interviewees to talk about their lives in their own words, in their own time, beginning wherever they wish and continuing on in such a way until they feel that they have reached “the end,” using their own linguistic styles of personal storytelling. If we view the construction of one’s identity as a lifelong process, then we can also assert that at times, one’s identity will be characterized by uncertainty, ambiguity, contradictions, and loss of control. This should be especially true of young adults, who are often deeply in the throes of trying to understand who they are and what their place is within their social context (Erickson, 1977). For these reasons, the biographical method of interviewing can be a very relevant and sensitive method for the exploration of such an identity, given that it is a method that is not afraid of giving over control to another (in this case, the researcher insists that the autobiographer lead the way) and that deals with and sometimes appears even to encourage ambiguity, uncertainty, and contradictions. The researcher does not aim to control what happens during the interview process or to devise a neat interview package that will result in a model that exactly reproduces itself each time an interview is undertaken. By not directing the autobiographer in any way (learning not to interrupt the autobiographer during the main narrative is one of the most difficult skills that the interviewer needs to learn), the researcher lets the autobiographer know that it is legitimate to be ambiguous and to not feel the need to place clear borders around his or her life Chaitin MY STORY, MY LIFE, MY IDENTITY International Journal of Qualitative Methods 3 (4) December 2004 15 Chaitin, J. (2004). The relevance and meaning of the Holocaust for children and grandchildren of survivors: The case of paradoxical relevance. Children in War: The International Journal of Evacuee and War Child Studies, 1(1), 79-89. Chaitin, J., & Bar-On, D. (2001). The family during the Holocaust: Memories of parent child relationships. Mind and Human Interaction, 12(4), 238-260. Eisenstadt, S. N. (1973). Israeli society: Background, development and problems (2nd ed.). Jerusalem, Israel: Magnes. Erickson, E. H. (1977). Childhood and society. Saint Albans, UK: Triad/Paladin. Feldman, J. (2002). Marking the boundaries of the enclave: Defining the Israeli collective through the Poland “experience.” Israel Studies, 17(2), 84-116. Fischer-Rosenthal, W., & Alheit, P. (Eds.). (1995). Biographien in Deutschland: Soziologische Rekonstruktionen gelebter Gesellschaftsgeschichte [Biographies in Germany: Sociological reconstructions of lived social history]. Opladen, Germany: Westdeutscher Verlag. Gecas, V. (1982). The self concept. Annual Review of Psychology, 8, 1-33. Gergen, K. J. (1971). The concept of self. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston. Gergen, K. J. (1991). The saturated self: Dilemmas of identity in contemporary life. New York: Basic Books. Giddens, A. (1991). Modernity and self-identity: Self and society in the late modern age. Cambridge, UK: Polity. Helman, S. (1999). Militarism and the construction of the life world of Israeli males: The case of the reserves system. In E. Lomsky-Feder & E. Ben-Ari (Eds.), The military and militarism in Israeli society (pp. 191-221). Albany: State University of New York Press. Hermans, H. J. M., & Kempen, H. J. G. (1993). The dialogical self. San Diego, CA: Academic Press. Hogg, M. A., & Abrams, D. (1988). Social identification: A social psychology of intergroup relations and group processes. London: Routledge. Josselson, R. (2004). The hermeneutics of faith and the hermeneutics of suspicion. Narrative Inquiry, 14(1), 1-28. Lieblich, A., Tuval-Mashiach, R., & Zilber, T. (1998). Narrative research: Reading, analysis and interpretation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Linn, R. (1986). Conscientious objection in Israel during the war in Lebanon. Armed Forces and Society, 12(4), 489-511. Linn, R. (1996). When the individual soldier says “no” to war: A look at selective refusal during the Intifada. Journal of Peace Research, 33(4), 421-432. Chaitin MY STORY, MY LIFE, MY IDENTITY International Journal of Qualitative Methods 3 (4) December 2004 16 Lomsky-Feder, E. (2004). Life stories, war and veterans: On the social distribution of memories. Ethos, 32(1), 82-110. Lomsky-Feder, E., & Ben-Arie, E. (1995). From the people in uniforms to different uniforms for the people: Professionalism, diversity and the Israeli Defense Forces. In J. Soeters & J. van der Meulen (Eds.), Managing diversity in the Armed Forces: Experiences from nine countries (pp. 157-186). Tilburg, the Netherlands: Tilburg University Press. Moore, Y., & Bar-On, D. (1996). The “as-if’” “Sabraness” of second generation Holocaust survivors: A biographical and narrative analysis of one interview [Hebrew]. Sichot, 11(1), 36-48. Mowday, R. T., Porter, L. W., & Steers, R. M. (1982). Employee-organization linkages: The psychology of commitment, absenteeism and turnover. New York: Academic Press. Rosenthal, G. (1993). Reconstruction of life stories: Principles in selection in generating stories for narrative biographical interviews. In R. Josselson & A. Lieblich (Eds.), Narrative study of lives (Vol. 1, pp. 59-91). London: Sage. Rosenthal, G. (1997). National identity or multicultural autobiography: Theoretical concepts of biographical constitution grounded in case reconstructions. In A. Lieblich & R. Josselson (Eds.), The narrative study of lives (pp. 21-39). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Rosenthal, G. (1998). The Holocaust in three-generations: Families of victims and perpetrators of the Nazi-regime. London: Cassell. Rosenthal, G. (2004): Biographical research. In C. Seale, G. Gobo, J. F. Gubrium, & D. Silverman (Eds.), Qualitative research practice (pp. 48-64). London: Sage. Sachar, H. M. (1996). A history of Israel: From the rise of Zionism to our time (2nd ed.). New York: Albert Knopf. Sampson, E. E. (1993). Celebrating the other. Boulder, CO: Westview. Sarup, M. (1996). Identity, culture and the post-modern world. Athens: University of Georgia Press. Sasson-Levy, O. (2003). Constructing identities at the margins: Masculinities and citizenship in the Israeli army. Sociological Quarterly, 43(3), 357-383. Schütze, F. (1983). Biographieforschung und narratives Interview [Biographical research and the narrative interview]. Neue Praxis, 3, 283-293. Schütze, F. (1984). Kognitive Figuren des autobiographischen Stegreiferzahlens. In M. Kohli & G. Robert (Eds.), Biographie und soziale Wirklichkeit [Biography and social reality] (pp. 78-117). Stuttgart, Germany: Metzler. Segev, T. (1998). 1949: The first Israelis. New York: Henry Holt. Chaitin MY STORY, MY LIFE, MY IDENTITY International Journal of Qualitative Methods 3 (4) December 2004 17 Shapira, A. (2000). From the Palmach generation to the candle children: Changing patterns in Israeli identity. Partisan Review, 67(4), 622-636. Shotter, J. (1993). Conversational realities. London: Sage. Stryker, S. (1980). Symbolic interactionism: A social structural version. Menlo Park, CA: Benjamin Cummings. Tajfel, H. (1972). La categorization sociale. In S. Moscovici (Ed.), Introduction a la psychologie sociale (Vol. 1, pp. 272-302). Paris: Larousse. Tajfel, H. (1981). Human groups and social categories. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Tajfel, H. (1982). Social identity and intergroup relations. New York: Cambridge University Press. Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1986). The social identity theory of intergroup behavior. In S. Worchel & W. G. Austin (Eds.), Psychology of intergroup relations (Vol. 2, pp. 7-24). Chicago: Nelson-Hall. Turner, J. C. (1985). Social categorization and self-concept: A social cognitive theory of group behavior. Advances in Group Process, 2, 77-122. Turner, J. C. (1987). Rediscovering the social group, a self-categorization theory. Oxford, UK: Blackwell. Turner, J. C., & Oakes, P. J. (1989). Self-categorization theory and social influence. In P. B. Paulus (Ed.), The psychology of group influence (Vol. 2, pp. 233-275). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. van Manen, M. (1996). Phenomenological pedagogy and the question of meaning. In D. Vandenberg (Ed.), Phenomenology and educational discourse (pp. 39-64). Durban, India: Heinemann Higher and Further Education. van Manen, M. (Ed.). (2002). Writing in the dark: Phenomenological studies in interpretive inquiry. London, Canada: Althouse. Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Wengraf, T. (2001). Qualitative research interviewing: Biographic narratives and semi- structured methods. Sage: London. Zerubavel, Y. (2002). The “mythological Sabra” and Jewish past: Trauma, memory and contested identities. Israel Studies, 17(2), 115-146.