ABSTRACT
This chapter discusses three interpretations in reverse order. The first is that one of the two statements represents Selcuk's true views or real sense of identity and the other, feelings such as his desire to comply or the social desirability of responding in this way. The second interpretation is that there is no inconsistency because Selcuk's statements are not similar. The idea of inconsistency presupposes similarity because, otherwise, a comparison of the specific utterances is not appropriate. The third interpretation is that Selcuk's utterances should be understood in their context. This is the idea that meaning is always contextual and variable, and that situational self-conception, rather than the organized self-concept, should be examined. The social comparative context affected ethnic self-description. Ethnic behaviours such as language and involvement in cultural practices are sometimes used as criterion variables of ethnic identity, but sometimes also as dimensions of a sense of identity.
