Marc Lewis, who was one of the first to apply dynamic systems constructs to an explication of personality development, and who did so in a very exciting way, provides us in the present chapter with more stimulating ideas and further food for thought. Here Lewis and Ferrari distinguish between implicit identity, which refers to personality characteristics, and explicit identity, which is a “specialized product” of the personality system and is self-reflective and dialogic. Both of these “identities” are subject to change as modeled in a dynamic systems framework. This is an interesting and potentially useful distinction; I would like to explore a comparison between these two aspects a bit further.

It seems to me that implicit and explicit identity may be differentially stable and differentially permeable to change. An examination of the literatures on “personality” and “self systems” suggests that implicit identity or personality may be more stable than explicit identity or self identity. According to a number of accounts, personality is in large measure grounded in emotional dispositions that have roots in temperament (McCrae and Costa, 1996; Goldsmith, 1994), though regularities and repetitive emotional experiences triggered by environmental conditions also shape dispositions (Malatesta, 1990). In any event, whether or not emotional dispositions of particular individuals accrue largely from temperamental substrates or from repetitive emotional events during early development, it is clear that mood states, which are products of personality, are fairly stable by the time individuals reach adulthood. The literature indicates that stability coefficients for positive and negative affect are quite high.