"Possible selves derive from representations of the self in the past and they include representations of the self in the future. They are different and separable from the current or now selves, yet are intimately connected to them. Possible future selves, for example, are not just any set of imagined roles or states of being. Instead they represent specific, individually significant hopes, fears, and fantasies. I am now a psychologist, but I could be a restaurant owner, a marathon runner, a journalist, or the parent of a handicapped child. These possible selves are individualized or personalized, but they are also distinctly social. Many of these possible selves are the direct result of previous social comparisons in which the individual’s own thoughts, feelings, characteristics, and behaviors have been contrasted to those of salient others. What others are now, I could become.
An individual is free to create any variety of possible selves, yet the pool of possible selves derives from the categories made salient by the individual’s particular sociocultural and historical context and from the models, images, and symbols provided by the media and by the individual’s immediate social experiences. Possible selves thus have the potential to reveal the inventive and constructive nature of the self but they also reflect the extent to which the self is socially determined and constrained (cf. Elder, 1980; Meyer, 1985; Stryker, 1984).”
- Hazel Markus & Paula Nurius, “Possible Selves,” American Psychologist, 1986. Emphasis mine.
I think this theory is super important for anyone who works with adolescents to understand, and has really important intersections with sociology, public policy, and lots of other fields. This, for instance, is why media representations matter. It’s why having diversity in various employment sectors matters (teaching field, I’m looking at you).