Reader-character identity interdependence: An empirical investigation of congruence in identity and reading

• All readers read for identification with the characters in the books they are reading • Marginalised readers seek out representation in their reading • Marginalised readers also read across dominant spaces of normativity • Readers from dominant identity groups read less widely in terms of representation • A small subset of readers respond negatively to connections between identity and reading This article examines the mutually constitutive relationship between identity, social participation, and reading, through a survey of 3089 readers in the United States, United Kingdom and Australia conducted in 2022. This is driven by an intersectional call to take seriously individualised experiences of identity including diverse and overlapping identities, consider multiple marginalisations, and interrogate normative modes of thinking. This connects to a commitment shared with other scholars of reading practice to undertake research that is simultaneously descriptive and critical. This forms the basis for our survey design, comprehending substantial engagement with readers’ reporting of their own reading practices. We work through multifaceted understandings of identity in our survey, and use this as the basis for examining specific patterns of identity formation through reading practice, and considering how individual experiences connect to larger systemic power dynamics. We find that all readers read for identification with the characters in the books that they read. However, readers who belong to multiply marginalised groups must go against the grain of dominant structures of representation to seek out opportunities for identification in their reading, and still also tend to read across dominant spaces of normativity, whereas readers who belong to dominant identity groups do not similarly read against the grain. Income and education complicate this by potentially dictating access to diverse books. Select readers were confronted by the survey’s interest in identity and reading; while a survey is inherently normative, interesting trends of counter-cultural pushback emerged in free-text spaces as readers navigated the limitations of the tool.