Elizabeth Theiss-Morse addresses a topic as old as the American Republic—the sources and consequences of American national identity. Despite the importance of this topic, much of the previous literature has discussed this in philosophical or political terms, with assertions or anecdotes sufficing for evidence. In contrast, this book offers valuable empirical evidence of how Americans actually think on these topics, based on a 2002 national survey. This is a complex and multifaceted topic, and no single book can provide all the answers. However, in raising questions and providing new empirical evidence, the book marks an important step forward in understanding American political identity.

With six chapters, Who Counts as an American is brief. The first chapter summarizes some of the key literature and underscores the complexity of the topic. The author argues that American national identity centers on a combination of a level of attachment to the American national community and a conception of who belongs to this community. This conceptualization of national identity distinguishes it from feelings of patriotism, nationalism, or adherence to the national creed—which, Theiss-Morse argues, are not appropriate measures of national identity. She presents this framework as a theory of national identity, but to be an effective theoretical model would require more elaboration.

The second chapter introduces the empirical base of the study. Using her 2002 national random digit dialing telephone survey, Theiss-Morse develops an index of national identity, which taps attachment to the American people. This is distinct from patriotism, which is measured by such questions as national pride. A third battery taps support for some elements of the “American Creed”: individualism and egalitarianism (although Samuel P. Huntington's Who Are We? (2004) has a more extensive list of values that might have been included). There are some surprising findings here, such as the different correlates of national identity and patriotism—even though these two dimensions are strongly related, contrary to the arguments presented in chapter 1.

Chapter 3 addresses the second element of national identity: What are the bounds of the American community? Who belongs? While social characteristics might provide a national stereotype in many countries, America has had a changing social structure because of its immigrant tradition. And social characteristics vie with creedal values as a way to define what it is to be American. The chapter shows that “soft boundaries” (such as feeling American or valuing freedom/equality) are nearly universally cited as important in defining who is an American. At the same time, some “hard boundary” items (such as U.S. citizenship or speaking English) are also nearly universally cited. The young, the better educated, and the politically knowledgeable are less likely to endorse hard boundary definitions, which have implications for the changing nature of identity. There are also some surprising nonfindings; for example, few cite race as an important factor, and soft and hard boundary definitions vary only marginally by partisanship and ideology. It is worth nothing that the survey was conducted eight months after September 11, 2001.

The following chapter examines some of the consequences of national identity. It argues that since national identity—as measured in this study—involves an attachment to the American public, national identity encourages attitudes and behavior that benefit the collective. A strong national identity creates a sense of obligation to help fellow Americans. This seems somewhat circular, and it is a place in the analysis where comparisons to patriotism or nationalism as traditionally measured would be insightful. A strong national identity also promotes support for individual charitable activity or government aid to the needy. This is the positive side of national attachments. There is some evidence of the negative side in the limiting of largess to those defined as part of the “American community.” The empirical evidence on this point is modest, but the theoretical and political implications are large.

Chapter 5 asks the hard question: Does national identity affect individuals' awareness of the negative features of their nation? Is it “America, Right or Wrong”? To an extent, the answer is yes for those with strong national identity, even controlling for patriotism and other political values. This is the potential dark side of national identity—a hesitancy to see problems that should be corrected. Another set of intriguing analyses explores whether the source of criticism affects an individual's reactions. This experimental evidence provocatively suggests that the source of criticism interacts with the strength of national identity. The book then concludes with a chapter summarizing the findings and considering the normative aspects of national identity. Not surprisingly, based on the empirical findings, Theiss-Morse argues that national identity has both positive and negative consequences.

It is probably a good thing when one finishes a book and wants even more. It is a sign that this is a significant topic deserving more research. In this spirit, let me outline some of the additions that might continue this program of research. In theoretical terms, many readers will want and expect more discussion of prior literature and a more fully developed theoretical model. For instance, the book purports to present a general model that should fit other nations—but one wants a richer theoretical framework if this is the intent. Often, a very large point is substantiated by a single article with narrow evidence. In addition, it is never quite clear how the three measures developed in chapter 2 are related to the traditional concept of nationalism. Much of the empirical literature on racial/ethnic identities versus national identity is also not fully discussed. More theoretical development would strengthen the book's central theoretical claims.

In terms of the empirical analysis, the author argues that national identity is distinct from patriotism, nationalism, and other previous measures of national attachments. Thus, many readers would like more attention devoted to the interrelationship among these various measures. And when the correlates of national identity are examined, the analyses could compare them to patriotism or nationalism. Some recent research suggests that this would highlight the positive and negative dimensions of national attachments and provide a richer understanding of the ways in which these sentiments matter.

In addition, there are frequent references to the United States in cross-national comparison, but systematic cross-national analysis is missing. Further research should examine some of the extensive cross-national literature on national identity. There are many theoretical reasons to expect that a general model appropriate to many European democracies would differ from the American experience. Also, several large cross-national projects (such as the International Social Survey Program and the World Values Survey) include data to demonstrate how the United States compares to other nations. Since the book at times talks about general models of identity, and also discusses why the U.S. experience is unusual, it would be valuable to look beyond this single case.

All this is to say that Theiss-Morse has brought theoretical and empirical attention to an important topic that will likely grow in importance in a world marked by globalization and increased international interactions. She adds to our understanding of national identity with empirical evidence that avoids the polemical rhetoric that often accompanies this topic. This is a significant contribution to our understanding of American political culture. And ideally, the next step is to place the American findings in a wider cross-national context.