People vary widely in their expressive accuracy, the tendency to be viewed in line with one’s unique traits. It is unclear, however, whether expressive accuracy is a stable individual difference that transcends social contexts or a more piecemeal, context‐specific characteristic. The current research therefore examined the consistency of expressive accuracy across three social contexts: face‐to‐face initial interactions, close relationships, and social media. There was clear evidence for cross‐contextual consistency, such that expressive accuracy in face‐to‐face first impressions, based on brief round‐robin interactions, was associated with expressive accuracy with close others (Sample 1; Ntargets = 514; Ndyads = 1656) and based on Facebook profiles (Samples 2 and 3: Ntargets = 126–132; Ndyads = 1170–1476). This was found on average across traits and for high and low observability traits. Further, unique predictors emerged for different types of expressive accuracy, with psychological adjustment and conscientiousness most consistently linked to overall expressive accuracy, extraversion most consistently linked to high observability expressive accuracy, and neuroticism most consistently linked to low observability expressive accuracy. In sum, expressive accuracy appears to emerge robustly and consistently across contexts, although its predictors may differ depending on the type of trait.
AikenA.HumanL. J.AldenL. E.BiesanzJ. C. (2014).
Try to find me: Social anxiety and peer first impressions. Behavior Therapy,
45, 851–862. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beth.2014.08.001.
2.
AmbadyN.HallahanM.RosenthalR. (1995).
On judging and being judged accurately in zero‐acquaintance situations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
69, 518–529. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.69.3.518.
3.
AndersenS. M. (1984).
Self‐knowledge and social inference: II. The diagnosticity of cognitive/affective and behavioral data. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
46, 294–307. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.46.2.294.
4.
AndersonC.BerdahlJ. L. (2002).
The experience of power: Examining the effects of power on approach and inhibition tendencies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
83, 1362–1377. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.83.6.1362.
5.
BackM. D.StopferJ. M.VazireS.GaddisS.SchmukleS. C.EgloffB.GoslingS. D. (2010).
Facebook profiles reflect actual personality, not self‐idealization. Psychological Science,
21, 372–374. https://doi.org/10.1002/0956797609360756.
6.
BairdB. M.LeK.LucasR. E. (2006).
On the nature of intraindividual personality variability: Reliability, validity, and associations with well‐being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
90, 512–527. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.90.3.512.
7.
BarghJ. A.McKennaK. Y. A.FitzsimonsG. M. (2002).
Can you see the real me? Activation and expression of the “true self” on the internet. Journal of Social Issues,
58, 33–48. https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-4560.00247.
8.
BatesD.MächlerM.BolkerB.WalkerS. (2015).
Fitting linear mixed‐effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software,
67, 1–48. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v067.i01.
9.
BemD. J.AllenA. (1974).
On predicting some of the people some of the time: The search for cross‐situational consistencies in behavior. Psychological Review,
81, 506–520. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0037130.
10.
BernieriF. J. (2001).
Towards a taxonomy of interpersonal sensitivity. In HallJ. A.BernieriF. J. (Eds.), Interpersonal sensitivity: Theory and measurement (pp. 265–302).
Mahwah, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum.
11.
BiesanzJ. C. (2010).
The social accuracy model of interpersonal perception: Assessing individual differences in perceptive and expressive accuracy. Multivariate Behavioral Research,
45, 853–885. https://doi.org/10.1080/00273171.2010.519262.
12.
BiesanzJ. C. (2019, in press).
The social accuracy model. In The Oxford handbook of accurate personality judgment.
New York, NY:
Oxford University Press.
13.
BiesanzJ. CHumanL. J. (2010).
The cost of forming more accurate impressions: Accuracy‐Motivated perceivers see the personality of others more distinctively but less normatively than perceivers without an explicit goal. Psychological Science, (21), 589–594. https://doi.org/10.1002/0956797610364121.
14.
BiesanzJ. C.WestS. G. (2000).
Personality coherence: Moderating self‐other profile agreement and profile consensus. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
79, 425–437. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.79.3.425.
15.
BiesanzJ. C.WestS. G.GrazianoW. G. (1998).
Moderators of self‐other agreement: Reconsidering temporal stability in personality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
75, 467–477. https://doi.Org/10.1037//0022-3514.75.2.467.
16.
BiesanzJ. C.WestS. G.MillevoiA. (2007).
What do you learn about someone over time? The relationship between length of acquaintance and consensus and self‐other agreement in judgments of personality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
92, 119–135. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.92.1.119.
17.
BlackmanM. C.FunderD. C. (1998).
The effect of information on consensus and accuracy in personality judgment. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology,
34, 164–181. https://doi.org/10.1006/jesp.1997.1347.
18.
BollichK. L.JohannetP. M.VazireS. (2011).
In search of our true selves: Feedback as a path to self‐knowledge. Frontiers in Psychology,
2, 312. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00312.
19.
BorkenauP.LeisingD. (2016).
A more complete picture of personality: What analyses of trait profiles have told us about personality judgment—So far. Current Directions in Psychological Science,
25, 228–232. https://doi.org/10.1002/0963721416651960.
20.
BorkenauP.ZaltauskasK. (2009).
Effects of self‐enhancement on agreement on personality profiles. European Journal of Personality,
23, 107–123. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.707.
21.
BuckR. (1975).
Nonverbal communication of affect in children. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
31, 644–653. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0077071.
22.
CampbellJ. D.AssanandS.PaulaA. D. (2003).
The structure of the self‐concept and its relation to psychological adjustment. Journal of Personality,
71, 115–140. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-6494.t01-1-00002.
23.
CarlsonE. N.VazireS.OltmannsT. F. (2011).
You probably think this paper's about you: Narcissists’ perceptions of their personality and reputation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
101, 185–201. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0023781.
24.
CarneyD. R.ColvinC. R.HallJ. A. (2007).
A thin slice perspective on the accuracy of first impressions. Journal of Research in Personality,
41, 1054–1072. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2007.01.004.
25.
ChaplinW. F.GoldbergL. R. (1984).
A failure to replicate the Bem and Allen study of individual differences in cross‐situational consistency. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
47, 1074–1090. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.47.5.1074.
26.
CheekJ. M. (1982).
Aggregation, moderator variables, and the validity of personality tests: A peer‐rating study. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
43, 1254–1269. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.43.6.1254.
27.
ClarkL. A.WatsonD.MinekaS. (1994).
Temperament, personality, and the mood and anxiety disorders. Journal of Abnormal Psychology,
103, 103–116. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-843X.103.1.103.
ColvinC. R. (1993b).
“Judgable” people: Personality, behavior, and competing explanations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
64, 861–873. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.64.5.861.
30.
CronbachL. (1955).
Processes affecting scores on “understanding of others” and “assumed similarity”. Psychological Bulletin,
52, 177–193. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0044919.
31.
CrossS. F.GoreJ. S.MorrisM. L. (2003).
The relational‐interdependent self‐construal, self‐concept consistency, and well‐being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
85, 933–944. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.85.5.933.
32.
CupermanR.IckesW. (2009).
Big Five predictors of behavior and perceptions in initial dyadic interactions: Personality similarity helps extraverts and introverts, but hurts “disagreeables”. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
97, 667–684. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015741.
33.
De Choudhury, M., Gamon, M., Counts, S., & Horvitz, E. (2013, July 8‐11). Predicting depression via social media. Proceedings of the ICWSM 2013: International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media, Cambridge, MA.
34.
DienerE.EmmonsR. A.LarsenR. J.GriffinS. (1985).
The satisfaction with life scale. Journal of Personality Assessment,
49, 71–75. https://doi.org/10.1037/t01069-000.
35.
DonahueE. M.RobinsR. W.RobertsB. W.JohnO. P. (1993).
The divided self: Concurrent and longitudinal effects of psychological adjustment and social roles on self‐concept differentiation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
64, 834–846. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.64.5.834.
36.
EdwardsA. L. (1957). The social desirability variable in personality assessment and research.
New York:
Dryden.
37.
EkmanP. (1972).
Universal and cultural differences in facial expressions of emotion. In ColeJ. R. (Ed.), Nebraska Symposium on Motivation, 1971 (pp. 207–283).
Lincoln:
Nebraska University Press.
38.
EnglishT.ChenS. (2007).
Culture and self‐concept stability: Consistency across and within contexts among Asian Americans and European Americans. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
93, 478–490. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.93.3.478.
39.
EnglishT.ChenS. (2011).
Self‐concept consistency and culture: The differential impact of two forms of consistency. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,
37, 838–849. https://doi.org/10.1002/0146167211400621.
40.
FleesonW. (2001).
Toward a structure‐and process‐integrated view of personality: Traits as density distributions of states. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
80, 1011–1027. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.80.6.1011.
41.
FletcherG. J. O.KerrP. S. G. (2010).
Through the eyes of love: Reality and illusion in intimate relationships. Psychological Bulletin,
136, 627–658. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0019792.
42.
FriedmanH. S.PrinceL. M.RiggioR. E.DiMatteoM. R. (1980).
Understanding and assessing nonverbal expressiveness: The affective communication test. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
39, 333–351. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.39.2.333.
43.
Friesen, W. V. (1972). Cultural differences in facial expression in a social situation: An experimental test of the concept of display rules. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of California, San Francisco.
FunderD. C. (Ed) (1999). Personality judgment: A realistic approach to person perception.
San Diego:
Academic Press.
46.
FunderD. C.ColvinC. R. (1997).
Congruence of others’ and self‐judgments of personality. In HoganR.JohnsonJ.BriggsS. (Eds.), Handbook of personality psychology (pp. 617–647).
San Diego, CA:
Academic Press doi:10.1016/B978‐012134645‐4/50025‐1.
47.
FunderD. C.DobrothK. M. (1987).
Differences between traits: Properties associated with interjudge agreement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
52, 409–418. https://doi.org/ 10.1037/0022‐3514.52.2.409
48.
FunderD. C.KolarD. C.BlackmanM. C. (1995).
Agreement among judges of personality: Interpersonal relations, similarity, and acquaintanceship. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
69, 656–672. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.69.4.656.
49.
FunderD. COzerD. J. (2019).
Evaluating effect size in psychological research: Sense and nonsense. Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science,
2, 156–168. https://doi.org/10.1002/2515245919847202.
50.
FunderD. C.SneedC. D. (1993).
Behavioral manifestations of personality: An ecological approach to judgmental accuracy. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
64, 479–490. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.64.3.479.
51.
FurrR. M. (2008).
Framework for profile similarity: Integrating similarity, normativeness, and distinctiveness. Journal of Personality,
76, 1267–1316. https://doi.org/10.1111Zj.1467-6494.2008.00521.x.
52.
GagnéF. M.LydonJ. E. (2004).
Bias and accuracy in close relationships: An integrative review. Personality and Social Psychology Review,
8, 322–338. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327957pspr0804_1.
53.
GoslingS. D.KoS. J.MannarelliT.MorrisM. E. (2002).
A room with a cue: Personality judgments based on offices and bedrooms. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
82, 379–398. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.82.3.379.
54.
HallJ. ABackM. DNestlerSFrauendorferDSchmid MastMRubenM. A. (2018).
How do different ways of measuring individual differences in zero‐acquaintance personality judgment accuracy correlate with each other?. Journal of Personality,
86, 220–232. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopy.12307.
55.
HaseltonM. G.FunderD. (2006).
The evolution of accuracy and bias in social judgment. In SchallerM.SimpsonJ. A.KenrickD. T. (Eds.), Evolution and social psychology (pp. 15–37).
New York:
Psychology Press.
56.
HirschmüllerS.EgloffB.SchmukleS. C.NestlerS.BackM. D. (2015).
Accurate judgments of neuroticism at zero acquaintance: A question of relevance. Journal of Personality,
83, 221–228. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopy.12097.
57.
HofsteeW. K. B. (2003).
Structures of personality traits. In MillonT.LernerM. J. (Eds.), Handbook of psychology: Personality and social psychology (pp. 231–254), 5.
New York:
John Wiley & Sons Inc DOI: 10.1002/0471264385.wei0510.
58.
HuelsnitzC. O.NeelR.HumanL. J. (2020).
Accuracy in perceptions of fundamental social motives: Comparisons to perceptions of big five traits and associations with friendship quality. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,
46, 3–19. https://doi.org/10.1002/0146167219838546.
59.
HumanL. J.BiesanzJ. C. (2011a).
Target adjustment and self‐other agreement: Utilizing trait observability to disentangle judgeability and self‐knowledge. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
101, 202–216. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0023782.
60.
HumanL. J.BiesanzJ. C. (2011b).
Through the looking glass clearly: Accuracy and assumed similarity in well‐adjusted individuals’ first impressions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
100, 349–364. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0021850.
61.
HumanL. J.BiesanzJ. C. (2013).
Targeting the good target: An integrative review of the characteristics and consequences of being accurately perceived. Personality and Social Psychology Review,
17, 248–272. https://doi.org/10.1002/1088868313495593.
62.
HumanL. J.BiesanzJ. C.FinsethS. M.PierceB.LeM. (2014).
To thine own self be true: Psychological adjustment promotes judgeability via personality‐behavior congruence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
106, 286–303. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0034860.
63.
HumanL. J.BiesanzJ. C.ParisottoK. L.DunnE. W. (2012).
Your best self helps reveal your true self: Trying to make a good impression results in more accurate impressions. Social Psychological and Personality Science,
3, 23–30. https://doi.org/10.1002/1948550611407689.
64.
HumanL. J.CarlsonE. N.GeukesK.NestlerD.BackM. D. (2020).
Do accurate personality impressions benefit early relationship development? The bidirectional associations between accuracy and liking. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
118, 199–212. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000214.
65.
HumanL. J.MignaultM. C.RogersK. H.BiesanzJ. C. (2019).
Why are well‐adjusted people seen more accurately? The role of personality‐behavior congruence in naturalistic social settings. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
117, 465–482. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000193.
66.
HumanL. J.SandstromG. M.BiesanzJ. C.DunnE. W. (2013).
Accurate first impressions leave a lasting impression: The long‐term effects of distinctive self‐other agreement on relationship development. Social Psychological and Personality Science,
4, 395–402. https://doi.org/10.1002/1948550612463735.
67.
JohnO. P.RobinsR. W. (1993).
Determinants of interjudge agreement on personality traits: The Big Five domains, observability, evaluativeness, and the unique perspective of the self [special issue]. Journal of Personality,
61, 521–551. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.1993.tb00781.x.
68.
JohnO. P.SrivastavaS. (1999).
The big five trait taxonomy: History, measurement, and theoretical perspectives. In PervinL. A.JohnO. P. (Eds.), Handbook of personality: Theory and research (pp. 102–138), 2.
New York:
Guilford Press.
69.
JuddC. M.WestfallJ.KennyD. A. (2012).
Treating stimuli as a random factor in social psychology: A new and comprehensive solution to a pervasive but largely ignored problem. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
103, 54–69. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0028347.
70.
KennyD.WinquistL. (2001).
The measurement of interpersonal sensitivity: Consideration of design, components, and unit of analysis. In Interpersonal sensitivity: Theory and measurement (pp. 265–302).
Mahwah, NJ US:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
71.
KenrickD. T.StringfieldD. O. (1980).
Personality traits and the eye of the beholder: Crossing some traditional philosophical boundaries in the search for consistency in all of the people. Psychological Review,
87, 88–104. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.87.1.88.
72.
KerrL. G.TisseraH., McClure, M. J.LydonJ. L.BackM. D.HumanL. J. (2020).
Blind at first sight: The role of distinctively accurate and positive first impressions in romantic interest. Manuscript in press. Psychological Science. https://doi.org/10.1002/0956797620919674.
73.
LeckeltM.KufnerA. C. P.NestlerS.BackM. D. (2015).
Behavioral processes underlying the decline of narcissists’ popularity over time. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
109, 856–871. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000057.
74.
LeisingD.LockeK.KurziusE.ZimmermannJ. (2016).
Quantifying the association of self‐enhancement bias with self‐ratings of personality and life satisfaction. Assessment,
23, 588–602. https://doi.org/10.1002/1073191115590852.
75.
LetzringT. D.HumanL. J. (2014).
An examination of information quality as a moderator of accurate personality judgment. Journal of Personality,
82, 440–451. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopy.12075.
76.
LetzringT. D.WellsS. M.FunderD. C. (2006).
Quantity and quality of available information affect the realistic accuracy of personality judgment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
91, 111–123. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.91.1.111.
77.
LorenzoG. L.BiesanzJ. C.HumanL. J. (2010).
What is beautiful is good and more accurately understood: Physical attractiveness and accuracy in first impressions of personality. Psychological Science,
21, 1777–1782. https://doi.org/10.1002/0956797610388048.
78.
MageeC.BuchtelE. E.HumanL. J.MurrayD. R.BiesanzJ. C. (2018).
Is personality variability associated with adjustment?Journal of Research in Personality,
72, 22–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2016.08.005
79.
MatsumotoD. (1990).
Cultural similarities and differences in display rules. Motivation and Emotion,
14, 195–214. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00995569.
80.
MatsumotoD.KupperbuschC. (2001).
Idiocentric and allocentric differences in emotional expression and experience. Asian Journal of Social Psychology,
4, 113–131. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-839X.2001.00080.x.
MurphyN. A. (2007).
Appearing smart: The impression management of intelligence, person perception accuracy, and behavior in social interaction. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,
33, 325–339. https://doi.org/10.1002/0146167206294871.
84.
MusekJ. (2007).
A general factor of personality: Evidence for the Big One in the five‐factor model. Journal of Research in Personality,
41, 1213–1233. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2007.02.003.
85.
NeffL. A.KarneyB. R. (2005).
To know you is to love you: The implications of global adoration and specific accuracy for marital relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
88, 480–497. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.88.3.480.
86.
OrehekE.HumanL. J. (2017).
Self‐expression on social media: Do tweets present accurate and positive portraits of impulsiv‐ ity, self‐esteem, and attachment style?Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,
43, 60–70. https://doi.org/10.1002/0146167216675332.
87.
PaulhusD. L. (1998).
Interpersonal and intrapsychic adaptiveness of trait self‐enhancement: A mixed blessing?Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
74, 1197–1208. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.74.5.1197.
88.
PaulhusD. L.BruceM. N. (1992).
The effect of acquaintanceship on the validity of personality impressions: A longitudinal study. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
63, 816–824. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.63.5.816.
89.
PaulhusD. L.MorganK. L. (1997).
Perceptions of intelligence in leaderless groups: The dynamic effects of shyness and acquaintance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
72, 581–591. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.72.3.581.
90.
PaunonenS. V.JacksonD. N. (1985).
Idiographic measurement strategies for personality and prediction: Some unredeemed promissory notes. Psychological Review,
92, 486–511. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.92.4.486.
91.
R Core Team2016R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Vienna, Austria. Retrieved from https://www.R-project.org/.
92.
RogersK. H.BiesanzJ. C. (2014).
The accuracy and bias of interpersonal perceptions in intergroup interactions. Social Psychological and Personality Science,
5, 918–926. https://doi.org/10.1002/1948550614537307.
93.
RogersK. H.BiesanzJ. C. (2015).
Knowing versus liking: Separating normative knowledge from social desirability in first impressions of personality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
109, 1105–1116. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0039587.
94.
RogersK. H.BiesanzJ. C. (2019).
Reassessing the good judge of personality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
117, 186–200. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000197.
95.
RogersK. H.LeM.BuckelsE. E.KimM.BiesanzJ. C.Dispositional malevolence and impression formation: Dark tetrad associations with accuracy and positivity in first impressions. Journal of Personality,
86, 1050–1064. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopy.12374.
96.
RogersK. H.WoodD.FurrR. M. (2018).
Assessment of similarity and self‐other agreement in dyadic relationships: A guide to best practices. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships,
35, 112–134. https://doi.org/10.1002/0265407517712615.
97.
RosenbergM. (1965). Society and the adolescent self‐image.
Princeton, NJ:
Princeton University Press.
98.
RudeS. S.GortnerE.‐M.PennebakerJ. W. (2004).
Language use of depressed and depression‐vulnerable college students. Cognition and Emotion,
18, 1121–1133. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699930441000030.
99.
RyffC. D. (1989).
Happiness is everything, or is it? Explorations on the meaning of psychological well‐being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
57, 1069–1081. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.57.6.1069.
100.
SchlenkerB. R.LearyM. R. (1982).
Social anxiety and selfpresentation: A conceptualization model. Psychological Bulletin,
92, 641–669. https://doi.Org/10.1037/0033-2909.92.3.641.
101.
SnyderM. (1974).
Self‐monitoring of expressive behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
30, 526–537. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0037039.
102.
SnyderM. (1979).
Self‐monitoring processes. In BerkowitzL. (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology12.
New York:
Academic Press.
SwannW. B. Jr. (1987).
Identity negotiation: Where two roads meet. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
53, 1038–1051. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.53.6.1038.
105.
SwannW. B. Jr.De La RondeC.HixonJ. G. (1994).
Authenticity and positivity strivings in marriage and courtship. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
66, 857–869. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.66.5.857.
VazireS. (2010).
Who knows what about a person? The self‐other knowledge asymmetry (SOKA) model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
98, 281–300. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0017908.
108.
VazireS.GoslingS. D. (2004).
E‐perceptions: Personality impressions based on personal websites. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
87, 123–132. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.87.1.123.
109.
WatsonD.HubbardB.WieseD. (2000).
Self‐other agreement in personality and affectivity: The role of acquaintanceship, trait visibility, and assumed similarity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
78, 546–558. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.78.3.546.
110.
WoodD.FurrR. M. (2016).
The correlates of similarity estimates are often misleadingly positive. Personality and Social Psychology Review,
20, 79–99. https://doi.org/10.1002/1088868315581119.
111.
WoodD.GoslingS. D.PotterJ. (2007).
Normality evaluations and their relation to personality traits and well‐being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
93, 861–879. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.93.5.861.
ZimmermannJ.SchindlerS.KlausG.LeisingD. (2018).
The effect of dislike on accuracy and bias in person perception. Social Psychological and Personality Science,
9, 80–88. https://doi.org/10.1002/1948550617703167.
114.
ZinbargR. E.BarlowD. H. (1996).
Structure of anxiety and the anxiety disorders: A hierarchical model. Journal of Abnormal Psychology,
105, 181–193. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-843X.105.2.181.
115.
ZuckermanM.BernieriF.KoestnerR.RosenthalR. (1989).
To predict some of the people some of the time: In search of moderators. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
57, 279–293. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.57.2.279.
116.
ZuckermanM.KoestnerR., DeBoy, T.GarciaT.MarescaB. C.SartorisJ. M. (1988).
To predict some of the people some of the time: A reexamination of the moderator variable approach in personality theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
54, 1006–1019. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.54.6.1006.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
