We conducted three studies involving small group interactions (N = 622) that examined whether Big Five personality states, affect, and/or liking predict judgments of others’ authenticity. Study 1 (n = 119) revealed that neither self-rated personality states nor affect predicted other-rated authenticity. Instead, other-rated liking was the only predictor of other-rated authenticity. Study 2 (n = 281) revealed that other-rated personality states and affect were significant predictors of other-rated authenticity, but other-rated liking was a more important factor in predicting other-rated authenticity than specific behaviors or affect. Based on these results, Study 3 (n = 222) examined whether experimental manipulation of likability had a causal effect on other-ratings of authenticity. Likable actors were indeed judged as more authentic. Together, this suggests that we judge people we like as more authentic and that likability may be more important than the “objective” content of behavior.
BackM. D.SchmukleS. C.EgloffB. (2011). A closer look at first sight: Social relations lens model analysis of personality and interpersonal attraction at zero acquaintance. European Journal of Personality, 25(3), 225–238.
2.
BaileyE. R.LevyA. (2022). Are you for real? Perceptions of authenticity are systematically biased and not accurate. Psychological Science, 33(5), 798–815. https://doi.org/10.1177/09567976211056623
3.
BaumeisterR. F. (2019). Stalking the true self through the jungles of authenticity: Problems, contradictions, inconsistencies, disturbing findings—And a possible way forward. Review of General Psychology, 23(1), 143–154. https://doi.org/10.1177/1089268019829472
4.
BenchS. W.SchlegelR. J.DavisW. E.VessM. (2015). Thinking about change in the self and others: The role of self-discovery metaphors and the true self. Social Cognition, 33(3), 169–185. https://doi.org/10.1521/soco.2015.33.3.2
5.
ChristyA. G.KimJ.VessM.SchlegelR. J.HicksJ. A. (2017). The reciprocal relationship between perceptions of moral goodness and knowledge of others’ true selves. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 8(8), 910–917. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550617693061
6.
ChristyA. G.SchlegelR. J.CimpianA. (2019). Why do people believe in a “true self”? The role of essentialist reasoning about personal identity and the self. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 117(2), 386–416. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000254
7.
ClementR. W.KruegerJ. (2000). The primacy of self-referent information in perceptions of social consensus. British Journal of Social Psychology, 39, 279–299. https://doi.org/10.1348/014466600164471
8.
CooperA. B.ShermanR. A.RauthmannJ. F.SerfassD. G.BrownN. A. (2018). Feeling good and authentic: Experienced authenticity in daily life is predicted by positive feelings and situation characteristics, not trait-state consistency. Journal of Research in Personality, 77, 57–69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2018.09.005
9.
DavisW. E.HicksJ. A.SchlegelR. J.SmithC. M.VessM. (2015). Authenticity and self-esteem across temporal horizons. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 10(2), 116–126. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439760.2014.910830
10.
De FreitasJ.CikaraM.GrossmannI.SchlegelR. (2017). Origins of the belief in good true selves. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 21(9), 634–636. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2017.05.009
11.
De FreitasJ.SarkissianH.NewmanG. E.GrossmannI.De BrigardF.LucoA.KnobeJ. (2018). Consistent belief in a good true self in misanthropes and three interdependent cultures. Cognitive Science, 42, 134–160. https://doi.org/10.1111/cogs.12505
12.
De FreitasJ.TobiaK. P.NewmanG. E.KnobeJ. (2017). Normative judgments and individual essence. Cognitive Science, 41, 382–402. https://doi.org/10.1111/cogs.12364
13.
DienerE.LarsenR. J. (1984). Temporal stability and cross-situational consistency of affective, behavioral, and cognitive responses. Journal of personality and social psychology, 47(4), 871.
14.
EaglyA. H.AshmoreR. D.MakhijaniM. G.LongoL. C. (1991). What is beautiful is good, but…: A meta-analytic review of research on the physical attractiveness stereotype. Psychological Bulletin, 110(1), 109.
15.
FiskeS. T.CuddyA. J.GlickP. (2007). Universal dimensions of social cognition: Warmth and competence. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 11(2), 77–83.
16.
FleesonW.WiltJ. (2010). The relevance of Big Five trait content in behavior to subjective authenticity: Do high levels of within-person behavioral variability undermine or enable authenticity achievement?Journal of Personality, 78(4), 1353–1382. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2010.00653.x
17.
FunderD. C.LevineJ. M.MackieD. M.MorfC. C.SansoneC.VazireS.WestS. G. (2014). Improving the dependability of research in personality and social psychology: Recommendations for research and educational practice. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 18(1), 3–12. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868313507536
18.
GanM.ChenS. (2017). Being your actual or ideal self? What it means to feel authentic in a relationship. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 43(4), 465–478.
19.
GarciaR. L.BergsiekerH. B.SheltonJ. N. (2017). Racial attitude (dis) similarity and liking in same-race minority interactions. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 20(4), 501–518. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430215612224
20.
GarrisonK. E.RiveraG. N.SchlegelR. J.HicksJ. A.SchmeichelB. J. (2023). Authentic for thee but not for me: Perceived authenticity in self-control conflicts. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 49, 1646–1662. https://doi.org/10.1177/01461672221118187
GoldbergL. R. (1992). The development of markers for the Big-Five factor structure. Psychological Assessment, 4(1), 26–42. https://doi.org/10.1037/1040-3590.4.1.26
23.
GrandeyA. A.FiskG. M.MattilaA. S.JansenK. J.SidemanL. A. (2005). Is “service with a smile” enough? Authenticity of positive displays during service encounters. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 96(1), 38–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2004.08.002
24.
GreenbergJ.KosloffS. (2008). Terror management theory: Implications for understanding prejudice, stereotyping, intergroup conflict, and political attitudes. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 2(5), 1881–1894.
25.
HahlO.KimM.Zuckerman SivanE. W. (2018). The authentic appeal of the lying demagogue: Proclaiming the deeper truth about political illegitimacy. American Sociological Review, 83(1), 1–33.
26.
HeppnerW. L.KernisM. H.NezlekJ. B.FosterJ.LakeyC. E.GoldmanB. M. (2008). Within-person relationships among daily self-esteem, need satisfaction, and authenticity. Psychological Science, 19(11), 1140–1145. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02215.x
HoggM. A.CooperShawL.HolzworthD. W. (1993). Group prototypically and depersonalized attraction in small interactive groups. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 19(4), 452–465.
29.
Jongman-SerenoK. P.LearyM. R. (2016). Self-perceived authenticity is contaminated by the valence of one’s behavior. Self and Identity, 15(3), 283–301. https://doi.org/10.1080/15298868.2015.1128964
30.
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
31.
KennyD. A.WongM.-N. (2016, August). SRM_R: An interactive tool for estimating the Social Relations Model from directed dyadic data with round-robin-like designs [Computer software]. https://davidakenny.shinyapps.io/SRM_R/
32.
KernisM. H.GoldmanB. M. (2005). From thought and experience to behavior and interpersonal relationships: A multicomponent conceptualization of authenticity. In TesserA.WoodJ. V.StapelD. A. (Eds.), On building, defending, and regulating the self: A psychological perspective (pp. 31–52). Psychology Press.
33.
KernisM. H.GoldmanB. M. (2006). A multicomponent conceptualization of authenticity: Theory and research. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 38, 283–357.
34.
KieckhaeferJ. M.WrightD. B. (2015). Likable co-witnesses increase eyewitness accuracy and decrease suggestibility. Memory, 23(3), 462–472. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658211.2014.905607
35.
KokkorisM. D.KühnenU. (2014). “Express the real you”: Cultural differences in the perception of self-expression as authenticity. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 45(8), 1221–1228. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022114542467
36.
KovácsB. (2019). Authenticity is in the eye of the beholder: The exploration of audiences’ lay associations to authenticity across five domains. Review of General Psychology, 23(1), 32–59. https://doi.org/10.1177/1089268019829469
LachmanS. J.BassA. R. (1985). A direct study of halo effect. The Journal of Psychology, 119(6), 535–540.
39.
LeisingD.ErbsJ.FritzU. (2010). The letter of recommendation effect in informant ratings of personality. Journal of personality and social psychology, 98(4), 668.
40.
LeisingD.ScherbaumS.LockeK. D.ZimmermannJ. (2015). A model of “substance” and “evaluation” in person judgments. Journal of Research in Personality, 57, 61–71.
41.
LentonA. P.SlabuL.SedikidesC.PowerK. (2013). I feel good, therefore I am real: Testing the causal influence of mood on state authenticity. Cognition and Emotion, 27(7), 1202–1224. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699931.2013.778818
42.
LiuY.PerreweP. L. (2006). Are they for real? The interpersonal and intrapersonal outcomes of perceived authenticity. International Journal of Work Organization and Emotion, 1(3), 204–214. http://dx.doi.org/10.1504/IJWOE.2006.010788
43.
MacCallumR. C.MarC. M. (1995). Distinguishing between moderator and quadratic effects in multiple regression. Psychological Bulletin, 118(3), 405.
44.
MacrossanP. (2018). Intimacy, Authenticity and “Worlding” in Beyoncé’s Star Project. In LoyS.RickwoodJ.BennettS. (Eds.), Popular music, stars and stardom (pp. 137–152) ANU Press. http://doi.org/10.22459/PMSS.06.2018.
45.
McClellandG. H.JuddC. M. (1993). Statistical difficulties of detecting interactions and moderator effects. Psychological Bulletin, 114(2), 376–390. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.114.2.376
46.
MignaultM. C.KerrL. G.HumanL. J. (2023). Just be yourself? Effects of an authenticity manipulation on expressive accuracy in first impressions. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 14, 562–571. https://doi.org/10.1177/19485506221101000
47.
NewmanG. E.BloomP.KnobeJ. (2014). Value judgments and the true self. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 40(2), 203–216. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167213508791
NisbettR. E.WilsonT. D. (1977). The halo effect: Evidence for unconscious alteration of judgments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35(4), 250–256.
50.
PillowD. R.CrabtreeM. A.GalvanM. J.HaleW. J. (2018). Not simply in the eye of the beholder: Authenticity as a product of candidate preference and unfettered speech. Political Psychology, 39(4), 849–868.
51.
PinelE. C.LongA. E. (2012). When I’s meet: Sharing subjective experience with someone from the outgroup. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 38(3), 296–307. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167211433878
52.
RichardF. D.BondC. F.Jr.Stokes-ZootaJ. J. (2003). One hundred years of social psychology quantitatively described. Review of General Psychology, 7, 331–363. https://doi.org/10.1037/1089-2680.7.4.331
53.
RiveraG. N.ChristyA. G.KimJ.VessM.HicksJ. A.SchlegelR. J. (2019). Understanding the relationship between perceived authenticity and well-being. Review of General Psychology, 23(1), 113–126. https://doi.org/10.1037/gpr00001
54.
RobinsonM. D.JohnsonJ. T.ShieldsS. A. (1995). On the advantages of modesty: The benefits of a balanced self-presentation. Communication Research, 22(5), 575–591. https://doi.org/10.1177/009365095022005003
55.
RosenthalR.RosnowR. L.RubinD. B. (2000). Contrasts and effect sizes in behavioral research: A correlational approach. Cambridge University Press.
56.
SaucierG.GoldbergL. R. (2003). The structure of personality attributes. In BarrickM. R.RyanA. M. (Eds.), Personality and work: Reconsidering the role of personality in organizations. (pp. 1–29). Jossey-Bass.
57.
SchlegelR. J.HicksJ. A.ArndtJ.KingL. A. (2009). Thine own self: True self-concept accessibility and meaning in life. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96(2), 473–490. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0014060
58.
SheldonK. M.RyanR. M.RawsthorneL. J.IlardiB. (1997). Trait self and true self: Cross-role variation in the Big-Five personality traits and its relations with psychological authenticity and subjective well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73(6), 1380–1393. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.73.6.1380
59.
StrohmingerN.KnobeJ.NewmanG. (2017). The true self: A psychological concept distinct from the self. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 12(4), 551–560. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691616689495
60.
ThielmannI.HilbigB. E.ZettlerI. (2020). Seeing me, seeing you: Testing competing accounts of assumed similarity in personality judgments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 118(1), 172–198. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000222
61.
ThorndikeE. L. (1920). A constant error in psychological ratings. Journal of Applied Psychology, 4(1), 25–29.
62.
TsaiJ. L.KnutsonB.FungH. H. (2006). Cultural variation in affect valuation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90(2), 288–307. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.90.2.288
63.
WalumbwaF. O.AvolioB. J.ZhuW. (2008). How transformational leadership weaves its influence on individual job performance: The role of identification and efficacy beliefs. Personnel Psychology, 61(4), 793–825. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2008.00131.x
64.
WebsterG. D.CampbellJ. T. (2023). Personality perception in Game of Thrones: Character consensus and assumed similarity. Psychology of Popular Media, 12(2), 207–218. https://doi.org/10.1037/ppm0000398
65.
WhiteM. H.CrandallC. S. (2023). Perceived authenticity as a vicarious justification for prejudice. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 26(3), 534–554.
WirtzD.ChiuC. Y.DienerE.OishiS. (2009). What constitutes a good life? Cultural differences in the role of positive and negative affect in subjective well-being. Journal of Personality, 77(4), 1167–1196. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2009.00578.x
68.
WongC. A.LaschingerH. K. (2013). Authentic leadership, performance, and job satisfaction: The mediating role of empowerment. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 69(4), 947–959.
69.
WoodM.CorbettJ.FlindersM. (2016). Just like us: Everyday celebrity politicians and the pursuit of popularity in an age of anti-politics. The British Journal of Politics and International Relations, 18(3), 581–598. https://doi.org/10.1177/1369148116632182
70.
ZimmermannJ.SchindlerS.KlausG.LeisingD. (2018). The effect of dislike on accuracy and bias in person perception. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 9(1), 80–88.
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.
