A recent review implies that people judge their own true selves, or their authentic and fundamental nature, to be no better than that of others, which conflicts with self-enhancement perspectives

A Perspective-Dependent View on the True Self. Yiyue Zhang. MSc Thesis, College of Arts and Sciences, Ohio University, Dec 2019. https://etd.ohiolink.edu/!etd.send_file?accession=ohiou1572777883003345&disposition=inline

Abstract: A recent review implies that people judge their own true selves, or their authentic and fundamental nature, to be no better than that of others (Strohminger, Knobe, & Newman, 2017), which conflicts with self-enhancement perspectives that assume that people tend to view their characteristics and life prospects more favorably than those of others (Sedikides & Alicke, 2012). However, this assumption has not yet been directly assessed. The current five studies explored whether self-enhancement operates in comparative true-self judgments of trait and morally-relevant behaviors. Study 1 to 3 showed that people rated positive and moral traits to be more characteristic of their true selves (vs. an average person’s and a close friend’s true selves). The pattern reversed for negative traits. Using hypothetical and actual moral behaviors, Study 4 and 5 indicated that although moral decisions were generally more characteristic of own versus others’ true-selves, people considered immoral decisions to be more characteristic of other people’s true selves than of their own. Together, the findings demonstrate that true self judgments are subject to self-enhancing tendencies, and therefore, is perspective-dependent.

General Discussion
The goal of this paper was to investigate whether people self-enhance in true self comparisons. The true self refers to a person’s true nature or his or her authentic identity. It assumes the existence of an underlying component of a person’s identity that defines them as an individual (Christy et al., 2019). Specifically, essentialists believe that individuals possess an innate personal essence (i.e. a true self) that explains their shared similarities in psychological and behavioral resemblances across cultural and individual differences. Stemming from this essentialist perspective that individuals have immutable and inherent essences (i.e. true selves), researchers argue that true self evaluations tend to be “perspective-independent,” in which people believe that every individual is morally good deep down (Strohminger et al., 2019). So far, prior research seems to support this conclusion. For example, studies have demonstrated that people tend to attribute their own as well as others’ moral, rather than immoral, behaviors to the true self (Jongman-Sereno & Leary, 2016; Newman et al., 2014).However, my findings that self-enhancement influences people’s true-self judgments and comparisons contrast with this commonly held notion, and suggest that the true-self assessment is perspective-dependent. Specifically, in the first two studies, I addressed the question of whether true self comparisons are subject to self-enhancing tendencies at the general personality trait level. By asking the participants to compare their true selves with those of their average peer’s and their close friend’s, I obtained strong evidence of comparative self-enhancement in which participants rated positive traits more characteristic of their own true selves than those of others’; negative traits were considered as more characteristic of others’, with the exception of their close friend’s, true selves rather than of their own true selves. Moreover, I replicated previous findings (e.g., Jongman-Sereno & Leary, 2016; Newman et al., 2014) that positive attributes are more likely to be viewed as expressions of the true self.In the third study, I extended my previous findings to morality-related personality traits. Morality, arguably, is considered as the constitutional feature of the true self (Strohminger et al., 2017). Thus, by showing that people view moral traits as more reflective of their own true selves rather than those of average peers’, I, again, found compelling evidence of self-enhancement in true-self comparative judgments. Study 3, in addition, incorporated judgments regarding the selfand the potential self. I found that the potential self is viewed more morally than the true self, suggesting that assessing the true self isnot completely basedon personal fantasies or future self-projections (Bargh et al., 2002; Rogers, 1961) but requires a certain level of self-knowledge (Jongman-Sereno & Leary, 2018). I also found that people believe that their true selves are more moral than their actual selves, replicating previous findings that the true self is perceived distinctly from the self (Christy et al., 2019; Strohminger et al., 2017), and moral goodness is the core of the true self (De Freitas et al., 2018; Newman et al., 2014). In the last two studies, I tested my previous findings in a moral behavioral context. Specifically, Study 4 used hypothetical moral dilemmas, and Study 5 employed actual behaviors that participants have committed in the past. In both studies, I found that people view immoral behaviors as more characteristics of others’ true selves than of their own. Moreover, moral behaviors are considered as more reflective of participants’ own true selves rather than of others’ true selves (Study 5). The lack of significant difference in immoral behavioral comparisons in Study 4 might be due to the perceptions of hypothetical scenarios being unrealistic. These two studies together demonstrated that comparative self-enhancement functions in the true-self judgments regarding moral information processing. Self-Enhancement in the True SelfThe value of authenticity, or being true to oneself, has been studied in many intellectual traditions. For instance, the modern concept of “self” derives arguably, from the emerging notion in the seventeenth century that people have natural rights (Taylor,1989), which, in turn, provide one basis for the belief in being true, or untrue, to one’s nature. From a philosophical stance, authenticity or the true self implies an underlying true nature, or psychological essence, within individuals that makes them who they truly are (Kierkegaard, 1954; Rogers, 1961). It seems clear, though, that people believe they have a true self, or at least endorse true self beliefs, when queried in psychological experiments (e.g. Christy et al., 2019). Recent research suggests that true self beliefs reflect “psychological essentialism,” which,as the name implies, is an aspect of self that remains invariant through surface changes (Christy et al., 2019). Some of the most interesting applications of the true-self construct in empirical research has been to show that people believe that their true selves are morally superior to their actual behavior (e.g., Newman et al., 2015). Research findings suggest that when people fall short of their behavioral ideals, they believe that there is a superior essence within that reflects their true selves more accurately.

Thus, the question pursued in the five studies described in this article can be interpreted as whether all essences, or true selves, are considered equal. If people believe in an essence that characterizes all human species, then there is little reason to expect one person’s essence to be better than that of another. Accordingly, by contrast, the extensive literature on self-enhancement in general, and comparative bias in particular, provides ample reason to question whether true-self judgments are immune from the ubiquitous self-serving tendencies that are reflected in many trait and behavior judgments (Alicke & Sedikides, 2011).The present studies call into question the strongest claim that has been made for true selves, namely, that people evaluate them just as favorably regardless of whether they belong to themselves or others. The findings from those five studies suggest the opposite –the true self assessments are subject to self-enhancement, in which people view their own true selves more favorably. Here I list two potential reasons that account for these findings.First, individuals might be more motivated to enhance their true selves because the true self is the core and the essential aspect of the self. From a self-enhancement perspective, the belief in a true self allows individuals to claim an arguably more favorable self that exists within their surface self, especially when their actual self is less socially desirable. The tendency to see oneself in a flattering fashion is stronger in the domains that are more relevant to a person’s self-image (Pedregon et al., 2012). Thus, by construing the true self to their own advantages, individuals are able to express a skewed, often a more positive, representation of their core identity that tells who they really are.

Moreover, self-enhancement in the true self tendsto be easier to achieve because of the hidden nature of the true self. Past research has shown that self-enhancement is facilitated when the judgment dimensions are more abstract as opposed to objective or concrete (Sedikides & Strube, 1997). Researchers have pointed out that understanding the true self is extremely subjective becausethe true-self judgments and comparisons are outside the boundaries of objective measurement tests (Strohminger et al., 2017).Thus, the invisibility of the true-self judgments might promote the chances of self-enhancement, because the possibility for invalidation is low (Alicke & Govorun, 2005; Alicke & Sedikides, 2009).The findings in this article not only suggest a perspective-dependent viewon the true-self judgments, but also challenge the common notion of an unbiased processing of authenticity. Kernis and Goldman (2006) argued that authenticity reflects the relative absence of self-serving bias or interpretive distortions, such as defensiveness and self‐aggrandizement, in the processing of self‐relevant information. Accordingly, individuals should objectively accept one’s strengths and weaknesses. Increasing literature, however, questions this assumption. For example, Jongman-Sereno and Leary (2016) demonstrated that positive events are judged to be more authentic than negative ones. Similarly, Christy and colleagues (2016, 2017) have shown that thinking about one's past moral behaviors increased participants' ratings of self-knowledge (as measured by the Self-Awareness Subscale of Kernis & Goldman’s, 2006, the Authenticity Inventory), whereas contemplating one's past immoral behaviors decreased these ratings. By showing that this positivity bias extends to self-other comparisons, those five studies provide strong support for the argument that authenticity isa biased construct.True Self vs. Other SelvesThe true self, by its nature, presumably differs from the actual self. This distinction is implied in previous research that asks participants to compare their actual behavior with that of their true or authentic selves (Jongman-Sereno & Leary, 2016). To myknowledge, however, direct comparisons of true and actual selves have not yet been effected, although Christy et al. (2019) have found that participants view true selves as more essential than actual selves. The findings of Study 3 directly confirmed theelevation of the true self over the actual self, thereby supporting investigators’ assumption that true selves are evaluated more favorably than actual selves (e.g., Strohminger et al., 2017).Most individuals have a vested interest in believing that there is a better self within than the one that is outwardly manifested. Even the moral peopleamong us have presumably, on occasion, done things they regretted, or failed to live up to their expectations. Both theory (Strohminger et al., 2017)and the empirical results of Study 3suggest that the true self is perceived as an improvement to the actual self. Although participants’ precise interpretation of this comparison standard will require further research, Christy et al. (2019) have made important strides in suggesting that people construe the true self as an enduring and essential aspect of identity. In comparing their actual selves to their true ones, therefore, participants may be thinking of a core essence that is better in most respects to its surface appearances.

In Study 3, I was interested in exploring whether another self construction—the potential self—would be even more favorably evaluated than the true self. Because potential selves point to a hypothetical future, they provide considerable latitude for construction. In essence, people are free to fantasize, and self-enhance, at will about how events will unfold in the future, with no immediate chance of invalidation. Consistent with this reasoning, I found that the potential self was evaluated more favorably than any other comparison standard.

Limits and Future Directions

Although I demonstrated that self-enhancing tendency still operates in the true self comparative judgment, it is still unclear what the underlying mechanisms are. In other words, are individuals believe that their true selves, by nature, are fundamentally more positive than others’true selves? Or is it that individuals are motivated to aggrandize their true selves? From a motivational stance, self-enhancement concerns more with the latter, as it implies that people are constantly seeking positive self-regard that is sometimes mismatched with the objective reality (Alicke & Sedikides, 2011). That is, individuals are aware of their personal strengths and weaknesses to some extent, but actively construe illusionary positive identities. This is consistent with the notion that self-knowledge is required to experience subjective authenticity (Kernis & Goldman, 2006; Jongman-Sereno & Leary, 2018). Therefore, the distortedly favorable views of one’s true self can be viewed as a result of a process of exaggerating strengths and overlooking shortcomings. From an essentialist perspective, however, the true self, as the essence of one’s identity, is shown to be immutable and inherent (Christy et al., 2019).

Thus, it is also reasonable to argue that the enhanced true self comes from the belief that people think their true selves are innately better than those of others.In addition to investigating whether people are enhancing their true selves by believing their true selves are superior or by actively viewing their true selves more favorably, researchers should conduct studies that examine the effect of self-enhancement on perceived or subjectivelyexperienced authenticity. Research has shown that positive affect, such as feeling competent, prosocial, and self-compassionate, increases the subjective feelings of being authentic (Lenton, Bruder, Slabu, & Sedikides, 2013; Sedikides et al., 2018; Zhang et al., 2019). Nonetheless, to my knowledge, there is no research that directly explores whether induced self-enhancement increases authenticity judgments. It is possible that self-enhancement improves the accessibility of positive self-views that potentially lead to enhanced feelings of authenticity.Resolving the role of self-enhancement in true and authentic self judgments will require further research, but I close by speculating that essential selves, and true or authentic selves, may be distinct constructs. Previous findings clearly establish that humans believe that their nature tends toward the good, and the findings here show that people believe that “my good is better than yours.” Asking people to evaluate their “true” or “authentic” abilities, or goodness, or to compare their true characteristicto others’, seems destined to prime self-enhancement concerns. Further research will hopefully help to clarify the nature of true and authentic selves, both in terms of their precise interpretation by individuals, and their implications for social judgment and behavior.