In person, online, and up close: the cross‐contextual consistency of expressive accuracy

Abstract

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; N targets = 514; N dyads = 1656) and based on Facebook profiles (Samples 2 and 3: N targets = 126-132; N dyads = 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.

Is Meta-Accuracy Consistent Across Levels of Acquaintanceship?

“…One way that consensus might explain the good meta-perceiver is that some people are seen as they see themselves more than others are by new and close acquaintances (Human et al, 2020); that is, the impressions that some people make across levels of acquaintanceship might be especially consistent because they align with the meta-perceiver's self-views. Given that people tend to rely heavily on their self-perceptions to form meta-perceptions (Kenny & DePaulo, 1993), the people who are actually seen as they see themselves across levels of acquaintanceship should be more metaaccurate across levels of acquaintanceship.…”

“…Similarly, the difference in meta-accuracy for observable versus unobservable traits is larger with new acquaintances than with close others (Carlson & Kenny, 2012). Given that people tend to be more consistently transparent across levels of acquaintanceship for observable than unobservable traits (Human et al, 2020), meta-perceivers might be consistently accurate about observable traits across levels of acquaintanceship because they can use the same strategy (e.g., paying attention to their behavior). In contrast, it might be more difficult for meta-perceivers to be consistently accurate about unobservable traits across levels of acquaintanceship because they might have to employ different strategies with new acquaintances versus close others.…”

“…Indeed, reported effects were the same when we limited low observability to just openness and neuroticism and high observability to just extroversion (see Table S3 in SOM). Next, we ran the meta-accuracy and meta-insight models on the items labeled as high or low observability independently and exported the scores from those models (e.g., Human et al, 2020). To test if the consistency of meta-accuracy varied based on trait observability, we correlated meta-perceivers' meta-accuracy scores across new acquaintances and close others, as well as among close others, separately for high observability and low observability traits.…”

“…In contrast, Toni has observed Morgan over time and, in various situations, so they have a broader range of cues about Morgan's personality and likely rely less on stereotypes. This might explain why impressions tend to be more accurate for well-known than new acquaintances (Human et al, 2020). Given that Taylor and Toni use different cues and have different impressions of Morgan, Morgan's path to meta-accuracy will differ for Taylor than for Toni.…”

Intrapersonal Behavioral Coordination and Expressive Accuracy During First Impressions

“…That is, there are large individual differences in expressive accuracy ( Human & Biesanz, 2013 ), the tendency to be accurately perceived, also termed judgeability ( Colvin, 1993 ), or being a good target ( Funder, 1995 ). Although multiple factors can influence expressive accuracy, past research has primarily examined the role of broad individual differences, such as psychological well-being (e.g., Human et al, 2014 ; Human et al, 2019 ) and personality traits like extroversion ( Colvin, 1993 ; Human et al, 2021 ). Here, we examine the role of intrapersonal behavioral coordination (IBC), or the degree of movement coordination between the head and body within a person, as an indicator of nonverbal expressivity.…”