Distinguishing between authenticity and personality consistency in predicting well-being: A mixed method approach

Introduction

The relationship between role personality consistency and well-being is somewhat ambiguous, with past research relying on methods confounded by social desirability or role stereotypes, or conflating consistency with authenticity.

Objective

This study uses a robust mixed method approach to establish the distinct impacts of authenticity and personality consistency on well-being.

Method

In the quantitative phase, 191 participants completed questionnaires assessing contextualised personality, well-being and authenticity. In the subsequent qualitative phase, a stratified sample of 22 participants completed a series of six open-ended reflective questions.

Results

Findings demonstrated significant work-home personality differences at the individual, but not group, level and revealed that authenticity, but not personality consistency, predicted well-being. Thematic analysis demonstrated that authenticity was understood as acting in line with personal values rather than demonstrating behavioural consistency across situations. In addition, while both personality differentiation and inauthenticity were seen as functional, their associations with well-being were substantially different: differentiation was associated with both positive and negative feelings and interpretations, while authenticity was exclusively a positive experience.

Conclusion

Authenticity, not personality consistency, is the key contributing factor to well-being. People who feel authentic, regardless of the extent of their contextual personality differentiation, are less stressed and more satisfied.