CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 0Personality Traits and PsychologyAttachment and Relationship DynamicsSocial and Intergroup Psychology

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Being understood and feeling understood: Examining the role of personality and emotion perceptions in others’ felt understanding

Open access
Mignault, Marie-Catherine, Tissera, Hasagani, Human, Lauren J., Lydon, John E.·2023·Journal of Research in Personality
DOI 10.1016/j.jrp.2023.104417
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

How must a person be understood to feel understood? We explored how perceptions of close others’ personality and emotions related to their felt understanding. Results revealed that perceivers’ raw emotion accuracy, but not personality accuracy, was positively associated with targets’ felt understanding in two studies. Notably, being perceived in line with the normative, socially desirable profile of emotions, and not in line with one’s distinct profile of emotions, drove this association. Overall, then, adopting a normative lens when perceiving others’ emotions could promote a subjective sense of feeling understood. These findings help advance the personality and social perception literature, and indicate that adopting a componential approach to accuracy can provide nuance when investigating associations with social processes.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jrp.2023.104417

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 88

  1. Algoe, 2010, It's the little things: Everyday gratitude as a booster shot for romantic relationships, Personal Relationships, 17, 217, 10.1111/j.1475-6811.2010.01273.x · DOI
  2. Aviezer, 2008, Angry, disgusted, or afraid? Studies on the malleability of emotion perception, Psychological Science, 19, 724, 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02148.x · DOI
  3. Bates, 2015, Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4, Journal of Statistical Software, 67, 1, 10.18637/jss.v067.i01 · DOI · Paper page
  4. Biesanz, 2010, The social accuracy model of interpersonal perception: Assessing individual differences in perceptive and expressive accuracy, Multivariate Behavioral Research, 45, 853, 10.1080/00273171.2010.519262 · DOI
  5. Biesanz, J. C. (2021).The social accuracy model. In T. D. Letzring, & J. S. Spain (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of accurate personality judgment [Published Online]. doi: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190912529.013.12. · DOI
  6. Biesanz, 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, 10.1177/0956797610364121 · DOI
  7. Biesanz, 2011, Do we know when our impressions of others are valid? Evidence for realistic accuracy awareness in first impressions of personality, Social Psychological and Personality Science, 2, 452, 10.1177/1948550610397211 · DOI
  8. Blackman, 1998, The effect of information on consensus and accuracy in personality judgment, Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 34, 164, 10.1006/jesp.1997.1347 · DOI
  9. Booth, 2020, Bad bosses and self-verification: The moderating role of core self-evaluations with trust in workplace management, Human Resource Management, 59, 135, 10.1002/hrm.21982 · DOI
  10. Borkenau, 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, 10.1177/0963721416651960 · DOI
  11. Bradbury, 2000, Research on the nature and determinants of marital satisfaction: A decade in review, Journal of Marriage and Family, 62, 964, 10.1111/j.1741-3737.2000.00964.x · DOI
  12. Carlson, 2013, Resolution of Meta-Accuracy, Social Psychological and Personality Science, 4, 419, 10.1177/1948550612461653 · DOI
  13. Chan, 2011, Forming first impressions: The role of gender and normative accuracy in personality perception, Journal of Research in Personality, 45, 117, 10.1016/j.jrp.2010.11.001 · DOI
  14. Colman, 2017, Seeing and feeling your way to accurate personality judgments: The moderating role of perceiver empathic tendencies, Social Psychological and Personality Science, 8, 806, 10.1177/1948550617691097 · DOI
  15. Colvin, 1993, Childhood antecedents of young-adult judgability, Journal of Personality, 61, 611, 10.1111/j.1467-6494.1993.tb00784.x · DOI
  16. Cronbach, 1955, Processes affecting scores on “understanding of others” and “assumed similarity.”, Psychological Bulletin, 52, 177, 10.1037/h0044919 · DOI
  17. Downey, 1998, The self-fulfilling prophecy in close relationships: Rejection sensitivity and rejection by romantic partners, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 545, 10.1037/0022-3514.75.2.545 · DOI · Paper page
  18. Edwards, 1953, The relationship between the judged desirability of a trait and the probability that the trait will be endorsed, Journal of Applied Psychology, 37, 90, 10.1037/h0058073 · DOI
  19. Edwards, 2002, Alternatives to difference scores: Polynomial regression and response surface methodology, Advances in Measurement and Data Analysis, 350
  20. Edwards, 1993, On the use of polynomial regression equations as an alternative to difference scores in organizational research, Academy of Management Journal, 36, 1577, 10.2307/256822 · DOI · Paper page
  21. Finkenauer, 2011, Understanding in close relationships: An interpersonal approach, European Review of Social Psychology, 22, 316, 10.1080/10463283.2011.633384 · DOI
  22. Fletcher, 2010, Through the eyes of love: Reality and illusion in intimate relationships, Psychological Bulletin, 136, 627, 10.1037/a0019792 · DOI
  23. Fonagy, 2007, The parent-infant dyad and the construction of the subjective self, Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 48, 228, 10.1111/j.1469-7610.2007.01727.x · DOI · Paper page
  24. Funder, 1995, On the accuracy of personality judgment: A realistic approach, Psychological Review, 102, 652, 10.1037/0033-295X.102.4.652 · DOI · Paper page
  25. Gagné, 2004, Bias and accuracy in close relationships: An integrative review, Personality and Social Psychology Review, 8, 322, 10.1207/s15327957pspr0804_1 · DOI
  26. Gaillard, 2009, Mental health patients' experiences of being misunderstood, Journal of the American Psychiatric Nurses Association, 15, 191, 10.1177/1078390309336932 · DOI
  27. Gelman, 2008, Scaling regression inputs by dividing by two standard deviations, Statistics in Medicine, 27, 2865, 10.1002/sim.3107 · DOI
  28. Gill, 2004, On what it means to know someone: A matter of pragmatics, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86, 405, 10.1037/0022-3514.86.3.405 · DOI
  29. Gignac, 2016, Effect size guidelines for individual differences researchers, Personality and Individual Differences, 102, 74, 10.1016/j.paid.2016.06.069 · DOI · Paper page
  30. Gordon, 2016, Do you get where I’m coming from?: Perceived understanding buffers against the negative impact of conflict on relationship satisfaction, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 110, 239, 10.1037/pspi0000039 · DOI
  31. Hinnekens, 2020, “I think you understand me”. Studying the associations between actual, assumed, and perceived understanding within couples, European Journal of Social Psychology, 50, 46, 10.1002/ejsp.2614 · DOI
  32. Hixon, 1993, When does introspection bear fruit? Self-reflection, self-insight, and interpersonal choices, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64, 35, 10.1037/0022-3514.64.1.35 · DOI
  33. Human, 2011, Through the looking glass clearly: Accuracy and assumed similarity in well-adjusted individuals’ first impressions, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 100, 349, 10.1037/a0021850 · DOI
  34. Human, 2014, To thine own self be true: Psychological adjustment promotes judgeability via personality-behavior congruence, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 106, 286, 10.1037/a0034860 · DOI
  35. Human, 2020, Do accurate personality impressions benefit early relationship development? The bidirectional associations between accuracy and liking, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 118, 199, 10.1037/pspp0000214 · DOI
  36. Human, 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, 10.1037/pspp0000193 · DOI
  37. Human, 2020, In person, online, and up close: The cross-contextual consistency of expressive accuracy, European Journal of Personality, 35, 120, 10.1002/per.2272 · DOI
  38. Human, 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, 10.1177/1948550612463735 · DOI
  39. Huelsnitz, 2020, Accuracy in perceptions of fundamental social motives: Comparison to perception of big five traits and assoications with friendship quality, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 46, 3, 10.1177/0146167219838546 · DOI
  40. Jacobson, 1994, Affect, verbal content, and psychophysiology in the arguments of couples with a violent husband, Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 62, 982, 10.1037/0022-006X.62.5.982 · DOI
  41. Jordan, 1989, Vol. 39
  42. Kenny, D. A., West, T. V., Malloy, T. E., & Albright, L. (2006). Componential analysis of interpersonal perception data.Personality and Social Psychology Review,10(4), 282-294. doi: 10.1207/s15327957pspr10041. · DOI
  43. Kerr, 2020, Blind at First Sight: The Role of Distinctively Accurate and Positive First Impressions in Romantic Interest, Psychological Science, 31, 715, 10.1177/0956797620919674 · DOI
  44. Lackenbauer, 2010, The unique and combined benefits of accuracy and positive bias in relationships, Personal Relationships, 17, 475, 10.1111/j.1475-6811.2010.01282.x · DOI
  45. Letzring, T. D., Wells, S. M., & Funder, D. C. (2006). Information quantity and quality affect the realistic accuracy of personality judgment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91(1), 111–123. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.91.1.111. · DOI
  46. Leising, 2010, The letter of recommendation effect in informant ratings of personality, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 98, 668, 10.1037/a0018771 · DOI
  47. Leising, 2015, A model of “substance” and “evaluation” in person judgments, Journal of Research in Personality, 57, 61, 10.1016/j.jrp.2015.04.002 · DOI
  48. Lemay, 2007, Projection of responsiveness to needs and the construction of satisfying communal relationships, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92, 834, 10.1037/0022-3514.92.5.834 · DOI
  49. Ling, 2020, Investigating how viewing common humanity scenarios impacts compassion: A novel approach, The British Journal of Social Work, 50, 1724, 10.1093/bjsw/bcz124 · DOI
  50. Lippert, 2001, Daily experiences of intimacy: A study of couples, Personal Relationships, 8, 283, 10.1111/j.1475-6811.2001.tb00041.x · DOI
  51. Livingstone, 2020, “They just don't understand us”: The role of felt understanding in intergroup relations, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 119, 633, 10.1037/pspi0000221 · DOI
  52. Lorenzo, 2010, What is beautiful is good and more accurately understood: Physical attractiveness and accuracy in first impressions of personality, Psychological Science, 21, 1777, 10.1177/0956797610388048 · DOI
  53. Luo, 2009, Accuracy and biases in newlyweds' perceptions of each other: Not mutually exclusive but mutually beneficial, Psychological Science, 20, 1332, 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2009.02449.x · DOI
  54. Lun, 2008, On feeling understood and feeling well: The role of interdependence, Journal of Research in Personality, 42, 1623, 10.1016/j.jrp.2008.06.009 · DOI
  55. Matz, 2021, Personality-place transactions: Mapping the relationships between Big Five personality traits, states, and daily places, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 120, 1367, 10.1037/pspp0000297 · DOI
  56. McShane, 2017, Planning sample sizes when effect sizes are uncertain: The power-calibrated effect size approach, Psychological Methods, 21, 47, 10.1037/met0000036 · DOI
  57. Mignault, 2022, On being and feeling transparent: Examining expressive accuracy awareness in first impressions of personality and links to well-being, Journal of Research in Personality, 96, 10.1016/j.jrp.2021.104185 · DOI
  58. Moors, 2013, Appraisal theories of emotion: State of the art and future development, Emotion Review, 5, 119, 10.1177/1754073912468165 · DOI
  59. Murray, 2006, Optimizing assurance: The risk regulation system in relationships, Psychological Bulletin, 132, 641, 10.1037/0033-2909.132.5.641 · DOI
  60. Murray, 1996, The benefits of positive illusions: Idealization and the construction of satisfaction in close relationships, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 79, 10.1037/0022-3514.70.1.79 · DOI · Paper page
  61. Murray, 2001, The mismeasure of love: How self-doubt contaminates relationship beliefs, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27, 423, 10.1177/0146167201274004 · DOI
  62. Nestler, 2015, The social consequences and mechanisms of personality: How to analyse longitudinal data from individual, dyadic, round–robin and network designs, European Journal of Personality, 29, 272, 10.1002/per.1997 · DOI
  63. Oishi, 2013, Feeling understood as a key to cultural differences in life satisfaction, Journal of Research in Personality, 47, 488, 10.1016/j.jrp.2013.04.011 · DOI
  64. Oyserman, 2002, Rethinking individualism and collectivism: Evaluation of theoretical assumptions and meta-analyses, Psychological Bulletin, 128, 3, 10.1037/0033-2909.128.1.3 · DOI · Paper page
  65. Patterson, 2001, Another look at accuracy and confidence in social judgments, Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 25, 207, 10.1023/A:1010675210696 · DOI
  66. Pollmann, 2009, Investigating the role of two types of understanding in relationship well-being: Understanding is more important than knowledge, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 35, 1512, 10.1177/0146167209342754 · DOI
  67. Rammstedt, 2007, Measuring personality in one minute or less: A 10-item short version of the Big Five Inventory in English and German, Journal of Research in Personality, 41, 203, 10.1016/j.jrp.2006.02.001 · DOI · Paper page
  68. Rogers, 2015, Knowing versus liking: Separating normative knowledge from social desirability in first impressions of personality, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 109, 1105, 10.1037/a0039587 · DOI
  69. Rogers, 2018, Assessment of similarity and self-other agreement in dyadic relationships: A guide to best practices, Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 35, 112, 10.1177/0265407517712615 · DOI
  70. Schönbrodt, F. (2016). Testing fit patterns with polynomial regression models. Unpublished manuscript. · DOI
  71. Simpson, 2001, Empathic accuracy and pre-emptive relationship maintenance. Studying the associations between actual, assumed, and perceived understanding within couples, European Journal of Social Psychology, 50, 46
  72. Simpson, 2003, When accuracy hurts and when it helps: A test of the empathic accuracy model in marital interactions, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 881, 10.1037/0022-3514.85.5.881 · DOI
  73. Smith, 1991, “Just a hunch”: Accuracy and awareness in person perception, Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 15, 3, 10.1007/BF00997764 · DOI
  74. Southam-Gerow, 2002, Emotion regulation and understanding: Implications for child psychopathology and therapy, Clinical Psychology Review, 22, 189, 10.1016/S0272-7358(01)00087-3 · DOI
  75. Swann, 1983, Self-verification: Bringing social reality into harmony with the self, Vol. 2, 33
  76. Swann, 2002, Different partners, different selves: Strategic verification of circumscribed identities, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28, 1215, 10.1177/01461672022812007 · DOI
  77. Swann, 1994, Authenticity and positivity strivings in marriage and courtship, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 857, 10.1037/0022-3514.66.5.857 · DOI
  78. Swann, 1992, Why people self-verify, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62, 392, 10.1037/0022-3514.62.3.392 · DOI
  79. Tissera, 2021, Seeing you, seeing me: Links between perceived commitment, metaperceptions, and relationship well-being, Personal Relationships, 28, 521, 10.1111/pere.12376 · DOI
  80. Tissera, 2022, Knowing how you see me: Exploring meta-accuracy of personality, emotions and their links with relationship well-being among young adults, Journal of Personality, 90, 873, 10.1111/jopy.12702 · DOI
  81. Tissera, H., Lydon, J. E., & Human, L. J. (2022). Is what is beautiful good and still more accurately understood? A replication and extension of Lorenzo et al. (2010).European Journal of Personality. doi: 10.1177/08902070221099688. · DOI
  82. Verhofstadt, 2008, Support provision in marriage: The role of emotional similarity and empathic accuracy, Emotion, 8, 792, 10.1037/a0013976 · DOI
  83. Watson, 1988, Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 1063, 10.1037/0022-3514.54.6.1063 · DOI · Paper page
  84. Wessels, 2020, Differential associations of knowing and liking with accuracy and positivity bias in person perception, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 118, 149, 10.1037/pspp0000218 · DOI
  85. West, 2011, The truth and bias model of judgment, Psychological Review, 118, 357, 10.1037/a0022936 · DOI
  86. Wood, 2016, The correlates of similarity estimates are often misleadingly positive: The nature and scope of the problem, and some solutions, Personality and Social Psychology Review, 20, 79, 10.1177/1088868315581119 · DOI
  87. Zaki, 2008, It takes two: The interpersonal nature of empathic accuracy, Psychological Science, 19, 399, 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02099.x · DOI
  88. Zimmermann, 2018, The effect of dislike on accuracy and bias in person perception, Social Psychological and Personality Science, 9, 80, 10.1177/1948550617703167 · DOI

Metadata

Authors
Mignault, M.-C., Tissera, H., Human, L. J., & Lydon, J. E.
Affiliations
  • Cornell University (US)
  • University of Toronto (CA)
  • University of British Columbia, Okanagan Campus (CA)
  • McGill University (CA)
Corresponding author
  • Mignault, Marie-Catherine
  • Tissera, Hasagani
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Research in Personality
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2023-10
Volume
106
Pages
104417
ISSN
0092-6566 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.jrp.2023.104417
OpenAlex
W4386277059
Cited by
0
References
3
FWCI
0.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Journal of Research in Personality (publishedVersion)
  • OSF Preprints (OSF Preprints) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (245846, 435–2016-0499)
  • Canada Research Chairs
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Traits and Psychology
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Attachment and Relationship Dynamics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
Keywords
feeling understood, perceived understanding, emotion perception, personality perception, close relationships, interpersonal perception

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review