Academic AbstractPopular lay theories shape how millions of people understand and communicate about romantic relationships, yet they are rarely examined scientifically. Rather than dismissing these frameworks as misconceptions, this review argues that engaging with lay theories can advance a science of relationships that is both empirically rigorous and publicly resonant. Using the love languages as a case study, this review introduces a bidirectional framework in which lay theories inform scientific inquiry and scientific insights are translated back to the public. Engaging with lay theories can refine theory, clarify core relational processes, and reveal contextual and cultural blind spots in lay theories. In turn, examining why lay theories resonate highlights unmet public needs, opportunities for improved scientific communication, and implications for clinical practice, relationship education, and public policy. The result is a science of relationships that is rigorous and resonant with the lived experiences of those it aims to serve.Public AbstractPopular ideas about relationships-such as the love languages-shape how millions of people understand love, communicate needs, and decide whether their romantic relationships are working. Yet these ideas are rarely examined by scientists, even though they influence real-life relationship decisions. This article argues that popular relationship theories should not simply be dismissed as wrong, but carefully studied as windows into what people need, value, and struggle with in their relationships. Using the love languages as an example, this review shows how engaging with popular ideas can help scientists improve theories of love, communicate research more clearly, and design guidance that better fits people's lives and relationships. This review also highlights potential risks of oversimplified frameworks, especially when they ignore cultural context. By building a science of relationships that is both rigorous and relatable, researchers can offer guidance that is more inclusive, useful, and responsive to the public.
Threatening a man's masculinity may lead to severe negative consequences at individual (e.g., anxiety) and societal levels (e.g., discrimination). Existing research is extensive and requires synthesis. In a comprehensive, systematic literature search, we identified and categorized peer-reviewed studies experimentally manipulating masculinity threat (MT) according to triggers, internalized responses, compensatory reactions, and moderators. We meta-analyzed studies with obtainable effect sizes (Nk = 442, Nparticipants = 19,448 predominantly heterosexual, mainly Western men) using three-level random effects models. The mean MT effect was small to medium, d = .45, 95% CI [.38, .51]. Self-induced prototypicality threat triggers (men concluding they do not meet masculine ideals) showed the greatest impact. Negative emotions and reduced self-perceived masculinity emerged as the strongest responses. Effects weakened after initial responding, suggesting successful compensation reduces the need for further efforts. Drawing on available evidence, we separate empirically supported MT components from open questions, offering a foundation for theory and research.Public Abstract Men are often expected to demonstrate masculinity. Questioning their masculinity can lead to masculinity threat. These threats can have negative consequences for the men themselves (e.g., emotional pain) and society (e.g., discrimination of gay men, women). To better understand when and how such threats and the following consequences occur, we conducted a meta-analysis on 123 studies involving 19,448 men. On average, studies showed that masculinity threats indeed influenced men's feelings, thoughts, and behaviors. Men were most threatened when they themselves concluded they did not conform to masculine ideals. Negative emotions (e.g., fear) and reduced feelings of masculinity emerged as the strongest consequences. Interestingly, when men initially showed masculine behaviors to reduce the threat, such as risk-taking, they were less likely to feel the need to prove their masculinity again later. We present a visual summary showing which aspects of masculinity threat are supported by evidence and which questions remain open.
Academic Abstract Advances in AI require a revision of the psychological and socio-technical dynamics by which individuals are radicalized to embrace violent extremism. This review synthesizes process models of radicalization with research on social and personality risk factors, AI, and psychological mechanisms to propose a four-stage framework mapping the AI architecture of radicalization: (1) Exposure, where recommender systems and virality features create initial attraction to extreme content; (2) Reinforcement, where filter bubbles and group recommendations leverage biases to strengthen extremist beliefs and create echo chambers; (3) Group Integration, where ideologically homogenous clusters, AI bot swarms and companions foster group belonging and readiness for action; cumulatively resulting in (4) Violent Extremist Action. We examine how established social, cognitive, personality, and contextual vulnerability factors heighten psychological risk in the AI-driven radicalization process, as well as the emerging role of generative AI. We conclude by outlining a stage-based framework for governance and future research.Public Abstract AI-driven algorithms designed to maximize engagement on social media, compounded by generative AI, can unintentionally set the stage for radicalization. It begins with Exposure, where algorithms push users toward extreme content because it captures attention. Next, during Reinforcement, algorithms feed users personalized content while AI swarms can create a synthetic consensus that reinforces emerging biases, normalizes extremity, and insulates users from alternative views. Third, during Group Integration, individuals are absorbed into extremist networks, reinforced by human peers, AI companions, and bot swarms that validate radical beliefs and deepen identity ties. By exploiting psychological needs for belonging and certainty, this stage becomes particularly pernicious, potentially opening the door for violence. We propose policy measures that can reduce radicalization at each stage.
Academic AbstractActive inference is an integrative theoretical framework that models the nervous system as a statistical engine for predicting and regulating sensory input. Within this framework, perception and behavior work toward the same imperative: minimizing uncertainty. The current article extends this approach to the inferences social agents make about themselves as both subjects and objects of experience. The resulting model conceptualizes "The Game of Self" as a continuous Bayesian updating of episodic and semantic self-representations in order to reduce self-related uncertainty. The model proposes a bidirectional predictive loop that evolves over time-semantic representations of identity guide the construction of episodic experience, while those experiences, in turn, shape semantic self-categorization. In both directions, the self-representations that emerge through active inference are those with the highest posterior probabilities given situational evidence. The article explores how episodic and semantic self-representations are continuously shaped by a dynamic and adaptive process of Bayesian inference.Public AbstractWho am I? What am I feeling? What should I do? These are fundamental questions that people ask themselves throughout their lives-and the answers can shape everything from small decisions to major life changes. But how do we come to know ourselves in the face of social and personal uncertainty? This article examines how the brain uses statistical modeling to make sense of identity and experience in an uncertain world. It introduces the concept of "The Game of Self"-an ongoing cycle between who we think we are and what we're experiencing. Our beliefs about who we are shape what we experience, and our experiences shape who we think we are. In each moment, our sense of self is the brain's best statistical guess about our current identity and lived experience. This framework offers new ways to think about selfhood-not as fixed, but as adaptive and responsive.
Academic AbstractGender differences in sexuality are often attributed to evolved biological differences organized before adolescence or experiential ones learned afterward-neglecting learning that endures because it is evolutionarily expected, and we are biologically sensitized to it. Here, we present the Biodevelopmental Learning Opportunities and Outcomes Model (BLOOM) of gender differences in sexuality, arguing women's lower interest in sex originates not from unequal capacities to want/desire it, but unequal opportunities to like/enjoy sex when biospsychosocially primed to learn from it. We synthesize evidence indicating sex is least equal in adolescence, offering the greatest costs and fewest rewards to women/girls who debut with men/boys (WDM). Concomitantly, it is most teachable in adolescence, when a window of opportunity for sexual incentive learning may open, particularly among individuals with heightened sexual plasticity/learning aptitude (i.e., women/girls). Implications for distinguishing gender differences in sexuality from experience-contingent similarities, and realizing equal sexual rights, education, and health are discussed.Public AbstractGender differences in sexual enjoyment are among the largest in psychology and have remained so over decades despite other advances in gender equality. The gender gap in sexual pleasure, for example, has gained widespread attention and is increasingly discussed as an explanation for gender differences in sexuality. Here, we spotlight the largest, but least discussed, gender gap in sexual enjoyment: the developmental gap. We review evidence that adolescence is not simply a vulnerable period for sexual health, but a window of opportunity for learning to have healthy, enjoyable, and desirable sex-and one wherein equal opportunity is lacking. We propose women get the least equitable sex during this window, when they are primed to learn from it, and this learning informs sexual interest thereafter, generating acquired differences that are often mistaken for inborn ones. We close with recommendations for ensuring equal opportunities for healthy sex and sexual health across genders.
Academic AbstractPartisan animosity is on the rise in many nations around the globe. Given its significant implications, it is imperative to establish a clear conceptualization of partisan animosity that can aid efforts to reduce it. To address this need, we present a novel framework that conceptualizes partisan animosity as an attitude of blame directed toward political outgroups. Drawing from the literature on moral psychology, we construct a comprehensive model of the psychology of blame. Then, we use that model as an interpretive lens to understand existing interventions that have reduced partisan animosity. Finally, we suggest a variety of possible future interventions inspired by our framework. By adopting this blame-based perspective, our article sheds light on the underlying mechanisms of partisan animosity, provides a unifying framework for understanding existing work, and stimulates novel ideas for future research.Public AbstractPartisan animosity, hostility directed toward political outparties, has been growing in many areas of the world, with significant negative impacts on society and politics. This article offers a new perspective on this growing animosity, proposing that partisan animosity reflects an attitude of blame that partisans direct toward each other. Drawing from insights in moral psychology, we present a model of blame, describing how it operates, and use the model to understand both the nature of partisan animosity and potential pathways for intervention. Our model contributes to understanding partisan animosity with the ultimate goal of informing interventions to reduce it.
Academic AbstractValence asymmetries-the tendency for bad stimuli to elicit more processing effort than good ones-have been widely observed but remain theoretically contested. To advance this debate, we present a formalized account integrating two major explanatory perspectives: the intrapsychic (or phylogenetic) approach, which locates the effect in internal evaluative mechanisms, and the ecological (or ontogenetic) approach, which attributes it primarily to environmental factors. We introduce a concise set of parameters to specify key concepts and analyze the argumentative structure of each perspective. This yields three major insights: (a) the traditional labels for these approaches are misleading, and we suggest using valence-driven and distinctiveness-driven instead, (b) theories must specify how exactly good and bad stimuli are defined, and (c) some explanations rely on implicit yet critical assumptions, such as the probability of having contact with stimuli. Clarifying these foundations provides a framework for informative empirical tests in future research.Public AbstractWhy do people pay more attention to bad things than to good ones? Psychologists call this pattern a valence asymmetry. Although the effect is well established, its causes are still debated. To advance this debate, we translate two leading ideas about this bias into a precise mathematical model. This allows us to see how the explanations differ, what each predicts, and where they overlap. This analysis reveals three important insights: First, some widely used terms are misleading, and we suggest using clearer alternatives like valence-driven and distinctiveness-driven instead. Second, researchers need to define more carefully what actually counts as good or bad. Third, many theories rely on hidden assumptions-such as how often people encounter certain kinds of stimuli. Making those assumptions explicit should help future studies test competing explanations more directly.
Academic AbstractA core part of human intelligence is the ability to work flexibly with others to achieve goals. The incorporation of artificial agents into human spaces is making increasing demands on artificial intelligence (AI) to demonstrate and facilitate this ability. However, this kind of flexibility is not well understood because existing approaches to intelligence typically construe this either as an individual-difference trait or as a property of groups. We argue that by focusing either on individual or collective intelligence without considering their dynamic interaction, existing conceptualizations of intelligence limit the potential of people and AI systems. To address this impasse, we propose a new kind of intelligence-socially minded intelligence-that can be applied to both individuals and collectives. We outline how socially minded intelligence might be measured and cultivated within people, how it might be modelled in AI agents, and how it might be applied to other intelligent systems.Public AbstractIn psychology, "intelligence" is generally understood to be something that either individuals or groups have. However, the extent to which people can make each other more intelligent by working collectively-and the extent to which groups are smarter for having individuals who can think for themselves-is underexplored. Artificial intelligence (AI) research has a similar problem, meaning that artificial agents lack the ability to engage in this kind of intelligence, both with each other and with people. To address this gap in the literature, we outline a new kind of intelligence for psychology and AI-socially minded intelligence-which can be applied to individuals, groups, and artificial agents. We discuss how socially minded intelligence might be measured, improved, modeled in AI agents, and applied to other intelligent systems such as teams consisting of people and AI agents.
Academic AbstractChildren and adolescents are growing up in increasingly ethnically, racially, and culturally diverse and often unequal worlds. Therefore, how schools, as key developmental contexts, approach diversity has important implications at individual, group, and societal levels. Here, we present a review, integration, and expansion of research on cultural diversity climate in schools, focusing on five dimensions of diversity climate (the cultural diversity climate "Big Five") and their facets. We begin by distinguishing cultural diversity climate from other related terms (e.g., diversity ideologies, diversity policies). Then, we discuss the five core dimensions of diversity climate (intergroup contact theory's optimal contact conditions, multiculturalism climate, colorblind climate, critical consciousness climate, polyculturalism climate). We examine facets subsumed under the dimensions, propose new theory-based facets, and outline differences and commonalities between them. Next, we review measurement approaches and highlight future research directions. Overall, this integrative, multidimensional, and multifaceted framework advances psychological theory on diversity climate.Public AbstractSchools play a vital role in how children and adolescents experience and understand diversity. This article reviews the concept of cultural diversity climate in schools, focusing on five key aspects that shape how cultural diversity is approached (i.e., the cultural diversity climate "Big Five"). Our integration of the cultural diversity climate "Big Five" encompasses five main dimensions, such as multiculturalism climate (acknowledging and valuing diversity at school), critical consciousness climate (critically reflecting on and challenging racism and inequities), and polyculturalism climate (raising students' awareness of connections between groups and cultures). To move towards a more fine-grained understanding of diversity climate, we describe existing facets (i.e., sub-components of the different dimensions) and develop new facets based on theory. We also discuss different ways of measuring cultural diversity climate. This work is important for creating more inclusive, equitable, and critically conscious school environments, thereby supporting all students, especially those from marginalized communities.
Research on intraminority solidarity has primarily relied on the stigma-based solidarity framework, which uses commonalities based on discrimination to foster systemically marginalized people's activism for one another. Shifting from a deficit-based to a critical strength-based approach, we propose strength-based solidarity, where marginalized people recognize their shared, identity-conscious (i.e., conscious of sociohistorical, cultural, and political contexts) strengths and thus work to optimize each other's lived experiences. We argue that strength-based solidarity can cultivate holistic and sustained intraminority solidarity. Integrating the literature on intraminority relations with collective action and strength-based research, we present holistic perception, efficacy, positive emotions, reduced competitive victimhood and less burnout, as mechanisms by which strength-based solidarity can facilitate intraminority solidarity. We discuss the proposed framework's intersections with stigma-based solidarity and intersectionality. Research on strength-based solidarity can provide education, political organizing, and clinical applications to cultivate positive intraminority relations.Public AbstractWhat makes people from different marginalized communities show up and advocate for each other? Psychologists and lay audiences alike often focus on experiencing similar discrimination as a reason marginalized groups may come together, but are marginalized people solely bonded through discrimination? We introduce a new way to look at solidarity between different marginalized groups: strength-based solidarity. We suggest that people from different marginalized groups share similar strengths in their day-to-day lives, such as resilience, cultural diversity, and community strength. Recognizing such common strengths has the potential to increase intraminority solidarity that can nurture marginalized people's strengths (such as celebrating talents and cultivating joys) and can last longer. Given the increasingly repressive U.S. climate, relying on shared strengths is especially instrumental to bring people together in all realms of society.
Academic AbstractBlack-threat stereotyping, or the tendency to disproportionately associate Black individuals with threat-related concepts, is an artifact of American psychology. Nonetheless, most of what psychologists know about this topic concerns how Black-threat stereotypes are applied to young, straight Black men. In the present analysis, we review existing research on intersectional Black-threat stereotyping: broadly, how Black-threat stereotyping depends on the multiple, intersecting social categories to which targets belong. Although the existing literature is at times contradictory, we argue that it can be well-explained by an Integrative Framework of Intersectional Stereotyping that merges the core assumptions of two recent theories of intersectional stereotyping: the lens model and MOSAIC. The central contribution of the proposed framework is that intersectional stereotypes may at times be retrieved from memory and at other times be dynamically generated. We conclude with a roadmap for future research in this consequential domain.Public AbstractIn the United States, Black Americans are killed by police at over twice the rate of White Americans. There are many reasons for this racial disparity, not the least of which is that Black Americans are often stereotyped as threatening. In the present paper, we review what scientists currently know about these inaccurate perceptions, and we discuss the question of whether these perceptions depend on the multiple social groups to which Black Americans belong (for example, Black Americans' age, gender, and sexual orientation groups). We argue that although research on this topic is messy, it can be "cleaned up" with the help of what we call an Integrative Framework of Intersectional Stereotyping. This framework merges insights from two recent theories of intersectional stereotyping: the lens model and MOSAIC.
Openness/intellect often stands apart from the other Big Few personality traits. Here, we interrogate some of the many qualities that make openness/intellect unique. First, we describe this trait's unique history, highlighting unresolved controversies critical to its modern interpretation. Second, we identify three major research questions where openness/intellect is unique among the Big Few: trait associations with outcomes are often moderated, it is often irrelevant to mental health, and it is the rarest target of volitional change; we develop theories to confirm and explain these phenomena. Third, we synthesize etic (imported) and emic (local) cross-cultural evidence to argue that openness/intellect is the least cross-culturally portable Big Few trait. We hypothesize that variation in individualism, looseness, and complexity modify its relevance and coherence around a potentially universal core. Throughout, we argue that understanding these unique qualities is required to cohesively interpret past openness/intellect findings and expand future research on this trait.Public AbstractMost researchers study personality using five or six broad traits. One of these traits is called openness/intellect, which describes people who are imaginative, knowledgeable, nontraditional, creative, and often unusual. Here, we explore how the trait itself is often unique compared to other broad personality traits. For example, most people want to change their personality, but they rarely want to change in openness/intellect. And, although openness/intellect is important for people living in North America and Europe, in other cultures it seems less relevant. In some cultures, its specific components don't go together: nontraditional people aren't more imaginative. In some languages, words like "creative" don't exist. Even so, some indicators of openness/intellect, like wisdom and experiencing goosebumps from music, are found among humans everywhere. We develop theories to explain these unique qualities of openness/intellect; testing them will allow us to further understand how, why, and among whom individual differences in this trait are important.
Academic Abstract This article introduces the Modern Constructivist Model of Motivated Self-Protection (MCM-MSP), an integrative and novel theoretical account of two distinguishable forms of self-protection motivation that are underlain by diverging patterns in psychophysiological processes: (1) defensive arousal, which opposes self-threats and their implied conceptual representations to prevent self-concept instability and related consequences and (2) intrapsychic conflict, which compels restoration of self-concept stability and self-evaluative equanimity after one accepts the personal implications of a self-threat. The MCM-MSP locates each motivational orientation within a process model that describes when, how, and to what effect it uniquely compels one to strategically prevent self-concept instability or resolve it. This new explanation of self-protection motivation provides generative avenues for future research, including new ways to synthesize research examining defensive responses, new experimental approaches to testing self-protection strategies' total causal effect, and a stronger description of self-protection motivation's psychological construction using mixed-methods research and large language models.Public Abstract This article introduces the Modern Constructivist Model of Motivated Self-Protection (MCM-MSP), a new approach to examining the emotional and motivational components involved in how people respond to events and information that undermine how they think and feel about themselves. When these self-threatening events occur, people use different strategies to navigate the threat: some strategies might prevent the threat from changing how they think and feel about themselves; other strategies might help make things better if they ultimately accept the threat. Psychologists have long theorized that these strategies are motivated, suggesting that some force from within compels people to enact defensive or ameliorative strategies. However, there is very little consensus or clarity regarding the nature of this motivational force. What exactly is self-protection motivation? The MCM-MSP answers this question by proposing two distinct motivational orientations that underlie self-protection motivation and then locating them within a framework that describes when, how, and to what effect each mechanism compels threatened people.
Academic Abstract People want to pursue happiness but often fail, a phenomenon known as the paradox of pursuing happiness. The mechanisms underlying this paradox remain elusive. Age differences in happiness-specifically that older adults appear more successful in pursuing happiness (the emotion paradox of aging)-provide valuable insights into effective happiness pursuit. Drawing on this literature, we propose an intergoal compatibility account to interpret both paradoxes through the lens of intergoal interactions, an intuitively critical yet underexplored factor in existing interpretations. This account asserts that greater compatibility (fewer conflicts and greater facilitation) between happiness pursuit and other important personal goals enhances the effectiveness of happiness pursuit, and such compatibility can be enhanced through contextual influences (e.g., age-graded developmental tasks) and strategic self-regulation (e.g., goal adjustments). This account generates testable predictions and practical implications for enhancing happiness pursuit across the lifespan.Public Abstract Why do people often struggle to achieve happiness? And why are older adults happier than younger adults, even though they face more losses in life? While these questions have drawn extensive attention, they remain puzzling. A crucial yet insufficiently explored factor in successful happiness pursuit is intergoal compatibility-the extent to which the pursuit of happiness aligns or conflicts with other important personal goals. For younger adults, the demands of age-related developmental tasks (e.g., educational and career aspirations) often create conflicts with the pursuit of happiness, diminishing its effectiveness. Conversely, in older adults, happiness becomes more prioritized and compatible with other important personal goals, thereby enhancing the effectiveness of pursuing happiness. A lesson we can learn from older adults is to pursue happiness in ways compatible with other important personal goals.
Although gender equity is acknowledged as a global objective, existing progress parameters and interventions predominantly align with Western contexts and academic traditions, which often overlook the complex realities of the Majority World. This paper provides a critique of the dominance of such approaches and highlights the challenges of applying them universally. We examine the limitations of prevailing gender equity scholarship, including how a lack of diversity in general and intersectionality in particular, methodological biases, and individual-level solutions may inadvertently perpetuate inequities. We propose alternatives based on Latin American theory and practice to design decolonial and intersectional interventions for gender equity. Finally, we call for a systemic change by introducing the 5S framework, which advocates for interventions that (a) challenge the status quo, (b) focus on systemic changes, (c) are sensitive to social context, (d) are sustainable, and (e) are supported by evidence. Gender equity is a global priority, but many strategies and solutions often ignore the unique challenges faced by people in different cultural and social contexts around the world. This paper explores why these one-size-fits-all approaches do not work and highlights the need for more inclusive, collaborative solutions. We examine core limitations such as the lack of focus on how gender intersects with race, class, and other factors, and the tendency to place the responsibility for change on individuals rather than addressing larger social and systemic problems. To tackle these challenges, we propose the 5S framework, which emphasizes interventions that: challenge the status quo, focus on systemic changes, are sensitive to social context, are sustainable, and are supported by evidence. Instead of offering fixed answers, we encourage collaborative and culturally sensitive efforts to create fairer and more effective ways to promote gender equity worldwide.
Academic AbstractTheories of well-being are heavily influenced by Western viewpoints; even when Majority World perspectives are incorporated, psychologists often fail to consider the rich cultural knowledge of the Indigenous peoples of North America. We propose that personality and social psychologists engage in "deep learning" (without appropriation or colonization) of a Native American Majority World perspective on well-being. We present a description of the "storywork" surrounding the concept of Mino-Bimaadiziwin, translated as "the good life" or "living in a good way," emerging for the Anishinaabeg, who are Indigenous peoples consisting of the Ojibwe (Chippewa), Potawatomi, Algonquin, Saulteaux, Nipissing, and Mississauga First Nations. We discuss the Gichi-dibaakonigewinan, The Seven Grandfather Teachings, that emerge to promote well-being, which is inherently relational and concerns harmony in contrast to happiness. Gichi-dibaakonigewinan are composed of seven virtues-Truth, Humility, Respect, Love, Bravery, Integrity, and Wisdom-whose consideration reveals pathways to well-being possible in Majority World Contexts that psychologists should consider.Public AbstractWhat is the good life, or living in a good way? Western psychology, rooted in Western philosophy, has sought to study this very question. However, researchers have not considered the perspective of the Majority World. In this paper, we present how the Anishinaabeg, who are Indigenous peoples consisting of the Ojibwe (Chippewa), Potawatomi, Algonquin, Saulteaux, Nipissing, and Mississauga First Nations, think about the good life, or Mino-Bimaadiziwin. Mino-Bimaadiziwin is characterized by the pursuit of harmony in contrast to happiness. We discuss the Gichi-dibaakonigewinan, The Seven Grandfather Teachings, that promote well-being. These Seven Grandfather Teachings are composed of seven virtues, each typified by an animal-the turtle for Truth, wolf for Humility, buffalo for Respect, eagle for Love, Bear for Courage, Raven for Integrity, and Beaver for Wisdom-whose consideration reveals pathways to well-being possible in Majority World Contexts psychologists should consider.
Academic AbstractAuthenticity, a key concept in dominant Western psychological approaches, has been less studied from the Majority World perspectives. In this article, we draw upon the Chinese cultural ideal of Outside Roundness and Inside Squareness to fill this gap. After illuminating the cultural and psychological meanings of this indigenous concept, we propose an integrated framework that characterizes authentic self-functioning along two continuous dimensions: Outside Roundness versus Outside Squareness, reflecting the degree of seeking interpersonal harmony, moderation, and flexibility, and Inside Squareness versus Inside Roundness, indicating the degree of ethical self-consciousness and moral adherence. We illustrate how this framework can characterize different modes of authenticity and examine their variability in the Chinese context, and discuss its implications for Chinese psychology, dominant Western psychological approaches, and global (cross-cultural) psychology in authenticity research.Public AbstractHave you ever contemplated how the authentic self manifests within different cultures? In China, a Confucian philosophical concept, known as Outside Roundness and Inside Squareness, merges the perspectives of maintaining moral integrity and interpersonal harmony to articulate the nuances of authentic self-functioning. Imagine an individual who skillfully maneuvers through social situations (Outside Roundness) while steadfastly upholding his/her moral principles (Inside Squareness). This encapsulates the prominent attributes of authenticity as conveyed through the influential Confucian narratives. Our research offers an in-depth cultural and psychological exploration of this concept, and introduces a framework to characterize Chinese authenticity and its diverse expressions. These analyses deepen our appreciation for both the diverse and shared aspects of humanity, thereby contributing to the evolution of a more inclusive global psychology.
