Evaluating the psychological and social nature of actual and perceived liking gaps.

IF 6.4 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL Journal of personality and social psychology Pub Date : 2025-02-24 DOI:10.1037/pspp0000548
Hasagani Tissera, Norhan Elsaadawy, Gus Cooney, Lauren J Human, Erika N Carlson
{"title":"Evaluating the psychological and social nature of actual and perceived liking gaps.","authors":"Hasagani Tissera, Norhan Elsaadawy, Gus Cooney, Lauren J Human, Erika N Carlson","doi":"10.1037/pspp0000548","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Our beliefs about how much we are liked tend to be less positive than liking judgments of others, a finding termed the \"liking gap.\" Because much of the past work has studied liking gaps at the sample level, it has overlooked important nuances in how these gaps can be measured and experienced. We introduce a distinction between the <i>actual liking gap</i> (i.e., a between-person discrepancy between how much others actually like us and how much we think others like us) and the <i>perceived liking gap</i> (i.e., a within-person discrepancy between how much we like others and how much we think others like us). Across three large first-impression samples (<i>N</i><sub>total</sub> = 2,753), we use condition-based regression analyses to examine (a) who tends to exhibit these gaps, and (b) how people experience social interactions marked by gaps. Our findings suggest that people display two types of gaps, actual and perceived, that are psychologically distinct. Larger negative perceived liking gaps were related to indicators of insecurity (i.e., lower self-esteem, higher social anxiety, and higher neuroticism), whereas actual gaps did not show the same pattern. Neither gap was reliably associated with the quality of people's social interaction. Finally, our approach also allowed us to isolate the unique effect of feeling liked as a robust, consistent correlate of both psychological adjustment and interaction quality. Overall, this research offers new insights into the (mal)adaptiveness of two types of liking gaps. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":16691,"journal":{"name":"Journal of personality and social psychology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of personality and social psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000548","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Our beliefs about how much we are liked tend to be less positive than liking judgments of others, a finding termed the "liking gap." Because much of the past work has studied liking gaps at the sample level, it has overlooked important nuances in how these gaps can be measured and experienced. We introduce a distinction between the actual liking gap (i.e., a between-person discrepancy between how much others actually like us and how much we think others like us) and the perceived liking gap (i.e., a within-person discrepancy between how much we like others and how much we think others like us). Across three large first-impression samples (Ntotal = 2,753), we use condition-based regression analyses to examine (a) who tends to exhibit these gaps, and (b) how people experience social interactions marked by gaps. Our findings suggest that people display two types of gaps, actual and perceived, that are psychologically distinct. Larger negative perceived liking gaps were related to indicators of insecurity (i.e., lower self-esteem, higher social anxiety, and higher neuroticism), whereas actual gaps did not show the same pattern. Neither gap was reliably associated with the quality of people's social interaction. Finally, our approach also allowed us to isolate the unique effect of feeling liked as a robust, consistent correlate of both psychological adjustment and interaction quality. Overall, this research offers new insights into the (mal)adaptiveness of two types of liking gaps. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
12.70
自引率
3.90%
发文量
250
期刊介绍: Journal of personality and social psychology publishes original papers in all areas of personality and social psychology and emphasizes empirical reports, but may include specialized theoretical, methodological, and review papers.Journal of personality and social psychology is divided into three independently edited sections. Attitudes and Social Cognition addresses all aspects of psychology (e.g., attitudes, cognition, emotion, motivation) that take place in significant micro- and macrolevel social contexts.
期刊最新文献
Evaluating the psychological and social nature of actual and perceived liking gaps. Reactions to undesired outcomes: Evidence for the opposer's loss effect. Narcissists' experience of ostracism. Stress reactivity and sociocultural learning: More stress-reactive individuals are quicker at learning sociocultural norms from experiential feedback. Money matters for future well-being: A latent growth analysis and meta-analytic integration of associations between income, financial satisfaction, and 22 well-being variables across three data sets.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1