A Short Version of the Kernis-Goldmanauthenticity Inventory: Adaptation in Russia

Aim. The first psychometric verification of the Kernis-Goldman Authenticity Inventory, which includes 45 statements and four scales in the initial version, such as Awareness, Unbiased processing, authentic Behavior, and Relational orientation, was carried out in Russia. The questionnaire was developed within the framework of the existential paradigm of personality psychology. Procedure and method. The study involved 704 respondents (144 male, 559 female, aged 17 to 32 years). To check the convergent validity, the Authenticity scale (subscales: Authentic living, Acceptance of external influence, and Self-Alienation) and the single-scale Moscow authenticity scale were used. Confirmatory factor analysis, parametric and nonparametric statistical methods were used. Results and conclusion. During the adaptation, the Authenticity inventory was reduced to 32 points (per 8 in each of the scales), in order to keep the original factor structure. It was found that the Relational orientation score is higher in females, and Awareness is higher in males. It was also found that the indicators of the adapted questionnaire positively correlate with the scores of Authentic living and the Moscow authenticity scale, and negatively — with the scores of Acceptance of external influence and Self-alienation. The study showed the structural and convergent validity of the Russian-language version of the questionnaire. The new tool can be recommended for evaluating the effectiveness of various interventions and for research.

Stalking the True Self Through the Jungles of Authenticity: Problems, Contradictions, Inconsistencies, Disturbing Findings—and a Possible Way Forward

Research on authenticity frequently invokes notions of true self, but is there such thing? The question must be answered twice, given frequent confusion and conflation of self with self-concept. Summarizing and integrating themes from authenticity research as evident in this special issue, I draw these conclusions. True self-concepts are more plausible than genuinely true selves, if the latter are independent entities distinct from actual behavior and experience. Yet rather than a single true self-concept, people have multiple nonfalse ones, none of which is entirely true. Among these, the pragmatically most important is the desired reputation, given the social-cultural orientation of humankind. Desired reputation is more a guide and goal than a reality, but successes and failures at achieving that reputation will produce welcome and unwelcome feelings that are likely reported as feeling authentic and inauthentic (respectively). Understanding authenticity in this way solves some of the perennial problems that beset research and theory on authenticity, especially positive distortion and external rather than internal orientation.

Introduction to the Special Issue: Authenticity: Novel Insights Into a Valued, Yet Elusive, Concept

Authenticity is generally believed to play an important role in our daily lives. Empirical research thus far has made progress in understanding the nature of this important construct. We identify four broad conclusions about authenticity based on this research: (a) People value authenticity in their own behavior and other domains (e.g., life experiences, consumer products), (b) Self-reports of personal authenticity are linked to psychological well-being, (c) People generally believe authentic, or “true,” selves are morally good, and (d) Authenticity judgments are guided by cognitive tendencies related to psychological essentialism. Despite this progress, many basic questions about authenticity remain unresolved including (a) What is the best way to define the construct? (b) Why do people care so much about whether something or someone is authentic? and (c) Why is personal authenticity so strongly related to psychological well-being? This special issue presents articles aimed to shed light on some of these basic questions. Although each of the articles offers a unique perspective to understanding authenticity, these collections of articles provide a generative framework to help researchers continue to explore this elusive construct.