Authenticity, or being true to oneself, relies on integrating autobiographical memories into a coherent life-story. These autobiographical memories serve three adaptive functions: self-identity, social connection and directing behaviour in the future. But little is known about how memory and the subjective sense of authenticity interact. Using a between-subjects experimental design, we compared memories of authentic and inauthentic moments with controls. Memories of in/authentic events were more likely to use the self function and less likely to use the social function than controls. In addition, we noted a trend for memories of inauthentic events to be more likely than controls to use the directive function. These results highlight the importance of an ecological approach to memory as well as the potential adaptive value of recalling inauthentic experiences in developing a coherent sense of self.
Working on a manuscript?
Avoid the common mistakesAuthenticity – a subjective sense of being true to oneself – contributes to positive life outcomes such as well-being and engagement [Sutton, 2020] and constructing this authentic sense of self is thought to rely on the recall of autobiographical memories that can be integrated into a coherent story [Boucher, 2011; Fivush & Graci, 2017]. But we know surprisingly little about what functions autobiographical memories might serve in supporting authenticity. This lack of data thwarts our understanding of mechanism and hinders progress in the development of theory. To address this gap, we asked people to recall times they felt authentic or inauthentic, and identified the functions that those memories served. The functional approach to autobiographical memories [AM] aims to understand how memories of our experiences are linked to subsequent psychological outcomes [Waters et al., 2014] and has identified three distinct adaptive functions served by autobiographical memories: self-continuity or definition, building social connection and directing behaviour in the future [Bluck et al., 2005]. Greater use of these three functions is associated with higher psychological well-being [Waters, 2014]. The self function is concerned with using memories of past experiences to build self-knowledge and develop a sense of continuity in the self-concept. This function can help someone to consider how much they may have developed over time [Bluck & Alea, 2011]. The social function is fulfilled when memories are used to foster and build social bonds, for example by sharing memories with others or learning about a person through using those memories. This function helps to develop intimacy in relationships [Bluck & Alea, 2011]. Finally, AM may be used to direct future behaviour: the directive function. This includes using memories to solve problems or develop plans and guidance for the future. The directive function includes using those memories of past events to understand an experience or create a sense of meaning [Bluck et al., 2005].Introduction
Functions of autobiographical memories
But these functions do not operate in a vacuum. The ecological approach to autobiographical memory emphasises that remembering occurs within a context and is therefore subject to influence by a range of factors [Lind et al., 2019]. These factors include individual differences, such as the influence of self-esteem and ruminative focus on the specificity and detail displayed in recall of autobiographical memories [Roberts et al., 2021], and types of memories. For example, single events tends to serve more self and directive functions, while recall of repeated or recurring events serves a social function, and extended events serve all three [Waters et al., 2014]. Similarly, the emotional valence of a memory influences the functions that memory serves, with the directive function being more likely than other functions to be used with negative memories [Lind et al., 2019].
The emotional valence of a memory is, however, distinct from how adaptive or helpful a person finds it. Pillemer [2001] notes that negative memories can be reinterpreted in the context of an overall life story as motivating rather than demoralizing. Negative memories can be adaptive and we are less likely to wish to ‘delete’ a helpful memory even if it is negatively valenced [Burnell et al., 2020]. Similarly, inauthenticity is commonly perceived as a negative state or experience that we are strongly motivated to avoid [Lenton et al., 2013], yet initial indications are that memories of being inauthentic can serve adaptive functions such as directing future behaviour [Sutton & Render, 2021].
While it is useful to know how functions used in diverse types of memories may differ, there have been calls for research to move into identifying patterns or interactions in how these functions are used [Pillemer, 2003]. A recent example of work answering this call is the investigation of memories of trust relationships in the workplace which explored interactions between memory valence and cultural context [Wasti et al., 2021]. This study found complex interactions between culture, valence and memory function. For example, positive memories served a social function more than negative memories across the three cultures surveyed, but the self function was used more in a Turkish sample than Singaporean or American, especially for positive memories. Studies like these continue to point to the need for an ecologically valid expansion of AM function research and a nuanced understanding of how contextual factors influence AM.
Autobiographical memory and authenticity
One of the most important contextual factors is the individual’s conceptual self, that is, their current knowledge of personal characteristics such as traits and attitudes [Conway et al., 2004]. This conceptual self both guides the recall of AM and is influenced by the memories in the construction of a coherent self-narrative or ‘working self’ [Demiray & Bluck, 2011]. Similarly, authenticity, our sense of being true to ourselves, is only possible to the extent that we can evaluate a current experience or recalled memory against a conceptual understanding of who we are. While there are several psychological models of authenticity, they all involve elements of both self-knowledge and self-expression [Harter, 2002]. Maintaining this ongoing life-story of who we are [McAdams, 2001] or sense of self-continuity through the recall of our personal past, is a key function of autobiographical memory [Bluck & Liao, 2013].
Although the research on authenticity and autobiographical memory is nascent, there are some emerging findings indicating a complex interaction between the two. Recalling a nostalgic memory can increase a sense of authenticity in the past self and help those who find themselves in contexts that restrict authenticity [Baldwin et al., 2015]. In addition, higher authenticity is associated with recalling a memory of achieving a goal or helping others [Smallenbroek et al., 2017]. Given that a range of research has demonstrated differential function use in different types of memories, it is likely that memories of authentic or inauthentic moments too, will serve different functions. A small study, the first of its kind to investigate differential AM function use in memories of authentic and inauthentic episodes, indicated that recall of inauthentic events served primarily to direct future behaviour while recall of authentic events served the self function [Sutton & Render, 2021].
The present study
This study aims to investigate the interaction between authenticity and autobiographical memory by identifying the AM functions used in memories of times people felt authentic or inauthentic. To do this, we partially replicate and extend on an initial study that used archival data to identify within-person differences between functions used in recall of these experiences [Sutton & Render, 2021]. Instead of within-person differences, we focus here on between-person differences and include a control condition of ‘free recall’ as a comparison to memories of authentic or inauthentic moments.
Self-knowledge is a basic component of authenticity [Kernis & Goldman, 2006; Wood et al., 2008]: we cannot feel true or untrue to ourselves if we do not know anything about ourselves. We therefore expect that the self function will be used significantly more in memories of authentic or inauthentic experiences than in controls. The social function, with its focus on developing social relationships, is expected to be used less in memories involving a sense of in/authenticity, which is self-focused, than in control memories. Finally, previous work has shown that reflections on inauthentic behaviour include elements of problem-solving and considering future behaviour [Sutton, 2018] and we therefore expect that recall of inauthentic moments are most likely to serve the directive function than controls.
Method
Participants
A total of 282 psychology students from New Zealand participated in the study in exchange for partial course credit. Incomplete responses [N = 19] and speeders [N = 22], those who completed the questionnaire 50% faster than the median [Greszki et al., 2014], were removed. In addition, on closer inspection of the memory narratives, two participants were excluded for low quality responses. A priori power analysis [using G*Power] indicated that a total sample of 245 had 95% power to detect a medium effect size. After data cleaning, sample size was 239, giving a power of 94%. Of the final 239 respondents, 81.6% were female, 15.5% male and 2.9% other/unspecified. Most respondents [66.1%] were less than 25 years old, followed by 21% aged 25–34 and 12.6% older than 35 years. 56.1% reported NZ European ethnicity, 6.7% Māori, 20.1% other ethnicities and 17.2% mixed ethnicity.
Procedure
Data were collected through an online questionnaire. Participants read an information sheet and provided informed consent before proceeding to the questionnaire. The study was approved by the authors’ institutional ethics committee. Participants first reported basic demographic data [sex, age and ethnicity] and then were randomly assigned to one of three groups [authentic, inauthentic or control condition] and asked to recall a memory relevant to that condition:
Please take a moment to think back over the last year and recall a time in your personal or professional life when you behaved in a way that made you feel [un]true to yourself, that made you feel [in]authentic. [Or, for the control condition: Please take a moment to think back over the last year and recall a memorable time in your personal or professional life.] Describe what happened, where and when the memory took place, who was involved, and thoughts and feelings during the event.
Measures and coding of event narratives
To determine whether respondents in the experimental conditions had followed instructions, all narratives were coded for the extent to which they represented authentic or inauthentic moments. Definitions of authenticity and inauthenticity were provided to two coders with expertise in authenticity but blind to the aim of the study. After training, coders read each narrative and rated it on the questions To what extent does this narrative represent a memory of a time the person was [in]authentic? on a five point scale from 1 = not at all to 5 = a great deal. Each narrative therefore received scores from two coders and the mean score was used in the subsequent analysis.
An ANOVA of these ratings by condition was conducted and demonstrated that the authenticity rating was significantly different across conditions [F [2, 236] = 114.45, p