There are, in fact, 4 possibilities to be authentically dishonest. These occur when:

• Honesty jeopardizes one’s relationships (A woman may worry that being honest with her husband about her erotic fantasies could damage their relationship)
• Honesty poses a threat to another person’s well-being (A person may fear that telling the partner of an abuse victim her whereabouts can endanger the victim’s life)

In general, authenticity requires:

1. Awareness of one’s inner states.
2. Truthful expression and communication of these states.

But, as noted above, we are not always honest with ourselves. In fact, self-deception is a major obstacle to becoming aware of inner states and communicating them to others.

For instance, we often try to hold on to unrealistically positive self-beliefs, which requires interpreting new information in ways that are biased in favor of making us feel good.

Since others do not have access to our inner states—only we do, and in a limited way—they cannot tell with certainty whether we are being authentic. Therefore, they rely on mental shortcuts and rules-of-thumb called heuristics.

Heuristics, in turn, are influenced by factors such as context. Specifically, context determines whether self-expression may be perceived as genuine or fake.

Cultural context: In China, describing one’s likes only is associated with being genuine, whereas in Germany this is true of describing both likes and dislikes .

Political context: A dishonest political leader is more likely to be seen as authentic by a voter if the two share a constituency and if the voter feels the political system is unlawful.

Personal ideology: Politically incorrect language is considered more authentic when it aligns with an observer’s own ideology and prejudices.

In order to make sense of the complex relationship between being truthful and genuine, we need to understand a few additional terms:

• Other- and self-concept: These terms refer to the mental image of another person or one’s self.
• Coherence : Coherence means that an individual’s behavior makes sense, is predictable, and seems consistent with what we know about them.

We are more likely to feel authentic when our self-concept is coherent. Similarly, a stranger’s behavior appears genuine if our mental image of them is coherent.

Therefore, it is only when honesty boosts coherence that it predicts authenticity. Specifically, high authenticity results from a combination of both high honesty and high coherence.

Morality matters too. When dishonesty is perceived as moral (e.g., prosocial lies rather than hypocrisy), the resultant behavior seems more genuine.

In general, to be interpreted as authentic, deception must be motivated by benevolence, loyalty, or other prosocial personal values (e.g., protecting someone from harm). When this is the case, deception is seen as internally motivated and coherent with the person’s self-concept.

The famous philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau apparently believed that to be authentic, one must be honest at all times —even brutally honest—and resist society’s restrictions and demands.

However, there is more to authentic self-expression than challenging social norms through compulsive sincerity and unfiltered communication of every passing thought, feeling, urge, etc.

Society and its rules are not enemies of authenticity. In fact, authenticity is not only an individual but also a social construction

In other words, sociocultural context plays an important role in creating and shaping self-concept (e.g., through social comparison, social validation).

Nor is deception the enemy of genuine self-expression. Deception can be authentic when internally driven and motivated by personal values (e.g., loyalty, compassion, kindness) and prosocial goals (e.g., protecting another person’s health and well-being).