Unmasking the True Self on Social Networking Sites

Abstract

Social Networking Sites (SNSs) have redefined the dynamics of self-disclosure, enabling users to share personal information in curated and highly visible ways. Existing research often frames this practice through the “privacy paradox,” yet such models overlook the deeper psychological motivations behind online disclosure. Drawing on more than 150 peer-reviewed sources, this paper advances a conceptual distinction between identity and the Self, with emphasis on the expression of the “True Self” in digital contexts. The discussion, informed by psychological perspectives of the self, examines how SNSs facilitate authentic dimensions of identity rarely expressed offline due to fear of judgment. Integrating theoretical frameworks such as Construal Level Theory, perceived control, digital nudging, and social conformity (lemming effect), the review demonstrates that online disclosure reflects not only strategic behavior but also an intrinsic drive for authenticity and self-verification. SNSs thus emerge as spaces of both social performance and authentic self-expression.

1. Introduction

Social Networking Sites (SNSs) offer individuals new ways to build and maintain relationships by creating profiles, connecting and interacting with others, and sharing personal information and updates with a wide audience of their choosing. These platforms also enable asynchronous communication, allowing users to consciously construct their messages—through posts, stories, or reels—which enhances selective self-presentation (Attrill & Jalil, 2011). As a result, personal data are increasingly uploaded, stored, and shared.

The use of SNSs has become so widespread that it is now a routine part of daily life for most people, many of whom maintain multiple accounts across different platforms, each serving distinct functions (Brandtzæg, 2012). Over time, SNSs have evolved into primary tools for cultivating personal online networks due to their immediacy, reach, and the social capital they offer (Marriott & Buchanan, 2014). Consequently, many core features of these platforms are explicitly designed to facilitate connections by encouraging the disclosure of personal information (Hallam & Zanella, 2017). In this sense, self-disclosure appears to be a prerequisite for participation in SNSs.

Self-disclosure—the tendency to reveal personal information to others—has been extensively studied long before the rise of SNSs (Cozby, 1973; Jourard, 1971; Berg & Archer, 1980; Berg & Derlega, 1987; Greene et al., 2006). Yet, the digitization of communication and the explosive growth of SNSs have heightened its relevance and urgency (Stutzman et al., 2013). Prior research confirms that intimate disclosure is common among SNS users, who often invest heavily in impression management. Moreover, online settings allow for even greater openness, making it easier to share thoughts, feelings, and personal narratives (Gibbs et al., 2006).

One of the most controversial issues in SNS research is the relationship between privacy and online information disclosure. A key tension arises when the pursuit of social capital exposes users to potential privacy loss—especially if sensitive data are shared publicly (Boyd & Ellison, 2008). Although prior research has examined motivations such as privacy concerns, perceived control, social influence, and benefit–risk evaluations, these frameworks still fail to explain the deeper psychological drive that compels individuals to disclose increasingly personal content—expressions not merely of social identity, but of more essential aspects of the Self.

To address this gap, the present study turns to what is arguably the most significant, controversial, and methodologically challenging concept in psychological and social science research: the Self. A construct that has long resisted precise definition, the Self is often conflated with social identity—particularly in the context of SNSs—resulting in conceptual ambiguity and interpretative limitations.

Most existing research on self-disclosure does not make a clear distinction between identity and Self. The multiple roles that individuals assume—both offline and online—are frequently misinterpreted as manifestations of the True Self. In doing so, the literature often overlooks the possibility that self-disclosure on SNSs may arise not merely from social interaction or impression management, but from an intrinsic need for authentic self-expression.

The aim of this study is therefore to disentangle the concepts of Self, identity, and True Self within the context of SNSs and to explore the extent to which online self-disclosure can be understood as a pursuit of authenticity rather than solely as strategic identity management.

2. Methodology

In order to examine prior work on the privacy paradox and self-disclosure on SNSs in the first stage, and on the self, identities, and authenticity in the second stage, a PRISMA-like methodology was employed. This approach ensured transparency, methodological rigor, and coherence in the identification and evaluation of sources. While a full PRISMA protocol was not applied, the logic of its sequential stages—identification, screening, eligibility, and inclusion—was followed to systematize the review process.

The procedure involved the following steps:

Identification—Relevant publications were retrieved from academic databases and institutional repositories using combinations of keywords such as privacy paradox, self-disclosure, authenticity, identity, social media, and True Self.

Screening—Duplicate entries were removed, and titles and abstracts were screened for relevance to the study’s scope.

Eligibility—Full-text articles were examined according to explicit criteria. Studies were included if they were peer-reviewed, in English, and contributed directly to the theoretical understanding of disclosure, self-disclosure, privacy, privacy paradox, self, identity, or authenticity in the context of SNSs. Exclusion criteria applied to articles without theoretical contribution or outside the disciplinary scope of psychology, anthropology, communication, or information systems.

Inclusion—The final corpus comprised both seminal works, which provided foundational grounding, and very recent contributions (up to 2025), which captured contemporary developments and institutional perspectives. Importantly, the study of the self is a longstanding scholarly field, with theories and analyses dating back to the previous century; accordingly, our corpus deliberately integrates both foundational and contemporary works to ensure a comprehensive and temporally inclusive perspective.

The stepwise process of identification, screening, eligibility and inclusion applied in this review is illustrated in the PRISMA flow diagram (Figure 1) and summarized in

Table 1. Summary of the PRISMA flow of the literature selection process.

Stage	Records	Details/Notes
Identification	150	132 records from Web of Science & Scopus; 18 additional from institutional repositories
Screening	138	After removal of 12 duplicates; 25 excluded at abstract/title level
Eligibility	113	Full-text articles assessed; 6 excluded (non-theoretical, outside scope, descriptive only)
Inclusion	150	First-stage review (privacy paradox & self-disclosure): 100+ studies; Second-stage review (Self, Identity, Authenticity, True Self in SNSs): 57 studies

.

This section aims to enhance the clarity and transparency of the methodological process.

PRISMA Flow—Literature Review Process:

Identification

• Records identified through Web of Science and Scopus: 132
• Additional records identified through institutional repositories: 18
• Total records identified: 150

Screening

• Duplicates removed: 12
• Records screened (titles and abstracts): 138
• Records excluded at screening stage: 25

Eligibility

• Full-text articles assessed for eligibility: 113
• Full-text articles excluded (with reasons): 6

  ○

  Not theoretical in nature

  ○

  Outside disciplinary scope (psychology, anthropology, communication, information systems)

  ○

  Descriptive only

Inclusion

• Studies included in first-stage review (privacy paradox and self-disclosure): 100+
• Studies included in second-stage review (Self, Identity, Authenticity, True Self in SNSs): 57
• Total studies included in final synthesis: 150

Based on the social, anthropological, and psychological aspects of self-disclosure, three initial research questions (RQs) were formulated:

RQ1: 

To what extent and in what ways do users disclose personal information on SNSs?

RQ2: 

What factors explain why users continue to disclose personal information despite privacy concerns?

RQ3: 

In what ways is the privacy paradox theoretically and empirically related to self-disclosure?

In line with these questions, the first stage of the review analyzed over one hundred peer-reviewed studies, primarily from Web of Science (https://www.webofscience.com/wos/) and Scopus (https://www.scopus.com/), to identify explanatory frameworks of self-disclosure in relation to the privacy paradox. Five thematic categories emerged: (1) privacy concerns; (2) benefit–risk evaluation within Construal Level Theory; (3) perceptions of control; (4) digital nudging; and (5) social conformity, captured in the “lemming effect.” While these frameworks clarify the conditions under which disclosure occurs, they do not fully account for the underlying psychological mechanisms that drive individuals to reveal increasingly personal information—dimensions that extend beyond social identity to more fundamental aspects of the Self.

This limitation highlighted the need for a second stage of analysis, focusing on the Self—one of the most debated and methodologically complex constructs in psychology and the social sciences. Frequently conflated with social identity in the context of SNSs, the Self has often been treated ambiguously, resulting in conceptual limitations. To address this, a second literature review was conducted using the keywords “True Self in SNSs” and “self-disclosure in SNSs,” which identified fifty-seven (57) relevant studies. These works enabled a clearer distinction between “identity” and “Self,” examined the relationship between self-disclosure, self-esteem, and authenticity, and demonstrated that disclosure in SNSs often reflects a deeper motivation: the expression and verification of the True Self.

From this stage, three additional research questions were formulated:

RQ4: 

What distinction can be drawn between the Self and the identity of a subject?

RQ5: 

Do multiple Selves truly exist, or should they be understood instead as multiple identities?

RQ6: 

What constitutes the True Self, and how is it connected to authenticity?

These questions structured the second stage of the literature review and informed the development of the study’s conceptual framework. This additional round of searching also followed a PRISMA-like methodology, ensuring systematic screening and inclusion of only the most relevant sources, while avoiding redundancy with the first stage. Ultimately, it led to the identification of fifty-seven (57) studies specifically addressing the notion of the Self in SNSs. These studies clarified the multiple meanings of the Self examined over time, established a clear distinction between Self and identity, and explored the relationship between self-disclosure and self-confidence on the one hand and the True Self and authenticity on the other.

3. Privacy Paradox and Self-Disclosure

3.1. The Role of Privacy Concerns

Users willingly share large amounts of sensitive personal data (Tufekci, 2008; Gritzalis, 2004), even though they are aware of and concerned about the risks that SNSs pose to their information privacy (Pew Research Center, 2014; Taddicken, 2014; Quinn & Epstein, 2018). This apparent inconsistency between individuals’ self-disclosure behavior and their privacy concerns has been termed the “privacy paradox” (Brown, 2001; Norberg et al., 2007), or the “information privacy paradox” (Stone et al., 1983).

While the privacy paradox has been widely examined (Kokolakis, 2017), many of the attempts to explain it have been insufficient, often offering narrow or one-sided interpretations (Barth & de Jong, 2017; Gerber et al., 2018). Moreover, some of the existing explanations are inconclusive or even contradictory (Dienlin & Trepte, 2015; Lutz & Strathoff, 2014; Paspatis et al., 2023). This may be attributed to the fact that disclosure and control on SNSs are not necessarily two ends of the same continuum, but rather distinct processes influenced by different aspects of personality (Christofides et al., 2009). As a result, privacy concerns do not appear to determine the amount or type of information users choose to disclose when constructing their digital identities. This paradoxical outcome may be understood in light of the fluid and often unpredictable nature of human behavior (Papaioannou et al., 2020).

From a psychological standpoint, the privacy paradox reflects a trade off between users’ privacy concerns and their desire for impression management (Utz & Krämer, 2009). Deciding whether to disclose or withhold personal information involves managing privacy boundaries—deciding who should have access to the information being shared. Nonetheless, research consistently shows that, despite such concerns, users disclose significant amounts of personal information (Christofides et al., 2009). They often choose to override their initial reservations in order to express their preferences, articulate who they are, and avoid misrepresentation (Papaioannou et al., 2021). From a purely rational perspective, individuals are willing to trade off privacy risks against the expected benefits of disclosure (Berendt et al., 2005; Culnan & Bies, 2003; Norberg et al., 2007; Olivero & Lunt, 2004).

Christofides et al. (2009) argue that information disclosure and information control may not represent opposite ends of the same spectrum, as prior research on privacy–disclosure balance might suggest. Rather, they propose that these are distinct behaviors shaped by different personality traits. In their study, participants reported being significantly more likely to disclose information on Facebook than in face-to-face interactions. This suggests that individuals behave differently when interacting within SNS environments compared to offline contexts. One possible explanation is that SNSs establish implicit norms about what kinds of information should be shared, based on what others disclose. As the researchers note, these platforms foster an environment where sharing occurs both proactively and in response to others.

The literature generally agrees that privacy concerns are not reliable predictors of privacy-related behavior, as a consistent gap has been observed between individuals’ stated concerns and their actual disclosure behavior (Acquisti & Gross, 2006; Beresford et al., 2012; Braunstein et al., 2011; Brown, 2001; Norberg et al., 2007; Tufekci, 2008; Zafeiropoulou, 2014).

In addition to privacy concerns, research has identified other factors that are either directly related to self-disclosure or mediate its relationship with privacy-related behavior. Four of these—discussed in Section 3.2, Section 3.3, Section 3.4 and Section 3.5—collectively provide a useful interpretive framework for understanding information disclosure, as they are grounded in universal (rather than individualized) mechanisms that operate independently of users’ personality types, prevailing social norms, or subjective interpretations of their presence on SNSs. However, even these studies focus primarily on the contextual conditions that influence users’ disclosure behavior, rather than addressing the underlying need for self-disclosure itself.

3.2. Construal Level Theory

Hallam and Zanella (2016, 2017) attempted to explain the incongruity between online self-disclosure behavior and privacy concerns—which captures the core concept of the privacy paradox—by applying Construal Level Theory (CLT) to a behavioral model.

According to CLT, the choices people make on a daily basis are unconsciously shaped by a negotiation between conflicting values (Eyal et al., 2009; Fiedler, 2007), with the individual’s reference point being the Self in the here and now. The various ways in which an object, event, or situation can be removed from this immediate point—in terms of time, space, social distance, or hypotheticality—constitute dimensions of what is known as psychological distance (Liberman et al., 2002, 2007; Kruglanski & Higgins, 2007).

These psychological distances influence, and are influenced by, the level of mental construal, which can be either abstract (high-level) or concrete (low-level). When an action is construed at a high, abstract level, individuals tend to value it more in the distant future; when the same action is construed in low, concrete terms, they are more likely to assign value to it in the near future (Liberman et al., 2002; Trope & Liberman, 2003).

Hallam and Zanella (2016, 2017) demonstrated that social rewards tied to near-future intentions exert a direct influence on behavior, whereas privacy concerns primarily influence decisions related to the more distant future. Accordingly, self-disclosure behavior represents a trade-off between two deliberate and cognitively demanding evaluations: the anticipated benefits of using SNSs and the potential risks to personal privacy.

However, privacy concerns do not appear to directly shape users’ online self-disclosure behavior. Although individuals are highly aware of the threats associated with disclosing personal information, their actions are more strongly guided by the motivation to obtain social rewards. The gratification and satisfaction derived from receiving “likes”—the prevailing social currency of SNSs (Mascheroni et al., 2015)—or views, serve as prominent drivers of increased disclosure (Ng, 2014).

The social rewards associated with likes and views are perceived as real and immediate, and are thus considered concrete, low-level constructs. In contrast, the risk of a privacy breach is viewed as hypothetical and temporally distant, and therefore qualifies as a more abstract, high-level construct. As a result, short-term disclosure intentions exert a strong positive influence on disclosure behavior, whereas long-term, risk-averse intentions have a less pronounced negative effect.

Users tend to disclose substantial amounts of seemingly sensitive information because they are often overconfident about distant-future outcomes—especially when these are associated with high-level, abstract constructs. This overconfidence stems from a tendency to underweight the influence of low-level contextual factors in the future, as well as from an illusion of control over the information they choose to disclose.

3.3. The Control Paradox

Control is a key determinant of both risk perception and risk-taking behavior (e.g., Harris, 1996; Klein & Kunda, 1994; Nordgren et al., 2007; Slovic, 1987; Weinstein, 1984). Previous research has shown that individuals are more inclined to take risks—and tend to perceive those risks as less severe—when they experience a perceived sense of control. In fact, the ability to manage certain known risks can obscure awareness of, or attention to, other risks that are beyond their control (Brandimarte et al., 2013).

In numerous instances of problematic information disclosure, individuals operate under an illusory sense of control. Their behavior does not stem from a disregard for privacy, but rather from the belief that they can effectively manage the information they choose to disclose (Acquisti & Gross, 2006; Brandimarte et al., n.d.). This perceived control is typically anchored in the proximal act of disclosure—that is, the ability to determine what is shared and when—while neglecting the more distal and diffuse dimensions of control over how the information is subsequently accessed, interpreted, or repurposed by others. Consequently, individuals tend to underestimate the magnitude of external privacy risks and simultaneously overestimate the efficacy of their own regulatory actions (Acquisti & Gross, 2006; Brandimarte et al., n.d.). This cognitive bias reinforces their inclination to disclose, often beyond what would be warranted by a more accurate assessment of risk.

Brandimarte et al. (2013) assert that providing users of SNSs with more fine-grained and explicit privacy controls can paradoxically encourage them to disclose more sensitive information to broader—and potentially riskier—audiences. Greater perceived control appears to reduce users’ psychological resistance to disclosure, even as the objective risks associated with sharing personal information increase. As long as individuals are offered direct and transparent decision-making power over what to publish and to whom, they tend to engage in disclosure more readily—even in cases where the nature of the information is highly sensitive. This dynamic suggests that it is not the act of publication itself that regulates privacy concerns, but rather the explicit perception of control over that act.

3.4. Digital Nudging

Perceived control is closely linked to the sense of safety and trustworthiness associated with a digital platform (Hui et al., 2007), as well as to the level of trust in the provider (Krasnova et al., 2010; Masur & Scharkow, 2016). Users’ privacy concerns and disclosure behaviors vary depending on the specific SNS they use, reflecting different perceptions of risk and trust across platforms. When individuals perceive a platform as trustworthy, they are more likely to disclose more personal and reliable identity-related information. For this reason, providers often emphasize the security of their platforms and their commitment to user privacy. They frequently employ tailored digital nudging strategies—subtle, choice-guiding design features that serve as soft paternalistic tools—to promote self-disclosure (Kroll & Stieglitz, 2019).

Digital nudging is defined as “a subtle form of using design, information, and interaction elements to guide user behavior in digital environments, without restricting the individual’s freedom of choice” (Meske & Potthoff, 2017). Although it is regarded as “a powerful mechanism to assist users in avoiding unintended disclosures” (Z. Wang et al., 2014), it can paradoxically lead to increased self-disclosure. By transparently reminding users of their privacy settings and the visibility of shared content—thereby enhancing their perceived sense of control and trust in the platform—nudges can reinforce users’ willingness to disclose personal information.

SNS providers aim to enhance users’ perceptions of safety and privacy by implementing notifications regarding privacy settings. While users may not always pay close attention to these notifications at the moment they appear, such messages tend to reinforce a general sense of security. This is because they are perceived as transparent and comprehensive communications from the provider about the platform’s commitment to privacy (Andrade et al., 2002; Krasnova et al., 2010; Y. Wang & Midha, 2012). Consequently, users are more likely to disclose personal information, as they feel a greater sense of control over their data and a degree of trust—or at least a lack of distrust—toward the provider. In addition, self-disclosure is often encouraged by social cues, such as the behavior of peers who also share personal content (Joinson & Paine, 2012).

3.5. The Lemming Effect

Given that humans are inherently social beings, the social environment significantly influences their self-disclosure behavior. SNS users tend to adopt group behaviors when they perceive that the number of individuals engaging in a particular action surpasses their personal behavioral threshold—a phenomenon commonly referred to as the lemming effect (Snyman et al., 2018). Granovetter (1978), who first articulated the foundational principle behind behavioral threshold theory, emphasized that seemingly paradoxical behaviors can often be attributed to the impact of collective action on individual decision-making. According to this theory, each individual holds an internal threshold that determines their likelihood of participating in a group behavior. This threshold reflects a cost–benefit evaluation of participation, which is influenced by the number of others already involved in the behavior.

In the context of information security and personal data disclosure, this suggests that individuals may adopt the behavior modeled by their social group—even when it conflicts with their own judgment or intentions. As the number of peers engaging in a given behavior surpasses an individual’s behavioral threshold, the influence of group dynamics grows stronger (Snyman et al., 2018). This alignment is further driven by the innate human need to feel connected to and accepted by a group (Simões & Mirabile, 2014).

3.6. Conclusions

Overall, users’ self-disclosure via SNSs appears to stem from a complex cognitive process shaped by the interplay of the specific factors discussed above. However, while these factors help establish the necessary preconditions for disclosure, they do not in themselves suffice to initiate the behavior (Paspatis et al., 2023). Put differently, they fail to fully account for what individuals seek to achieve when revealing personal information (Schudy & Utikal, 2017). It appears that a further motivational element is required—one that frames self-disclosure not merely as an action, but as a psychological need (Berg & Derlega, 1987; Bai et al., 2025).

What, then, is the nature of this need? Section 3 and Section 4, drawing on the aforementioned literature review, trace a linear relationship between disclosure and the motivation for self-presentation. These sections also examine divergent perspectives on whether users are primarily driven to present an idealized or desired version of themselves, or rather their authentic Self, emphasizing that self-presentation is closely linked to self-esteem.

4. Self-Presentation and Self-Esteem

Users of SNSs often associate the disclosure of personal information with their sociability and sense of online identity (Ng, 2014). For many, self-disclosure becomes a means of establishing presence—a way of expressing their voice and projecting their image—while non-disclosure is experienced as social exclusion or invisibility. As a result, individuals increasingly construct their digital self-identity through the sharing of personal information in online interactions. This dynamic has contributed to what Floridi (2010) describes as rampant “informational re-appropriation” in digital spaces: an effort to assert one’s individuality through the voluntary revelation of personal details. As Wu (2019) notes, individuals disclose information about themselves not merely to connect, but to avoid becoming informationally indiscernible—seeking not only visibility in online environments, but also a broader sense of social recognition and affirmation.

Users of SNSs often perceive greater personal risk in restricting access to their information than in disclosing it, as such limitations may impede opportunities for identity construction (Christofides et al., 2009). As a result, despite expressing concern for their privacy and actively engaging with various privacy settings, they still tend to disclose significant amounts of personal information—an outcome that exemplifies the core dynamic of the privacy paradox.

Thus, individuals willingly engage in self-presentation, placing their identities on public display within social networking environments, where they are open to evaluation by others. The personal information they choose to share becomes a reference point for social comparison processes, which can shape their self-perception in multifaceted ways (Nor et al., 2025; Weber et al., 2025). These comparisons influence their self-esteem not only by affecting how they evaluate their life circumstances but also by informing the extent to which they perceive themselves as worthy, competent, and socially accepted (Weber et al., 2025).

As the use of SNSs is closely connected to how individuals view themselves, self-esteem emerged early on as a central topic in related research. Several studies have explored the relationship between users’ self-perception and their everyday activity on these platforms (Mehdizadeh, 2010; Kalpidou et al., 2011; Vogel et al., 2014). However, findings on how users choose to present themselves remain inconclusive. Some researchers argue that users tend to showcase an idealized or desired version of themselves, while others claim that SNSs often reflect the actual Self users experience and express (Whitty, 2008).

Utz et al. (2012) argue that individuals often engage in self-presentation strategies to manage the impressions they create, adapting the image they project based on contextual expectations (Goffman, 1959). These strategies may involve withholding certain personal information or replacing it with selectively modified details that reflect a more desirable version of the Self. A widely accepted view—supported by various content analyses—is that SNS profiles are frequently used to construct and convey idealized versions of the Self (Manago et al., 2008; Attrill & Jalil, 2011). According to the idealized virtual-identity hypothesis, profile owners tend to highlight traits that align with aspirational self-concepts rather than their actual personalities. Consequently, impressions formed through SNS profiles often reflect the users’ ideal-Self representations rather than their authentic personal attributes.

A contrasting view maintains that SNSs may serve as extended social contexts in which individuals express actual aspects of their personality, thereby enabling more accurate interpersonal perceptions. These platforms incorporate multiple forms of personal information that resemble those found in offline environments—such as private reflections, facial imagery, and social interactions—all of which are considered valid indicators of personality (Ambady & Skowronski, 2008; Funder, 1999; Hall & Bernieri, 2001; Kenny, 1994; Vazire & Gosling, 2004). The limited degree of anonymity on SNSs—since users are typically identifiable by real names rather than pseudonyms, as in anonymous chatrooms—can influence self-presentation by constraining the range of possible selves that individuals feel able to project.

Creating idealized identities on SNSs has become increasingly difficult for two main reasons: (a) platform features have evolved to include elements of one’s reputation that are not easily self-managed—such as wall posts, comments, and tagged content from others—and (b) offline social connections, including family members, friends, and colleagues, provide implicit accountability and continuous feedback on one’s online persona. In this context, the extended real-life hypothesis posits that individuals tend to use SNSs to convey their actual personality traits rather than to construct idealized virtual identities (Back et al., 2010). From this perspective, SNSs function as effective channels for the expression and communication of real personality, which may, in part, account for their sustained popularity (Back et al., 2010).

As Simões and Mirabile (2014) point out, our presence on SNSs is motivated not only by the desire to maintain contact with people we already know offline—the “people of our lives,” to paraphrase Facebook’s slogan—but also by the ongoing process of self-reproduction in pursuit of two fundamental social needs: the need to belong and the need for self-presentation. The need to belong is evident, for instance, when users employ hashtags to share personal information within their online communities; through such acts, they align themselves with shared norms while simultaneously expressing unique facets of their identity (O’Donnell, 2018). The need for self-presentation, by contrast, encourages users to portray themselves in a more favorable or socially acceptable manner (Marwick & Boyd, 2011), primarily through deliberate self-disclosure. The social feedback they receive in return reinforces their self-esteem and supports their emotional well-being. In this context, self-esteem functions as a key psychological driver: it facilitates authentic self-presentation and reduces the likelihood of deceptive portrayals (Ranzini & Lutz, 2017). Individuals with high self-esteem tend to reveal more sincere and less manipulated aspects of the self, maintaining a consistent identity across online and offline contexts. Conversely, low self-concept clarity is associated with more fragmented and idealized self-presentations across different platforms (Fullwood et al., 2020).

Although the aforementioned studies seek to explain the motivations behind self-disclosure, they often use the terms “identity” and “self” interchangeably when describing users’ revealing behaviors. In our view, this conflation blurs the underlying psychological drivers of self-disclosure and self-presentation practices. This conceptual ambiguity has guided our literature review toward a deeper exploration of what is arguably the most complex, contested, and fundamental construct in this field of inquiry: the Self.

5. Is Identity Equal to Self?

5.1. Identity Construction

Zhao et al. (2008) examined how identity is constructed within what they describe as “nonymous” environments—online spaces where users’ digital and offline identities are closely linked, such as Facebook. In such contexts, individuals tend to show rather than tell who they are, constructing identities not through explicit self-descriptions but through the deliberate presentation of images and interest-related content. This process involves the strategic sharing of photographs, affiliations, and preferences, all of which contribute to a performative projection of Self.

Moreover, identity on SNSs is not only expressed but also deliberately managed, particularly through visual means (Hunt et al., 2014), which are subject to a self-objectifying gaze. As O’Donnell (2018) notes, the continuous stream of images on an individual’s Instagram profile forms a curated chronicle of the life one chooses to present—a form of narrative construction shaped by selective visibility and presentational coherence.

Approaching identity as narrative, Sfard and Prusak (2005) argue that personal identity is significantly informed by stories about others, which individuals may internalize and reframe into first-person narratives as part of their evolving self-concept. In the context of SNSs, this highlights the inherently social nature of online self-presentation: many of the actions users take—such as posting, tagging, or sharing—are not solely for their own expression, but are consciously performed with an audience in mind. In that sense, users are continuously constructing and reconstructing their identities in dialog with others’ perceptions, behaviors, and expectations, driven by the desire to be seen, recognized, and affirmed within their digital social circles.

It appears, however, that the demands of identity construction and impression management increasingly motivate individuals to engage in greater self-disclosure. As Gross and Acquisti (2005) note, the sharing of personal information across large-scale social networks introduces a novel form of intimacy—one that users must gradually become accustomed to. Within this evolving context, the condition of being observed has been reframed: once considered a threat, it is now often perceived as a form of temptation that encourages the public display of the inner Self across all age groups (Bauman & Lyon, 2013).

From this standpoint, identity is no longer viewed solely as an inherent personal trait but as a socially constructed product—shaped both by what individuals choose to share and by what others share or express about them. Self-disclosure thus becomes a key element in identity formation and a means of personal expression (Papathanassopoulos et al., 2016).

Nonetheless, the nature of what is being presented or disclosed remains contested. Contradictory findings persist, largely due to conceptual ambiguities surrounding the distinction between “Self” and “personal identity.”

5.2. What Is Identity and What Is Self? A Discrimination

Orsatti and Riemer (2015) offer a valuable conceptual distinction between identity and Self, which sheds light on the multifaceted, divergent, and at times idealized ways individuals present themselves on SNSs. According to their framework, identity encompasses: (a) the ways in which individuals actively live their lives across different contexts; (b) the ways they are shaped by social practices and interactions with others; and (c) the ways they act and position themselves in the world.

From this perspective, identity is understood as (1) multiple, social, and constantly evolving—never fixed or final—and (2) an active accomplishment, continuously constructed through engagement with others and broader cultural systems. Identity is thus inherently relational: it is always co-created, never entirely self-contained or privately owned. One becomes a “someone” through participation in social practices—for instance, being a mother presupposes the presence of a child, just as being a doctor presumes involvement in an established medical institution and discourse.

Self, on the other hand, refers to the internal sense of coherence and continuity that allows individuals to experience themselves as integrated and consistent beings, even amidst the multiplicity of roles and identities they may inhabit. It denotes the subjective experience of an “I” that is consistently felt as one’s own—an enduring perspective through which life is interpreted and narrated.

Beyond the distinction between personality, identity, and Self, the notion of multiple selves is also a recurring theme in the academic discourse, emphasizing that individuals may embody different versions of the Self across contexts, relationships, and platforms, while still retaining a core experiential unity.

According to Markus and Nurius (1986), an individual’s self-concept at a given point in time can be understood as comprising two distinct categories: the “now selves” and the “possible selves.” The “now selves” represent established aspects of identity that are known and recognizable to others. In contrast, “possible selves” refer to self-representations that are currently unknown to others and reflect what a person might become, would like to become, or fears becoming. Within this category, hoped-for possible selves form a specific subset. These are socially desirable identities that individuals aspire to realize and believe are attainable under appropriate circumstances. Importantly, they are distinct from both the suppressed or hidden “Real Self”—which may remain private—and the “Ideal Self”, conceptualized by Higgins (1987), which may involve unrealistic or overly aspirational traits.

Orsatti and Riemer (2015) argue that although we tend to perceive ourselves as unified and coherent beings, our everyday lives are actually shaped by a multiplicity of selves. While we often conceive of the Self as self-contained and located “in here,” the reality is that our sense of Self is deeply interdependent on other people and on our participation in social groups and contexts “out there.” Who we are is co-constructed through our interactions with others and defined, in part, by how we relate to them and how they relate to us. In this view, the Self is not singular or static, but rather multiple, socially embedded, and continually shaped, negotiated, and reaffirmed through our roles and memberships within various social environments.

It seems, however, that the concepts of Self and identity are often intertwined within the research field.

The idea that individuals possess multiple senses of Self—or personas—is not new in psychology and sociology. In fact, the notion of the Self as multi-faceted has long been accepted. Both Goffman (1959) and Jung et al. (1953) distinguished between the public Self, or persona, and the individual’s private, inner Self. For Jung, real individuality resided in the unconscious Self, in contrast to the conscious ego. Markus and Nurius (1986), as previously discussed, introduced the concept of “possible selves”: imagined versions of the Self that represent an individual’s hopes for personal development or fears of undesired outcomes. Higgins (1987) further proposed a tripartite model of the Self, consisting of the ideal Self (who one aspires to be), the ought Self (who one feels obliged to be), and the actual Self (who one believes they currently are). Both the ideal and ought selves serve as internal standards against which the actual Self is evaluated, influencing self-perception and motivation.

Hence, depending on the characteristics of the environment in which they find themselves, individuals selectively emphasize those facets of the Self—or aspects of identity—that allow them to align more effectively with the surrounding social context. In this light, “True Selves,” “real selves,” and “hoped-for possible selves” are understood not as fixed traits of distinct individuals, but rather as situational products shaped by the social contexts in which they are expressed (Zhao et al., 2008).

People’s experiences on social media reinforce the view of the Self as comprising multiple identities or “versions,” given that users frequently present themselves in varying roles across online contexts (Papaioannou et al., 2021). As such, the SNS environment—combined with its structural affordances, the presence of nonymity, and the normative pull toward social alignment—can enable individuals to express multiple self-concepts that may have remained unarticulated or suppressed in offline life for a variety of reasons (Simões & Mirabile, 2014).

This environment functions primarily as a social laboratory, enabling the exploration and expression of various types of possible selves (Bargh et al., 2002; McKenna & Bargh, 2000). In this context, SNSs provide a unique opportunity for individuals to experiment with alternative inner self-conceptions that they already possess but may not express in their offline lives. These are neither abstract potential selves nor idealized versions of the Self. Rather, they correspond to hoped-for possible selves—socially desirable identities that individuals believe attainable under the right conditions (Bronstein, 2014). This conceptualization closely aligns with Rogers’ (1951) notion of the True Self and offers a compelling explanation for the motivation behind self-disclosure on SNSs.

5.3. The True Self

The True Self, as defined by Bargh et al. (2002), McKenna et al. (2002), Hu et al. (2021), and Choi and Sung (2018), is conceptually distinct from both the ideal or possible (potential) selves, on the one hand, and the actual Self, on the other. It refers to attributes and dispositions that an individual already possesses but does not typically or fully express in everyday offline interactions (Bargh et al., 2002). Unlike ideal selves—which reflect aspirational attributes—or possible selves—which include hypothetical or future-oriented self-conceptions, the True Self encompasses aspects of one’s identity that feel authentic yet remain largely unshared or suppressed in normative social contexts.

Rogers (1951) proposed that the True Self constitutes an essential element of personal identity. He understood the True Self as a psychologically real dimension of the individual—a present rather than future version of the Self—that remains partially or entirely unexpressed in everyday social life, and thus distinct from the actual Self. According to Rogers, the True Self encompasses qualities that are central to one’s identity but lack validation from significant others. These may include (a) characteristics and traits that an individual wishes other would recognize, but refrains from expressing due to fear of disapproval, social judgment, or misalignment with normative expectations; or (b) characteristics that, even when expressed, are not acknowledged or affirmed by one’s significant others (Seidman, 2014), which may substantially affect self-esteem and psychological well-being.

Rogers poignantly described the True Self as a kind of prisoner, “tapping out day after day a Morse Code message, ‘Does anyone hear me?’” (Rogers, 1951, p. 136).

5.3.1. True Self in SNSs

Today’s digital environment allows users of social SNSs to explore and experiment with different aspects of their identity in more diverse and dynamic ways, supported by a wide range of enhanced tools for self-expression compared to early online platforms or the initial forms of SNSs. Functions such as live video, temporary updates, reels, status sharing, and multimedia posts (e.g., photos and videos) have turned SNS profiles into dynamic arenas for ongoing self-presentation.

In this context, self-expression goes beyond simple content sharing—it reflects the construction or reconfiguration of an online identity that may partially or entirely differ from one’s offline Self. This allows individuals to portray aspects of themselves that they are not—or cannot easily be—in their real-world interactions.

The environment of SNSs enables individuals to articulate identity-relevant, subjectively authentic dimensions of the self—elements of personal identity that may remain unexpressed in offline settings due to social constraints, normative expectations, or concerns about interpersonal evaluation. Empirical findings by Hu et al. (2021) indicate that the True Self is often obscured or inhibited in face-to-face interactions, whereas the actual Self—representing the socially enacted persona in everyday contexts—is more readily displayed. The specific affordances of the SNS environment, such as asynchronous interaction, selective self-presentation, and enhanced control over impression management, facilitate the activation, articulation, and sustained expression of aspects of the True Self that might otherwise remain unexpressed.

Further empirical evidence suggests that individuals engaged in online interactions are more likely to be perceived by their counterparts as exhibiting traits associated with their “True Self” than those participating in face-to-face communication (Bargh et al., 2002, Experiment 3). This supports the notion that online environments, particularly SNSs, facilitate the articulation of personally significant, yet underexpressed, dimensions of selfhood. Tidwell and Walther’s (2002) foundational study corroborates this view, demonstrating that computer-mediated communication tends to elicit greater self-disclosure and encourages more intimate, probing questions compared to in-person conversations. Similarly, Bronstein’s (2014) research on personal blogs revealed that individuals often share deeply personal information online—content they consciously withhold from their offline relationships. These findings align with earlier work by Bonebrake (2002) and Cooper and Sportolari (1997), who observed that users willingly disclose aspects of themselves in digital contexts that they are reluctant to reveal in equivalent face-to-face interactions.

It appears, however, that the heightened activation and expression of the True Self in online contexts does not typically stem from a conscious, strategic effort at self-presentation. Rather, it tends to operate at a more implicit or unconscious level. Bargh et al. (2002, Experiments 1 and 2) found that True Self attributes become more cognitively accessible following online interactions, facilitated by the unique temporal, spatial, and social characteristics of digital interaction, such as reduced social cues and increased control over disclosure. This tendency to disclose elements of the True Self to pre-existing offline friends during computer-mediated exchanges has been shown to predict positive relational outcomes—such as greater ease in addressing sensitive or conflictual issues and the perception that the relationship has been strengthened through online communication (McKenna et al., 2005). Additionally, the need to express one’s True Self within SNS-mediated interactions appears to function as part of an individual’s self-guides—that is, the internalized standards and motivational goals that direct behavior (Hu et al., 2021).

The need for congruence between one’s self-concept and self-guides is widely acknowledged in psychological theory, as discrepancies between the two have been linked to emotional distress, including anxiety, disappointment, and depressive states (Higgins, 1987; Debrosse et al., 2018). Accordingly, when individuals behave in ways that align with their True Self within online environments, they effectively reinforce their internalized self-guides—an alignment that is associated with enhanced psychological well-being and a greater sense of personal coherence.

5.3.2. True Self and Self-Verification

The expression of True Self qualities in SNSs can be understood as a pursuit of self-verification—the psychological drive to be perceived by others in ways that align with one’s own self-perception. Individuals are strongly motivated to have significant aspects of their identity recognized and affirmed by others. Yet, in offline social contexts, such validation is often restricted—tempered by normative expectations, interpersonal constraints, or the anticipation of social disapproval.

Within the environment of SNSs, however, the conditions appear more conducive to this process of self-verification. When individuals receive acknowledgment for meaningful and personally significant elements of their identity in these digital settings, those elements are conferred social legitimacy and become further integrated into the individual’s self-concept as authentic components of the Self.

Even when users are aware of the potential vulnerabilities associated with disclosing personal information—such as compromised privacy or adverse reactions—they often perceive the psychological value of being seen as outweighing these risks. At the core of this behavioral tendency lies an implicit acknowledgment that, although daily life often reinforces a singular, socially situated version of the Self, individuals possess a broader and more complex range of traits, dispositions, and relational capacities that typically remain unarticulated. SNSs provide a space in which individuals can articulate personal qualities and relational capacities they deeply wish to be recognized for, but which they are typically unable to express in offline contexts—often due to social constraints, fear of judgment, or misalignment with prevailing norms (Rogers, 1951).

6. From Ambiguity to Authenticity: Defining the True Self in SNS Contexts

Research on disclosure and privacy behavior within SNSs is often marked by conceptual ambiguity and internal contradictions. One of the most prominent issues is the lack of terminological precision in describing users’ diverse manifestations of the Self. Scholars frequently conflate the notions of Self and identity, referring to “multiple selves” or “versions of the Self” when in fact they are discussing variations in identity performance.

However, users in SNSs are not engaged in constructing an alternative Self in a substantive psychological sense. Rather, they either enact an identity—one that may correspond to an ideal, possible, or prescriptive self-representation shaped by self-esteem and contextual factors—or they express elements of their True Self that are typically constrained in offline settings.

In the first case, what is communicated is often a selectively assembled identity profile, intended to conform to normative expectations or to elicit favorable social evaluations. This process does not necessarily entail the disclosure of deeply personal or psychologically central attributes; instead, it reflects a form of strategic self-presentation aligned with Goffman’s notion of front-stage behavior (Goffman, 1959). Within this performative framework, the SNS environment serves simultaneously as the venue and the audience, shaping and mediating how identity is articulated.

Despite concerns about privacy, social media platforms—with their expressive affordances—can also operate as spaces of personal freedom, where individuals choose to disclose personal information or internal reflections. This willingness to share often stems from a deeper psychological need: the desire for self-verification. That is, users seek to have significant aspects of their identity acknowledged and validated by others in ways that align with how they perceive themselves.

In academic literature, however, there is a tendency to equate authentic online self-presentation with actual self-behavior. This conflation is both analytically problematic and conceptually limiting, as it overlooks the fundamental distinction between being and doing. Authenticity is not merely about how we behave in relation to others, but rather about expressing core elements of who we are—the “True Self.” While authenticity may influence behavior, it does not originate from it.

To act authentically, therefore, presupposes a degree of self-awareness and alignment between inner experience and outward expression. Authenticity lies in the presentation of Self in a manner that resonates with one’s inner reality, regardless of external expectations or situational norms. This is precisely why authenticity remains difficult to attain—not only in digital spaces but in everyday life as well. Nonetheless, the drive for authentic self-expression persists, grounded in the individual’s need to distinguish the Self from others and closely intertwined with the pursuit of self-verification. Taking into account the conceptual ambiguities and terminological inconsistencies found in prior research—particularly the frequent conflation of “Self,” “identity,” and “True Self”—this study seeks to address a key gap in the understanding of self-disclosure on SNSs. Many earlier approaches have either oversimplified or misinterpreted self-disclosure by framing it primarily as a performative or strategic act of identity presentation. In contrast, our central argument is that personal disclosure in SNSs often stems from a deeper psychological drive: the need to express one’s True Self (Kreling et al., 2022)—an inner dimension of the Self that is difficult or impossible to articulate in offline environments due to social constraints, fear of judgment, or lack of validating contexts, as outlined in the preceding sections.

This need is fundamentally distinct from the desire to manage impressions or curate an identity through profile content or posts. Rather, it reflects a pursuit of authenticity—a striving to make visible and shareable those aspects of the Self that are felt as most essential, even if rarely expressed in everyday life. SNSs, therefore, function not merely as arenas of social performance, but also as potential spaces of psychological resonance and self-actualization. Within these digital environments, users are afforded the opportunity to articulate who they are beyond their socially assigned roles and identities—revealing, in essence, the Self as a singular, irreplaceable subject, that is, their True Self.

In doing so, this study introduces a novel perspective by systematically disentangling the conflation of Self, identity, and True Self that persists in the literature. Whereas prior work has largely conceptualized online self-disclosure as a form of strategic identity management, our contribution lies in demonstrating that disclosure is equally, and perhaps more fundamentally, driven by the psychological need for authenticity and self-verification. By foregrounding the role of the True Self in digital contexts, this study provides a new conceptual lens for understanding both the privacy paradox and the deeper motivations underlying self-disclosure in SNSs.

Beyond this contribution, it is important to recognize that digital environments continue to evolve rapidly, particularly with the integration of artificial intelligence. Generative AI models such as ChatGPT increasingly mediate online interaction and may transform how identity, authenticity, and self-disclosure are articulated and perceived. Although this dimension lies beyond the scope of the present study, it highlights a promising direction for future research: examining how AI-driven contexts reshape the dynamics of the True Self in digital spaces and further complicate the interplay between privacy, disclosure, and authenticity.