Private Selves, Public Faces: The Psychology of Identity Shifting

American actress Dakota Johnson made headlines when it was discovered that the bowl of limes shown in her Architectural Digest home tour was actually a prop and not for use, given that she later revealed in another interview that she is allergic to limes. While the moment became a subject of online scrutiny for its supposed “fakeness,” it raises an important psychological question about how people behave in social and interpersonal settings. Often, individuals divide their actual self from the persona they put forward when interacting with others. This phenomenon is not limited to public figures like celebrities or influencers; it exists everywhere and is largely universal in nature

An important concept in social psychology that helps explain this is Role Theory. Role theory suggests that daily interactions with others are shaped by socially constructed roles that people learn, internalize, and perform based on context. For instance, within a household, the highest earner often assumes the role of the breadwinner, taking on responsibilities tied to financial stability. Similarly, in organizational settings, managers and CEOs are expected to appear polished, confident, and authoritative. While these roles may reflect aspects of an individual’s personality, they are not always fully authentic. As a result, there is often a noticeable difference between how people present themselves publicly and how they behave privately, almost as if individuals are constantly switching between two masks.

This constant shift in behaviour is largely driven by our desire to maintain a favourable impression. Impression formation plays a crucial role in social interactions, as first impressions often set the ground for how relationships develop and are difficult to change once formed. To influence these initial impressions, people consciously adjust their behaviour, language, appearance, and even preferences to align with what is socially valued in a particular setting. This explains why individuals put extra effort into looking presentable before a job interview or a date, hoping to be perceived positively by the other person. However, sustaining these impressions over time requires a lot of emotional labour, as people must continuously regulate their emotions and calculated actions to meet social expectations. Over time, this effort can become mentally exhausting, especially when the public persona feels far removed from one’s true self.

However, this does not imply that all kinds of identity shifts are bad. There is an important distinction made by psychologists between adaptive identity flexibility and identity fragmentation. Adaptive flexibility is something that allows individuals to adjust across roles while maintaining a stable core identity. This shows a healthy balance between the personal self, which includes inner values and beliefs, and the social self, which responds to external expectations. Identity fragmentation, on the other hand, is something that occurs when these different selves feel disconnected or inconsistent. This is often linked to low self-concept clarity, where individuals struggle to define who they truly are, leading to confusion, stress, or feelings of inauthenticity. Understanding which behaviour of ours is adaptive or fragmented helps us to be more mindful.

So, in a world where visibility and perception increasingly shape social life, managing multiple roles has become unavoidable. The real challenge is not about avoiding personas, but instead is about ensuring these different personalities do not replace the core self of the person entirely. As Carl Jung famously noted, “The persona is that which in reality one is not, but which oneself as well as others think one is.” 

If we are always performing for others, how do we remain grounded in who we are when no one is watching?