{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.022895622895622896, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.7853881278538815, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Self-presentation: managing the impression of consistency when reality interferes with self-enhancement.

The manner in which an individual's self-perceptions affect related self-presentations was investigated. One hundred and twenty subjects believed that they would participate in a group task where their individual performance would either be known to the group or be completely anonymous. On the basis of bogus feedback from prior tests, subjects expected to perform either extremely well or very poorly on the group task; control groups received no such feedback. Before the task began, group members exchanged personal information that allowed them to vary their self-presentations. Factor analysis revealed two self-presentational factors: competence and interpersonal relations. A Performance Expectations X Anonymity interaction was obtained on self-presentational claims to personal competence. Under public performance conditions (where future public events could invalidate an unrealistically positive self-presentation), self-presentations were consistent with subjects' expectations of actual performance. However, under anonymous conditions, self-presentations were quite favorable and unaffected by expectations of actual performance. The results support an incentive model and fail to support a consistency model. Subjects seemed to desire as self-enhancing and approval gaining a public image as possible but conceded to the demands of public reality when necessary.