Great opportunities sometimes come your way, and when they do, you would like to make sure they turn into reality. When these opportunities require you to do your best to impress someone you’ve never met before, you’d obviously like to close the deal. Thinking back to the times you’ve put yourself on the line during a real interview or just a first meeting, which approach are you most likely to implement now? And will it work?

The psychology of first impressions

Much of the literature on first impressions in psychology focuses on scenarios in which people attempt to manipulate their image to put their best foot (or face) forward. Job interviews present the classic situation where people want to appear “hirable.” The candidate is highly motivated to look good, and even an honest person may be tempted to engage in a little image manipulation. Advice given to job seekers or anyone wanting to achieve their desired outcome (like a college applicant) often incorporates specific steps people should take, such as wearing the right clothes, making good eye contact, and staying sitting quietly rather than remaining seated. to agitate or appear nervous.

According to Benjamin Moon and colleagues at the University of Calgary (2024), the literature on print management (IM) misses the mark in trying to identify individual factors that predict a job candidate’s behavior (and success). Instead, it might make more sense to group all the factors into a single set or profile. After all, when you put yourself in the position of meeting someone for the first time, your presentation reflects a combination of several factors. As Moon et al. Note that “candidates may use multiple IM tactics at the same time to convey a presentation personality composed of multiple dimensions…looking at them in isolation may not be consistent with how candidates actually use IM in interviews.” »

Consider your own approach to instant messaging. When you’re preparing to meet someone new, you don’t just rely on eye contact, clothes or body language as distinct qualities to watch out for. Additionally, the choices you make will not be the same as those of others. Researchers at the University of Calgary believe your personality will play a key role in determining which strategy you ultimately decide to use. Socio-analytic theory predicts, in Moon et al. analysis, that your desire to give a certain impression will “stimulate the expression of personality traits.”

5 Print Management Profiles (And Which Ones Work)

In two samples, an undergraduate student (N=523) and an online adult (N=1,060), Moon and colleagues measured instant messaging tactics, personality traits, and cognitive abilities. Students participated in a mock interview and the online sample reported the outcome of their most recent job interview (resulting in a sample size of 1,042).

The measure of IM tactics fell into three categories: self-promotion, ingratiation, and defensive, with honest and deceptive forms within each. Here are examples (you can rate yourself on a scale of 1 to 5 points for each):

Honest self-promotion (PSH): I made sure the interviewer knew my professional credentials.

Creation of misleading images: I distorted my answers to emphasize what the interviewer was looking for (CISD; light deception); I invented work situations or accomplishments that didn’t actually happen (DEIC; extensive deception).

Honest Ingratiation (HIN): I discussed the interests I shared in common with the interviewer.

Deceptive Ingratiation (DIN): I congratulated the organization for something, no matter how insignificant it was to me.

Honest Defensive (HDE): I shared my past regrets about how I handled certain situations and how I would improve in the future.

Misleading image projection (SOAK): When asked directly, I did not mention some problems I encountered in previous jobs.

To measure personality, the authors assessed the six “HEXACO” traits of honesty-humility (H), emotionality (E), extroversion (X), approval (A), awareness (This opening (O).

Now that you have an idea of ​​how these IM tactics translate into actual interview behavior, it’s time to move on to the five IM profiles that the authors developed from the IM, Personality and Personality Metrics. and cognitive. Again, see if you can find your way through these profiles by the abbreviations and brief descriptions:

Right shooter: High HSP, high H, C, E (18%): honest, reliable and outgoing.

Naive deceivers: Low HSP, High H, Low X, A, C, O (7%): not very honest, but not very engaging, reliable or pleasant.

Charmers: High HIN, High X, C (37%): Try to find a common connection with the interviewer, outgoing and reliable.

Extreme deceivers: High DEIC, low H,

Deceivers retained: low DEIC, moderate DIN and DIP; Low H, Moderate E, and Low A (11%) – willing to tell little lies, somewhat outgoing, but not very nice.

As you can see, charmers gained predominance, but extreme deceivers weren’t far behind. In terms of cognitive performance, straight shooters outperformed all others and extreme deceivers scored the lowest. As for the results, charmers (71%) and extreme deceivers (75%) were most likely to get a second interview, but it was mavericks (58%) and charmers (58%) who were most likely to get a second interview. get a job offer. As the authors conclude, “charmers appear to be successful in both the short and long term.”

These findings had other interesting implications, with naïve deceivers deserving special mention. These are people who don’t lie very often, but when they do, they “lie big.” Retained image deceivers and extreme image abusers also make for an interesting comparison, with retained individuals more likely to have “a line they won’t cross.”

Putting Your Instant Messaging Profile to Use

You now know that the most common job seeker is the one who will try to charm you, although close behind are those ready to commit the “big lie”. This may be somewhat disturbing when you think about who you will choose the next time someone tries to impress you. Rather than taking people at face value, it’s worth doing a little investigation because, as the results have shown, the extreme deceiver will eventually be discovered. Since you would probably prefer to hire a straight shooter, Moon et al. the results suggest you do a little background check.

Although developed in the context of a job interview, the results can also be extrapolated to other situations in which you want to see, or be seen, in the best possible light. As you may know from hard-earned experience, people will try to impress you as a potential dating partner or as someone trying to sell you something and sometimes it can be you in the hot seat.

When it comes to your own IM strategy, these findings further suggest that you don’t have to lie to be liked. Some of this “honest” ingratiation won’t necessarily hurt, because the charmers are the ones who get the best results. If your instinct is telling you to pretend to be massively fake or fake something about your background, you may want to do a little soul searching to understand why you feel like you can’t present yourself as you really are .

To summarize, Branding your IM profile can be an important step in determining what face you want to present to the outside world. A straight shooter might not always get the job right away, but, in the long run, could this be the best path to fulfillment?