Dr Manju Antil (Counselling Psychologist and Psychotherapist)

By Dr. Manju Rani, Psychologist and Assistant Professor, Apeejay Stya University

Introduction: The Dissonance of Digital Selfhood

In the digital age, the self has become both a subject and a product, expressed, packaged, and consumed within the curated confines of social media. Among Gen Z and digital natives, there is a rising psychological concern I term the Authenticity Crisis—a chronic tension between expressing one’s genuine identity and conforming to the socially desirable image shaped by online platforms. This crisis is not just an identity conflict but a socio-emotional strain with implications for mental health, interpersonal relationships, and self-concept integrity.

From my psychological perspective, this conflict reflects a deeper struggle between being oneself and being approved, where the algorithmic architecture of platforms such as Instagram, TikTok, LinkedIn, and even mental health communities rewards performative positivity, aesthetic coherence, and ideological conformity. As a result, young individuals often edit not only their photos but also their opinions, behaviours, emotional disclosures, and even moral stances in service of digital palatability.

The authenticity crisis is not about occasional self-censorship; rather, it signals a chronic, identity-level dissonance—an exhausting psychological space where individuals no longer trust their spontaneous emotions, hesitate to express divergent views, or lose connection with their offline self altogether.

Defining the Authenticity Crisis

Psychologically, the Authenticity Crisis refers to the internal conflict arising when an individual feels compelled to project a version of themselves online that aligns with social desirability, digital trends, or community expectations—often at the expense of their true beliefs, emotions, or identities. This phenomenon is intensified by the constant visibility and judgment inherent in online platforms, where likes, shares, comments, and “cancel culture” operate as real-time feedback mechanisms, subtly shaping behaviour and self-expression.

In clinical terms, this crisis reflects a loss of congruence between the internal and external self, a concept originally explored by Carl Rogers (1961) in his theory of person-centred therapy. According to Rogers, psychological well-being depends on the congruence between one’s ideal self, perceived self, and actual experiences. In digital contexts, however, this congruence is often disrupted, leading to anxiety, self-doubt, emotional suppression, and even identity diffusion.

Theoretical Frameworks Underpinning Authenticity Crisis

One of the foundational psychological theories relevant here is Self-Determination Theory (Deci & Ryan, 2000), which posits that authenticity is a core psychological need essential for well-being. The theory argues that when individuals are pressured to act in ways that are inconsistent with their inner values for the sake of approval or reward, they experience reduced autonomy and increased emotional distress. Social media environments, by continuously incentivising normative behaviour, create a climate where authentic self-expression becomes risky or devalued.

Another relevant framework is Erving Goffman’s (1959) dramaturgical model of social life. Goffman conceptualised identity as a performance, distinguishing between the “front stage”—where individuals perform for an audience—and the “backstage”—where true emotions and identities reside. Social media has effectively collapsed these two stages. There is no true backstage anymore, only layers of visible, performative selves. What was once private now becomes content, and what was once genuine is often reinterpreted as branding.

Additionally, symbolic interactionism explains how identity is constructed through repeated social interactions and reflections. On social media, however, these interactions are often distorted by filters—both literal and metaphorical. The self becomes a mirror of what is validated, not what is deeply felt. Over time, this reflective distortion can lead to internal confusion, impostor syndrome, and emotional numbness.

Clinical Observations: Identity Performance and Emotional Suppression

In therapeutic settings, I encounter many young adults who articulate the experience of “not knowing who I am anymore.” Their confusion is not pathological in origin but digital in nature. For instance, one of my clients, a 19-year-old engineering student named Arnav, confided during therapy that he often felt like a different person online. On Instagram, he projected a politically correct, hyper-woke persona aligned with activist trends. In reality, he admitted feeling unsure, ambivalent, and even disconnected from some of the views he was amplifying. However, voicing doubt, asking questions, or remaining silent on certain issues led to fear of being judged or excluded. This chronic value dissonance created a loop of anxiety, guilt, and emotional suppression, culminating in depressive symptoms and a profound sense of inauthenticity.

Another case involved a university student, Radhika, who described her experience of “curated vulnerability.” She often posted about mental health and “safe spaces,” yet in therapy, she admitted rarely feeling safe herself. Her disclosures online were, in her words, “more aesthetic than cathartic.” She posted about journaling and therapy for the likes, not for healing. This disconnection between expressed emotions and felt emotions created a fracture in her self-understanding, leading to chronic burnout and an inability to trust her own emotional signals.

Psychological Outcomes of the Authenticity Crisis

The authenticity crisis has significant psychological consequences. One of the most common is identity confusion, a phenomenon described by Erik Erikson in his stages of psychosocial development. Particularly in the “identity vs. role confusion” stage, which is most prominent during adolescence and early adulthood, the struggle to form a coherent self is disrupted when that self is constantly negotiated in performative spaces.

This ongoing performance leads to impostor syndrome, where individuals feel fraudulent in their accomplishments or social roles because their external success feels disconnected from their internal reality. It also contributes to emotional suppression, which is linked to a host of negative mental health outcomes, including anxiety, depression, and psychosomatic symptoms (Gross & John, 2003).

Furthermore, the pressure to be “authentically performative” or to package one’s pain in aesthetically digestible ways (e.g., aestheticised posts on burnout, trauma, or body image) results in instrumentalised vulnerability. This compromises genuine emotional processing and reinforces the idea that even one’s rawest experiences must serve as content, ultimately eroding psychological intimacy and emotional trust in relationships.

Sociocultural and Technological Factors

The crisis of authenticity cannot be understood in isolation from the platform architectures and economic models of social media. The algorithmic logic of visibility rewards virality, relatability, and trend conformity, not nuanced, complex self-expression. Moreover, cancel culture, call-out culture, and the fetishisation of authenticity create contradictory demands: be real, but not too real; be vulnerable, but only if it’s digestible; be yourself, but only if it fits the brand.

In many ways, social media platforms simulate democratic self-expression but operate within capitalist attention economies that commodify identity. Every post, opinion, or emotional disclosure becomes a product to be consumed. Over time, individuals internalise this framework, leading to self-commodification—a process where one’s identity is not lived but marketed.

Psychologist’s Perspective: Toward Emotional Integrity

As a psychologist, I view the authenticity crisis as a call to return to emotional integrity. Authenticity is not about absolute self-disclosure or emotional exhibitionism; rather, it is about the alignment between internal values and external behaviour. In my work with clients, I emphasise the cultivation of self-reflexivity—an ability to pause, question, and realign one’s digital behaviours with one’s true emotional and cognitive landscapes.

Therapeutic strategies that prove effective include Values Clarification, where clients identify core personal values independent of social approval, and Mindful Self-Compassion (Neff, 2003), which helps individuals befriend the self behind the mask. Narrative approaches also support clients in rewriting their digital narratives in ways that honour complexity over coherence, truth over trendiness.

Conclusion: Reclaiming the Unedited Self

The crisis of authenticity is the psychological burden of living in a world where one is always watched, always evaluated, and always expected to be something, not just someone. For Gen Z and future generations, reclaiming authenticity means reclaiming the right to be incomplete, contradictory, evolving, and emotionally imperfect.

Authenticity is not a performance. It is a process—a radical act of emotional honesty in a world addicted to optics. As psychologists, educators, and cultural critics, we must foster spaces where individuals feel safe to be real, not for likes, not for approval, but for the quiet dignity of being true to oneself.

References (APA 7th Edition)

• Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination ofbehaviour
  
  
  r. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 227–268.
• Erikson, E. H. (1968). Identity: Youth and crisis. W. W. Norton & Company.
• Goffman, E. (1959). The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. Anchor Books.
• Gross, J. J., & John, O. P. (2003). Individual differences in two emotion regulation processes: Implications for affect, relationships, and well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85(2), 348–362.
• Neff, K. D. (2003). The development and validation of a scale to measure self-compassion. Self and Identity, 2(3), 223–250.
• Rogers, C. R. (1961). On Becoming a Person: A Therapist’s View of Psychotherapy. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.