Philippe Verduyn, David Seungjae Lee, and Jiyoung Park's work suggests that the way we use social media might be more impactful on our feelings than we realize. It turns out that simply scrolling through Facebook without really engaging with the content - what they call passive usage - can actually chip away at our emotional well-being. This is about doomscrolling; it points to a deeper relationship between our digital habits and our mental state. It makes us wonder how much of our 'true self' is actually fixed in stone.
Is Your Personality Actually Set in Stone?
For decades, we've been taught that our personality is something pretty stable, like a built-in operating system for our brains. We tend to think, "Oh, I'm just a naturally anxious person," or "I'm always the creative one." But the research, especially the kind that follows people over many years - longitudinal studies - is starting to paint a much more nuanced picture. It suggests that while we have core tendencies, we are far more malleable than we give ourselves credit for. The idea of a fixed self is becoming increasingly outdated.
When scientists look at personality, they often use statistical models to track changes over time. One key concept here is the difference between 'fixed effects' and 'random effects.' Think of it like this: a fixed effect suggests that a person's underlying traits are constant, no matter what life throws at them. A random effect, however, allows for the possibility that the person's underlying state can shift based on their experiences. Andrew Bell and Kelvyn Jones provided a helpful framework for understanding this in their work on time-series cross-sectional data (2014). While their paper is rooted in political science, the statistical concept they explore - modeling how individual trajectories change - is directly applicable to understanding personal growth. They showed how modeling these changes allows researchers to account for individual variation over time, suggesting that what we measure at one point might not perfectly predict what we measure years later, opening the door to change.
Furthermore, our immediate environment and even our academic pursuits can influence our mental field. Consider the findings by Keloharju, Knüpfer, and Müller (2022). They looked at the mental health of people pursuing PhDs. Their research found that while the intense pressure of doctoral studies does impact mental health, the negative effect wasn't as severe or as consistent as some might have predicted. This suggests that while major life stressors are real, the relationship between the stressor and the outcome isn't always a straight, unbreakable line. Our resilience, and thus our mental state, seems to have a buffer that we might underestimate.
The concept of behavioral predictability is also being challenged by how we interact with the world. Normile (2018) (preliminary) conducted a fascinating study where people's behavior in a very specific, mundane setting - like a Starbucks - was analyzed. The results indicated that even in a seemingly controlled environment, our actions reveal more about our underlying patterns than we might assume. However, the very act of studying these patterns suggests that self-awareness and environmental nudges can alter those patterns. If our behavior in a coffee shop can be mapped, it implies that the rules governing that behavior are learnable and therefore potentially changeable.
Even our relationships are less deterministic than we think. Rick S (2025) explored how much knowledge about a spouse's spending habits is actually necessary for a healthy partnership. The implication here is that perfect knowledge or perfect prediction isn't the goal; rather, a certain level of adaptive understanding is enough. This suggests that in complex human systems, knowing too much or trying to predict everything can be counterproductive, pointing toward a flexible, rather than rigid, self-concept.
The digital world itself contributes to this fluidity. Fordyce (2025) (preliminary) discusses the 'splinternet' - the idea that the internet is fragmenting into smaller, less connected parts. This fragmentation shows that the 'whole' system is not fixed; it's constantly being rewired. If the infrastructure of information is fluid, it stands to reason that the infrastructure of the self might be too. Sauer-Zavala (2025) directly addresses this by asking, "Can you change your personality?" The very existence of this research question, and the ongoing scientific effort to answer it, suggests that the answer is a resounding, scientifically supported, "Yes, to some degree." We are complex systems, not static objects.
What Else Can Our Habits Reveal About Us?
The evidence isn't limited to our deepest psychological traits; it pops up in our everyday habits and our digital footprints. The research highlights that context matters immensely when we try to label ourselves. For instance, the study by Normile (2018) (preliminary) showed that even seemingly random actions, like where you choose to sit in a public space, can be mapped back to underlying behavioral tendencies. This is powerful because it suggests that our environment acts as a kind of behavioral mirror, reflecting patterns we might not even be consciously aware of.
Furthermore, our digital habits are becoming a major area of study regarding self-perception. The findings from Verduyn, Lee, and Park (2015) regarding passive Facebook usage are a prime example. They demonstrated a measurable negative impact on affective well-being simply by consuming content without participating. This isn't a judgment on the platform; it's a finding about the mechanism of engagement. It teaches us that the way we interact with information - whether we are actively creating or passively absorbing - is a variable that directly impacts our emotional state, proving that our digital habits are not just background noise.
When we combine these threads - the malleability shown in academic stress (Keloharju et al., 2022), the behavioral mapping (Normile, 2018), and the digital impact (Verduyn et al., 2015) - a clear picture emerges: the self is less a statue and more a river. It's always moving, influenced by the currents of our relationships, our technology, and the challenges we face.
Practical Application: Sculpting Your Adaptability
Understanding that your personality is malleable is not merely an academic insight; it's a blueprint for self-improvement. The goal isn't to become a completely different person, but rather to increase your range of behavioral responses - to become more flexible, resilient, and contextually appropriate. This requires consistent, targeted practice, much like physical training for a muscle group.
The "Behavioral Rehearsal" Protocol
We propose a structured, three-phase protocol designed to challenge your default responses in low-stakes environments. This protocol focuses on intentionally practicing behaviors that feel uncomfortable or unnatural to you right now.
- Phase 1: Identification & Observation (Weeks 1-2):
- Frequency: Daily, for 15 minutes.
- Duration: Two weeks.
- Protocol: Keep a "Trigger Log." Whenever you feel a strong, automatic emotional reaction (e.g., defensiveness in a disagreement, immediate anxiety before a presentation), do not react immediately. Instead, pause. Write down the trigger, your automatic response, and the intensity (1-10). The goal here is purely metacognitive awareness - observing the pattern without judgment.
- Phase 2: Micro-Intervention (Weeks 3-6):
- Frequency: 3-5 times per week, targeting specific scenarios.
- Duration: Four weeks.
- Protocol: Select one identified pattern (e.g., interrupting others when stressed). In a low-stakes setting (e.g., a casual work discussion, a family meal), set a physical reminder (like a wristband or phone alarm). When the trigger occurs, your only task is to execute the alternative response you want to build (e.g., physically counting to three before speaking, or using a bridging phrase like, "Let me pause and consider that"). The intervention must be brief and noticeable.
- Phase 3: Contextual Integration (Weeks 7+):
- Frequency: As needed, increasing complexity.
- Duration: Ongoing.
- Protocol: Systematically apply the learned alternative response to higher-stakes, real-world situations. If you are working on emotional regulation, practice this during a known stressful event (like a difficult meeting). The key shift here is moving from remembering the alternative action to feeling it as the default pathway. Consistency across varied contexts solidifies the neural pathway.
Remember, the initial discomfort during Phase 2 is the friction required to polish the behavioral change. Treat these exercises as cognitive weightlifting.
What Remains Uncertain
While the evidence strongly suggests personality flexibility, it is crucial to maintain a healthy dose of skepticism regarding the scope of these findings. Firstly, the concept of "personality" is incredibly broad; what we are modifying through these protocols are more accurately described as behavioral repertoires or response habits, rather than core, immutable traits like temperament. We are building skills, not rewriting DNA.
Secondly, the current understanding relies heavily on self-report data and longitudinal tracking of specific, observable behaviors. The underlying neurobiological mechanisms that allow for such rapid, sustained plasticity remain incompletely mapped. We do not fully understand the interplay between genetics, early life experience, and adult behavioral choice. Furthermore, the protocols outlined here are generalized. A highly specialized field, such as trauma recovery, requires protocols far more nuanced than general behavioral rehearsal. More research is needed to establish optimal dosing - that is, what is the perfect balance between challenge and exhaustion in these training regimens - to prevent burnout or maladaptive overcorrection.
Core claims are supported by peer-reviewed research. Some practical applications extend beyond direct findings.
References
- Philippe Verduyn, David Seungjae Lee, Jiyoung Park (2015). Passive Facebook usage undermines affective well-being: Experimental and longitudinal evidence.. Journal of Experimental Psychology General. DOI
- Andrew Bell, Kelvyn Jones (2014). Explaining Fixed Effects: Random Effects Modeling of Time-Series Cross-Sectional and Panel Data. Political Science Research and Methods. DOI
- Keloharju M, Knüpfer S, Müller D (2022). PhD Studies Hurt Mental Health, but Less than You Think. . DOI
- Normile D (2018). Your behavior in Starbucks may reveal more about you than you think. Science. DOI
- Rick S (2025). How much do you need to know about how your spouse spends money? Maybe less than you think. . DOI
- Fordyce R (2025). What is the 'splinternet'? Here's why the internet is less whole than you might think. . DOI
- Sauer-Zavala S (2025). Can you change your personality? Psychology research says yes, by tweaking what you think and do. . DOI
- (2011). The Tests are Less than Objective. Myths of Standardized Tests. DOI