arbiter
JournalsAccount

Thought-Feeling Accuracy in Person Perception and Metaperception: An Integrative Perspective

Jacquie D. Vorauer et al.

Annual Review of Psychology2025https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-011624-024416review
AJG 4ABDC A*
Weight
0.48

Abstract

People often want to know what their interaction partners are thinking. How accurate are they, what information do they use, what predicts how accurate they will be, and does accuracy matter? We organize our review of thought-feeling accuracy, defined as the accuracy of individuals' judgments about the content of another person's thoughts and feelings in live interaction, around these questions. At the same time, we argue that often people are especially interested in what others are thinking about them, such that research on the accuracy of individuals' metaperceptions regarding others' views of them is highly relevant to understanding thought-feeling accuracy more broadly construed. In particular, we maintain that systematic biases characterizing individuals' spontaneous metaperceptions are an important source of preventable and harmful forms of thought-feeling inaccuracy. We advocate for integration across the thought-feeling accuracy and meta-accuracy literatures so as to generate new insights that can move them both forward.

5 citations

Open via your library →

Cite this paper

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-011624-024416

Or copy a formatted citation

@article{jacquie2025,
  title        = {{Thought-Feeling Accuracy in Person Perception and Metaperception: An Integrative Perspective}},
  author       = {Jacquie D. Vorauer et al.},
  journal      = {Annual Review of Psychology},
  year         = {2025},
  doi          = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-011624-024416},
}

Paste directly into BibTeX, Zotero, or your reference manager.

Flag this paper

Thought-Feeling Accuracy in Person Perception and Metaperception: An Integrative Perspective

Flags are reviewed by the Arbiter methodology team within 5 business days.

Evidence weight

0.48

Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40

F · citation impact0.41 × 0.4 = 0.16
M · momentum0.63 × 0.15 = 0.09
V · venue signal0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03
R · text relevance †0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20

† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.