An Authenticity Walk: Exploring Conformity, Authenticity, and the Courage it Takes to be Seen

Most of us teach Solomon Asch's famous conformity studies — the standard line, the confederates, the one real participant caught between their own eyes and a room full of confident, wrong answers. It's a wonderful study, especially when we show videos and discuss nuance. Yes, three-quarters of participants conformity to the group at least once, but only a small fraction conform immediately (~5%); most defy the group at least at first (figure 1). Even so, I noticed something in my own classroom: students can ace an exam question about Asch and never once turn that lens on themselves. I have tried replicating the pattern in class by getting students who arrive on time in cahoots when stragglers enter the room. But then only a few experience conformity and I don't feel good singling them out. So I created something from another angle, having us explore inside ourselves by integrating the social psychology of conformity with mental health and developmental perspectives on authenticity.

"People conform, but not me" is a remarkably widespread sentiment, and research suggests it's built into how we compare ourselves to others in the first place: we judge our own conformity by looking inward, at our doubts and reasons, while we judge everyone else's only by what we can see them do (Pronin, Berger, & Molouki, 2007).

So I built something to close that gap. The Authenticity Walk isn't about watching conformity happen to someone else. It's about noticing it in ourselves. In ordinary, everyday moments, not dramatic ones.

Around the room, I hang posters, each with a short, everyday scenario (table 1). Nothing provocative. Just life. As I designed and redesigned the scenarios I sought a sweet spot: narrow enough to be an exact moment of choice, and generic enough so nobody feels singled out.

Students walk the room on their own, and at each scenario, they make a private, forced choice between two options (figure 2):

Around the room, I hang posters, each with a short, everyday scenario (table 1). Nothing provocative. Just life. As I designed and redesigned the scenarios I sought a sweet spot: narrow enough to be an exact moment of choice, and generic enough so nobody feels singled out.

Students walk the room on their own, and at each scenario, they make a private, forced choice between two options (figure 2):

I would hold back part of my true self in this situation. I'd stay quiet, mask, or adapt — maybe for reasons that make sense to me: protection, privacy, or peace.

I would express or show my true self in this situation. Even if it feels vulnerable or risky, I'd speak honestly, show emotion, or act in alignment with my identity and values.

I deliberately use a forced choice, even though "it depends" probably what most students are quietly thinking. A forced choice pushes for a real decision in the moment, and "it depends" almost always surfaces naturally once the discussion opens up anyway.

Choosing Scenarios for Your Class
I created 23 scenarios (table 1) on single pages plus three blank in poster handouts [PDF]. You don't need to use all of them. I don't. Each new scenario you choose gives your students another. Each scenario you choose adds time to your lesson, time walking around the room and time during discussing of students' choices. But the more you choose, the greater your breadth of contexts and choices to hold back or be true. Choose as many as feel like they'll thought-provoking for your students, offer them contrasts, and fit your practical constraints. I usually choose about 14 and often tweak my choices based on each of my class' personality.

Setup, Before Class

• Post the scenario signs along a classroom wall
• Make sure students have something to mark with — pen, pencil, or marker. Thick markers or colored dot stickers make the class-wide pattern more visible at a glance.
• Optional: Give each student two or three sticky notes, and invite them to jot down why a particular answer felt meaningful, posting the note near that scenario.
• Optional: Have students complete the online Eight Facets of Authenticity individual difference measure. It adds another layer to our discussion (discussed further below).

During the Activity

1. Invite students to walk the room and respond privately and honestly to each scenario.
2. Once everyone's done, draw their attention to the scenarios where the class split was closest to fifty-fifty — those tend to generate the richest conversation.
3. Open a discussion (facilitation discussion questions below)

When students walk about, there's no right answer. That's the point. This isn't a test of courage. It's a mirror.

Discussion uses flows easily. Students want to talk. A natural beginning is to pick out posters with very lopsided marks and those with big divides.

Why might people feel so differently, or so similarly, in this exact same situation?

While discussing the scenarios, some questions that help us go deeper:

What role does identity, obedience, or conformity pressure play here?

What supports authenticity in this space, and what threatens it?

Something worth naming for your own class, even if you choose not to say aloud explicitly: everyone in that room is weighing the same underlying question, just through their own eyes. A student deciding whether to voice a minority religious or political view. A student weighing whether to disclose a mental health struggle. A neurodivergent or LGBTQ+ student holding back parts of themselves to fit in. A student from an ethnic or cultural minority unsure which norms are "safe" to break.

Seeing check marks on the wall, not just felt privately, but visible and shared, cultivates empathy in a way simply talking about the concept doesn't. Students realize the classmate next to them is navigating something too.

Classic research on conformity and obedience shows how powerfully we're shaped by the people and situations around us. Sometimes enough to override what we privately believe or feel (Asch, 1956; Milgram, 1963).

In a certain sense,authenticity can look like the opposite of conformity. But let's consider the key ideas:

Conformity: aligning our behaviors with social norms (of peers, group, culture) due to felt pressure (not instruction or consequences, which are compliance and obedience respectively).

Authenticity: A process of developing accurate self-awareness, honestly processing feedback, and trying to align our actions with our core values.

If we're authentic during Asch's experiments, we don't conform. So it's sensible to see them as opposites. But we're missing the nuance.

Authenticity is really about self-awareness: knowing our own motives, strengths, and contradictions clearly enough so we're neither flattering ourselves nor being unfairly hard on ourselves. It's about reflecting honestly on feedback and trying to act in line with your values. Not performing a version of yourself designed to keep other people comfortable (Wood et al., 2008).

Authenticity isn't about always standing apart or always speaking up. It's about self-congruence.

Sometimes staying quiet, adapting, or holding something private is an authentic choice.

Scenario C provides an example most students click with: Being emotionally honest when others expect you to pretend you’re fine. Maybe we're in environment with people we know will lose respect for us if we're vulnerable. And, because we value their respect and maintaining the relationship, we might choose to be quiet about our feelings. But we know our true feelings and we know why we're making our choice.

For me, the sharpest example distinguishing conformity and authenticity is Scenario D: Correcting someone who gets your identity wrong. If someone believes I'm in a marginalized group, I simply won't correct them. After all, to say, "oh, no, no, no, I'm not ..." is to imply there's something wrong with being that type of person. And, the idea of considering a type of person "less than" is antithetical to my core values.

Self-determination theory offers a helpful way to think about this (Deci & Ryan, 2000). People tend to flourish when their choices feel self-endorsed rather than driven by pressure or fear. Choosing not to disclose something about yourself can still be a fully authentic act, if it's protecting your safety, a relationship, or an emotional boundary you're entitled to hold. Full transparency was never the requirement. Being true to your own intention is. This kind of authenticity also tends to pay off: people who act more authentically report more lasting life satisfaction and less distress over time (Boyraz et al., 2014; Kifer et al., 2013), lean on healthier coping strategies rather than turning to things like substance use (Kernis & Goldman, 2006), and build deeper connections with the people around them (Lopez & Rice, 2006).

Discussing authenticity can get personal to many students. Persons with marginalized or stigmatized identities feel this tension more sharply than most (Kernis & Goldman, 2006; Legate et al., 2012). Someone who is LGBTQ+ might be completely open in one setting and hold that part of themselves close in another. Not because they're being inconsistent, but because they're reading the room accurately. Feeling safe tends to make authentic expression easier; feeling unsafe tends to make it costly, sometimes at real expense to well-being (Beals et al., 2009; Frable et al., 1998; Legate et al., 2012).

And perhaps the most important, and freeing finding, to share with students: the people with the highest well-being aren't the ones who never hold back. They're the ones who flexibly adjust how open they are, situation by situation (Legate et al., 2017). Authenticity, in other words, isn't the absence of conformity. It's the presence of self-awareness, intentionality, and alignment with your values — including knowing when it's genuinely okay to hold your truth close.

If you'd like students to walk in with more self-knowledge and a more nuanced understanding of authenticity, I created a short before-class activity giving each student personalized results across eight distinct facets of dispositional authenticity.

Try the before-class authenticity activity yourself! It takes about fifteen minutes, and you (and your students) receive a certificate of completion (figure 2) along with an explanation of what your results mean. Here's a brief summary of what each rating means.

Eight Facets of Authenticity

Analytical Awareness. How well do you actually know yourself: your motives, your contradictions, the "why" behind your patterns.

Unbiased Processing. Can you look at your own strengths and flaws without flinching away or dressing them up. Can you take in information about yourself without excessive flattery or self-flagellation.

Behavioral. Do your actions actually match your values, or do you catch yourself performing a more agreeable version of yourself to keep others comfortable?

Relational Orientation. Less about knowing yourself, it's about needing to be known, especially by people close to you.

Felt Self-Congruence. Not actively thinking to understand ourselves. Rather this is about feeling a sense of self. Do you feel in touch with yourself, or foggy and estranged from your own inner life?

Authentic Living of Values. Living in line with your core values day to day.

Boundary Integrity. How much do you hold your ground when under peer pressure? Maintain boundaries and avoiding people pleasing tendencies.

Authenticity at School/Work. This one is deliberately narrow, rather about who you are in general. It's about whether you can be your real self in a specific context you find yourself (school or work). Low scores suggest you're susceptible to emotional exhaustion and burnout.

At its heart, the Authenticity Walk is a simple idea dressed up as a classroom activity: most of us are quietly deciding, moment to moment, how much of ourselves is safe to show. Asch showed us that conformity is powerful. What the walk adds is a mirror, a chance for students to notice the pulls in their own lives, in scenarios ordinary enough that no one has to raise their hand and admit anything. That noticing is where learning happens. When a student realizes the classmate beside them checked the same box, or the opposite one, for reasons that make just as much sense. That's the moment empathy has an opening.