Social anxiety self-help gives one instruction on repeat: open up. Share more, hide less, let people see the part of you that feels riskiest to show. The problem is that the same brain telling you to disclose is also the one insisting disclosure is what gets you rejected. The story you’re most afraid to tell, it warns, is the thing standing between you and being liked. A study published online June 8, 2026 in The Journal of Psychology tested that fear on actual strangers who’d never met the speakers before. It didn’t hold up.

Gabriela Lavinia Niță and Violeta Ștefania Rotărescu, researchers at the University of Bucharest, built the test around what’s called a zero-acquaintance paradigm: you show raters someone they’ve never met and ask how much they like that person, based on nothing but what’s in front of them. Four university students played the speakers: two with a diagnosed social anxiety disorder, two without, one man and one woman in each group. A hundred and thirty-six online evaluators watched each speaker move through four stages, from a photo alone up through a video where the speaker described something sad or difficult from their school years. Then the raters said how much they liked them, and whether they’d want to talk to them again.

Quick Verdict

Question	Answer
Who ran the study?	Gabriela Lavinia Niță and Violeta Ștefania Rotărescu, University of Bucharest
Where was it published?	The Journal of Psychology (Taylor & Francis), published online June 8, 2026; PsyPost covered it Sep 27, 2026
Method	Zero-acquaintance paradigm: strangers rated speakers they’d never met before
Who was rated?	4 university students: 2 with diagnosed social anxiety, 2 without
Who did the rating?	136 online evaluators
Disclosure stages tested	Photo only → general facts → happy school memory → sad/difficult school memory
Did opening up help socially anxious speakers?	Yes, the likability boost tracked with non-anxious speakers, not behind them
What else moved the ratings?	The rater’s own social anxiety and need for affiliation, not just what the speaker shared

Bottom line: The specific fear driving a lot of social-anxiety avoidance (that disclosure backfires) didn’t show up in this data. Sharing personal information raised likability whether the person sharing it was anxious or not.

What the Study Actually Tested

This wasn’t a survey asking people to guess how disclosure “probably” feels. It was staged and sequential. Raters first saw only a photo: pure first impression, no information. Next came a video of the speaker giving basic facts: name, age, hobbies. After that, a video of the speaker describing a happy memory from school. Finally, a video of the same speaker describing something sad or hard from that same period of their life. After every single stage, the same 136 raters filled out likability questionnaires on the same four speakers, so the design tracks how one person’s rating of one speaker shifts as the disclosure gets heavier.

The finding that matters most: sharing personal stories raised likability for both the anxious speakers and the non-anxious ones. Not a smaller bump for the anxious pair and a bigger one for the confident pair. The lift showed up regardless of which group the speaker was in. And disclosing something sad or difficult (the exact category of sharing that anxiety tells you to avoid because it makes you look fragile or burdensome) was specifically linked to raters wanting more future contact with the speaker, not less.

That’s worth sitting with. The instinct behind a lot of social-anxiety avoidance isn’t “don’t talk to people.” It’s “don’t tell them the real stuff.” This design tested the real stuff directly, staged it as its own condition, and it didn’t cost the speakers anything measurable in how much strangers wanted to see them again.

How Do You Become More Likable When You Have Social Anxiety?

According to this research, the mechanism isn’t confidence, charisma, or masking your anxiety better: it’s disclosure itself. Three things from the design point to why:

1. Sharing basic facts already beat the bare photo condition. Likability moved before anyone got to a real story. Just hearing a name, an age, a hobby, in a speaker’s own voice, outperformed a static image with zero information.
2. Sharing a personal memory, happy or sad, moved the needle further than facts alone. The step from “here’s who I am” to “here’s something that happened to me” is where the bigger shift showed up.
3. The anxious speakers didn’t have to compensate for anything to get the same benefit. They weren’t rated as starting from a deficit that disclosure merely closed. The lift applied to both groups on comparable terms.

That third point is the one social-anxiety advice usually skips. It’s not “share more to make up for coming across as awkward.” It’s that disclosure works as its own independent lever, on anyone, anxious or not.

The Research This Complicates

None of this happens in a vacuum. Other work on social anxiety has found that people with the condition often lean on “safety behaviors” — avoiding eye contact, rehearsing exit lines, staying quiet to avoid saying the wrong thing — and that those specific behaviors make people less likable, not more. Put the two studies side by side and a pattern comes into focus: it isn’t the anxiety itself costing people social standing. It’s the strategies anxious people use to manage the anxiety (the shrinking, the hedging, the withholding) that do the damage. This new study suggests the opposite move, disclosure, doesn’t carry that same cost. If anything it’s the fix for the exact deficit the safety-behavior research identified.

That’s a meaningfully different diagnosis than “social anxiety makes you less likable, full stop.” It points at a specific, changeable behavior instead of a fixed trait.

Who’s Doing the Rating Matters Just as Much

Here’s the part that keeps this from being a tidy “just be vulnerable” headline. The researchers didn’t only track what the speakers did: they ran a second analysis on the raters themselves, measuring their personality traits, their own social anxiety levels, and their need for affiliation (how strongly someone wants social connection and approval from others).

Raters with higher social anxiety gave more generous ratings across the board. Raters with a high need for affiliation were also more lenient evaluators. Extraversion and agreeableness, somewhat surprisingly, didn’t predict how generously someone rated the speakers.

So likability, per this data, isn’t purely a property of what the speaker did. It’s partly a property of who happened to be watching. An anxious speaker sharing something personal in front of a room that skews toward high-affiliation, socially anxious listeners might land better than the same disclosure in front of a colder audience, not because the disclosure changed, but because the audience did. That cuts against the version of self-help advice that treats likability as something you can engineer from your side alone, purely through better disclosure technique.

Where This Fits With What This Site Keeps Finding

This lands next to Strong Ground by Brené Brown, which spends 300-plus pages arguing that vulnerability is the load-bearing skill under most healthy relationships. Brown’s case has always been more assertion than data. This study is one of the more direct empirical tests of the specific claim (does disclosure cost you socially if you’re already anxious about being judged), and the answer, at least in a zero-acquaintance setting, is no.

It also connects to A Little More Social by Nicholas Epley, which argues most people are wrong about how badly conversations with strangers go. Epley’s research focus is the gap between predicted and actual outcomes of talking to people you don’t know. This study measures a related but distinct gap: the predicted cost of disclosure versus its actual cost, among people who’ve never met you before and have nothing else to judge you on.

And it’s relevant background for anyone reading the research on why people hide wins but share failures: that study found disclosure decisions get shaped heavily by how much you like the person you’re talking to. This one adds the other half: disclosure also shapes how much the listener ends up liking you, even at zero acquaintance, before any relationship exists to protect.

For anyone whose anxiety is less about liking and more about persistent worry itself, the current wave of anxiety-focused books is worth a look. This study is a narrow, specific data point, not a replacement for treatment if social anxiety is functionally disabling.

What This Doesn’t Mean

• It doesn’t mean oversharing has no ceiling. The study tested four structured, researcher-designed disclosure stages, not an unfiltered stream of personal information. Dumping trauma on a stranger in the first thirty seconds of an unstructured conversation is a different scenario than a paced video someone chose to record.
• It doesn’t rule out the halo effect. The researchers flagged this themselves: physical attractiveness can inflate likability ratings independent of anything a person discloses, and with only four speakers total, two per condition, that’s a real limitation on how far these specific results generalize.
• It doesn’t replicate live, back-and-forth conversation. Raters watched pre-recorded video. There was no reciprocity, no real-time reaction from the speaker to how the disclosure landed, none of the actual social risk of watching someone’s face while you talk. Real conversations carry more variables than a staged video can capture.
• It doesn’t mean disclosure is a fix for clinical-level social anxiety. A study about stranger-rating in a controlled online setting says something narrow and useful about likability. It says nothing about whether disclosure feels achievable for someone whose anxiety makes speaking at all difficult. That’s a question for treatment, not a study design tweak.

What Actually Holds Up, Given This

• Stop treating disclosure as the risky move and silence as the safe one. In this data, saying more (even something sad or hard) didn’t cost speakers likability. Staying at the surface level didn’t protect anyone; it just meant less of a boost.
• Notice that the “I’ll seem burdensome if I share something hard” fear is specifically what this study tested and didn’t confirm. The sad-memory condition was linked to more interest in future contact, not less.
• Don’t assume a bad social read means you did something wrong. Some of the variance in how you’re received depends on who’s listening (their own anxiety, their own need for connection), not just what you said or how you said it.
• Small, real disclosure beats performing confidence you don’t feel. The jump from a bare photo to basic spoken facts already moved likability. You don’t need a dramatic reveal. Ordinary information, offered instead of withheld, is doing real work here.

The Bottom Line

A hundred and thirty-six strangers, four speakers, four stages of disclosure, and a finding that pushes back on a fear social anxiety keeps repeating: sharing personal information, even something sad, raised likability for anxious and non-anxious speakers alike. It didn’t backfire on the anxious pair. It didn’t require them to compensate for anything. The trade-off wasn’t disclosure versus safety: the study’s data says disclosure was the safer bet the whole time, and part of how well it lands depends on who’s on the other end, not just how well you tell the story.

---

Niță, G. L., & Rotărescu, V. Ș., “Is Likeability in the Eye of the Beholder? A Quasi-Experimental Study on Personality, Social Anxiety and the Need for Affiliation in Assessing the Likability of Socially Anxious Adults,” The Journal of Psychology, 2026. Also listed on PubMed. Additional coverage from PsyPost. Related reading: Strong Ground by Brené Brown Review, A Little More Social Review, Why You Hide Wins But Share Losses, Study Finds, and The Best Books for Wartime Anxiety.