Nonliteral language represents a complex form of communication that can be interpreted in numerous different ways. Our study explored how individual differences in personality and communication styles affect the evaluation of literal and nonliteral language in the context of assumptions made by the Tinge Hypothesis (Dews & Winner, 1995). Participants watched videos of social interactions focusing on positive, negative, sarcastic, and jocular statements. They evaluated speaker intentions and social impressions and completed several personality and communication style questionnaires. Individual differences in empathy, defense style, and sarcasm use correlated with the accuracy of identifying speaker intent. Additionally, positive statements were rated as friendlier when compared to jocular statements, thereby supporting the Tinge Hypothesis. However, literal negative statements were rated as more friendly than sarcastic statements, which is inconsistent with the Tinge Hypothesis. The current results provide novel evidence for the Tinge Hypothesis using multimodal, dynamic stimuli and highlight the role of the individual personality of the recipient in evaluating sarcasm and jocularity.