A great range of person perception phenomena may be conceptualized in terms of how much perceivers know about the targets, how much they like the targets and how these factors relate to the extent to which target descriptions reflect actual target characteristics and/or evaluative bias. We present a comprehensive empirical analysis of this interplay in two studies, the second (targets: N = 189, informants: N = 1352) being a pre-registered replication of the first (targets: N = 73, informants: N = 549). Using multilevel profile analyses, we investigated how liking and knowing are differentially associated with judgments’ normative accuracy (i.e., reflecting actual characteristics of the average target), distinctive accuracy (i.e., reflecting actual characteristics of specific targets), and positivity bias. Statistical effects were largely consistent across two independent validation measures (self-ratings vs. peer-ratings of personality), and across the two studies. Despite being positively correlated with one another, liking and knowing had opposing effects on person judgments: Knowing targets better was associated with greater distinctive and normative accuracy, and with lower positivity bias. In contrast, liking targets more was associated with lower distinctive and normative accuracy, but with greater positivity bias. The findings suggest that person judgments tend to reflect actual target characteristics as well as evaluative bias, and that the relative extents to which they do are predictable from what the perceivers say about their relationships with the targets (i.e., knowing and liking). Directions for future research are discussed.