Shrunken and Recolored: Young Black American Women's Double Consciousness Body Image,Online Victimization,and Photo Editing

Abstract

In digital spaces, Black women's natural physical characteristics are marginalized by racially biased photo-editing technologies. This has implications for Black women who are vulnerable to appearance concerns at the intersections of dual pressures to adhere to white and culturally specific body and appearance ideals (i.e., double consciousness body image). In this cross-sectional online survey-based study, we applied aspects of the tripartite influence model to examine whether double consciousness body image internalization was associated with body image- and facial image-based photo editing among 354 young Black women. In doing so, we considered photo editing as a behavior reflective of social pressures to adhere to sociocultural appearance ideals promoted in digital spaces. Additionally, we explored the potential moderating role of online victimization in the associations between double consciousness body image internalization and photo editing. Double consciousness body image internalization was significantly positively associated with body image- and facial image-based photo editing. Online victimization moderated the associations between double consciousness body image internalization and both body image- and facial image-based photo editing, such that these relations were stronger at higher frequencies of online victimization. We discuss the implications of our findings for promoting young Black women's healthy body image and safety on social media platforms.

Keywords

appearance ideals body image Black women double consciousness body image online victimization photo editing social media

Photo editing (i.e., manipulating photos prior to display or distribution) is widespread given the rapid advancements in augmented reality and facial recognition technologies in the past decade (Gioia et al., 2023; Swerzenski, 2021). Social media platforms, such as Instagram, Snapchat, and TikTok, offer standard and augmented reality photo-editing beauty filters for users to alter their appearance in photos (Gioia et al., 2023). Standard beauty filters can be used to smooth the appearance of skin, apply virtual makeup, lighten eyes, and alter skin tone (Mihaila & Braniste, 2021). Augmented reality beauty filters use artificial intelligence and computer vision to modify body and facial imagery in real time, including to align more closely with white appearance ideals, such as smaller facial features, larger eyes, defined chin, and thinness (Mihaila & Braniste, 2021). Photo-editing tools and beauty filters have been critiqued as reinforcing unrealistic standards of beauty to the detriment of young people's body image (Beos et al., 2021; Schroeder & Behm-Morawitz, 2024). Recently, scholars have begun to explore racial biases in artificial intelligence, digital algorithms, and beauty filters (Riccio et al., 2024; Riccio & Oliver, 2023). For instance, a recent study using computer vision algorithms found that beauty filters transformed faces (i.e., skin tone, facial features) to conform to white beauty ideals (Riccio et al., 2024). Still, research examining Black women's body image in relation to photo editing is lacking despite having potential far-reaching social and psychological implications for Black women whose natural features are marginalized and devalued in digital spaces.

The use of culturally specific measures is necessary when investigating Black women's body image and photo-editing behaviors. There is a long history of racial bias in photographic media. Since its invention, the medium of photography has relied on celluloid film and digital sensors that are calibrated for White skin tones. In the mid-1990s, enhancements to the standard “Shirley card” (skin color reference cards used to calibrate skin tone) were developed to address this structural bias in photographic technology; however, the adaptations also relied on lighter-skinned models which functioned to reinscribe biased photographic norms and social notions of whiteness as the default (Hawley, 2024; Lewis, 2019; Roth, 2009). Consequentially, Black women have been underrepresented in mainstream media, and those featured predominantly approximate white beauty ideals—typically portrayed as young, slender, with lighter skin tones, smaller facial features, and straightened hair (Boepple & Thompson, 2018; Jankowski et al., 2017; Perkins et al., 2023).

These restricted portrayals send a clear and persistent message about which appearances are deemed most beautiful, thereby engendering limited access to cultural and economic capital. As a result, many Black women internalize these beauty ideals, and pressures to conform can lead to heightened use of photo-editing technologies in social media-based self-portrayals. Prior studies have reported Black women's internalization of white appearance ideals (Avery et al., 2021; Awad et al., 2015; Capodilupo & Kim, 2014; Jones & Shorter-Gooden, 2003) while also idealizing Black cultural feminine appearance ideals, such as having bigger buttocks, smooth skin, a toned/muscular physique, bigger breasts, and a curvier body figure (Capodilupo, 2015; Hunter et al., 2020; Kelch-Oliver & Ancis, 2011; Overstreet et al., 2010). Yet, Black women's double consciousness body image internalization, which involves simultaneously embracing white and Black cultural body and appearance ideals, remains understudied (Wilfred & Lundgren, 2021).

This study aimed to address the dearth of research on young Black women's double consciousness body image and photo-editing behaviors. We focused specifically on participants aged 18–30 given this age segment's substantially higher usage of visual content-based social media platforms, such as Instagram and TikTok, relative to other age groups in the United States (Pew Research Center, 2024). Younger women are also shown to have lower body appreciation than older women (Frederick et al., 2022; Tiggemann & McCourt, 2013). Furthermore, we focused on this age segment to build on prior research examining Black women's social media use characteristics and risks which have involved samples aged 18–30 (Matsuzaka et al., 2022, 2023; Onuoha et al., 2024; Volpe et al., 2025).

Informed by the tripartite influence model (Thompson et al., 1999), the present study examined the associations between double consciousness body image ideal internalization and body image- and facial image-based photo editing among young Black women. Delineating between body image-based photo editing (i.e., editing photos or parts of photos to manipulate aspects of the body) and facial image-based photo editing (i.e., editing photos or parts of photos to manipulate aspects of the face) may also be advisable given literature highlighting how, for Black women, appearance ideals center around body size and shape as well as facial characteristics (Awad et al., 2015; Wilfred & Lundgren, 2021).

Research examining the associations between Black women's body image and photo editing should also consider the role of online victimization (i.e., harmful social interactions facilitated via digital technologies), which often targets individuals based on their appearance (Tynes et al., 2010; Zimmer-Gembeck et al., 2021). For instance, a prior study found that young Black women who experienced more frequent online sexual victimization (i.e., sexual exploitation, abuse, or harassment in online contexts), which is often appearance-based, had lower body esteem (Matsuzaka et al., 2022). Thus, we explored the potential moderating role of online victimization in the associations between double consciousness body image internalization and body image- and facial image-based photo editing.

Tripartite Influence Model and Photo-Editing Behaviors

The tripartite influence model is a theoretical model of body image disturbance that posits that greater perceived pressure—from peer, parent, and media influences—to adhere to socially desirable body image ideals increases body dissatisfaction via heightened appearance-ideal internalization and appearance comparison tendencies (Thompson et al., 1999). In this study, we applied components of the tripartite influence model to examine the associations between double consciousness body ideal internalization and photo editing. We did not apply the tripartite influence model to explore the mediating influences of appearance-ideal internalization and appearance comparison in the relations between sociocultural appearance influences and body dissatisfaction. Instead, we studied the association between appearance ideal internalization (as measured by double consciousness body image internalization) and sociocultural appearance influences (as measured through photo-editing behaviors). In doing so, we conceived of photo editing as a behavior representative of pressures to adhere to sociocultural appearance ideals, as promoted on media platforms by peers, parents, and other social influences.

Prior research suggests a bidirectional relation between appearance concerns and photo-editing behaviors (Gioia et al., 2023; McGovern et al., 2022; Rodgers & Rousseau, 2022). McGovern et al. (2022) referred to this bidirectional relation as the “feedback loop” whereby photo editing both results from as well as reinforces appearance concerns (p. 506). For instance, adolescent girls’ and young women's investment in an unhealthy appearance has been linked with the use of photo editing to enhance online self-presentation (McLean et al., 2015; Sun, 2021). On the other hand, photo editing has been studied as an antecedent to appearance concerns (Beos et al., 2021; Chang et al., 2019; Lamp et al., 2019; Terán et al., 2020; Tiggemann et al., 2020). Studies conducted in Australia, China, and the United States indicated that photo editing is significantly related to more facial dissatisfaction (Beos et al., 2021; Tiggemann et al., 2020), body surveillance or critiquing your body from an observer's perspective (Lamp et al., 2019), and body shame (Terán et al., 2020). In a study involving Asian, Black, Latina, and white college-aged women in the United States, young Black women's appearance-ideal internalization mediated the relations between Instagram use and a greater desire for the curvy body ideal (Gahler et al., 2023). This study was notable for its incorporation of a nonwhite appearance ideal (i.e., curvy ideal). Still, to our knowledge, no prior studies using the tripartite influence model have included a measure for double consciousness body image internalization. The study by Gahler et al. (2023) was also novel in its use of social media-specific predictors of appearance-ideal internalization, moving beyond the focus on traditional media pressures.

More research is needed to adapt the tripartite influence model to consider the influences of social media among young Black women who have high rates of social media use relative to their white counterparts (Pew Research Center, 2024). Technological advances in software allow people to edit and post visual content featuring highly idealized self-representations onto social media platforms (Chen et al., 2023; Gahler et al., 2023). In turn, these self-representations are open to peer, parental, and social responses ranging from validation through likes, shares, and positive comments, to online victimization via exclusion, harassment, or derogatory comments (Fardouly et al., 2017; Näsi et al., 2014). Applying the tripartite influence model, we explored the moderating role of online victimization as a harmful social interaction through which peer, parental, and other social influences are enacted on media platforms.

The Potential Moderating Role of Online Victimization

Online victimization refers to harmful technology-facilitated social interactions that often target appearance, behaviors, and identities that are marginalized (Tynes et al., 2010). Tynes et al. (2010) conceptualized four different types of online victimization: general online victimization (e.g., name-calling, bullying, or harassment, humiliation), online sexual victimization (e.g., unwanted sexual imagery or messages, sexual solicitation), online individual racial victimization (e.g., personal experiences with racially motivated exclusion, harassment, or threats), and online vicarious racial victimization (e.g., vicarious exposure to others’ experiences with racially motivated exclusion, harassment, or threats). These types of online victimization may be experienced by Black women in unique ways (Volpe et al., 2025). For instance, prior research indicates that Black women experienced various forms of gendered and racialized violence on social media, such as being called an angry Black woman, being sexually objectified or body-shamed, experiencing colorism, and receiving gendered racist comments (Musgrave et al., 2022; Riccio et al., 2024; Volpe et al., 2025).

Musgrave et al. (2022) highlighted how online victimization often targets social groups that experience systemic oppression on the basis of their sex, gender, and racial identities. Indeed, adolescent girls and young women are at greater risk of online victimization than their peers who are boys and men (Sun & Fan, 2018). Black and Latinx women disproportionately experience online harassment in comparison to White women (Francisco & Felmlee, 2022). Women of color across both the United States and the United Kingdom are more likely to receive hostile and negative identity-related tweets on Twitter (Amnesty International, 2018). Furthermore, Black women's bodies and appearance are often targets of victimization at the nexus of sexist and racist discourses that devalue Black women's appearance, although this has yet to be empirically examined in digital contexts (Lewis & Neville, 2015; Matsuzaka et al., 2022).

Appearance is suggested to play an important role in experiences of online victimization (Näsi et al., 2014; Zimmer-Gembeck et al., 2021. Indeed, social interactions have been discussed as a central means by which appearance ideals are reinforced on social media (Näsi et al., 2014). For instance, visual self-presentation on social media, such as posting a selfie, may be met with positive and negative feedback, ranging from likes to harmful comments about appearance (Bell et al., 2018). It is possible that people may engage in photo-editing behaviors in attempts to avoid further experiences of online victimization, although this has yet to be empirically examined. Research has shown that fears of being negatively evaluated by peers are associated with greater engagement in photo editing (Mustafa & Akram, 2022). Thus, in the present study, we conducted a novel investigation of whether the association between appearance ideal internalization and engagement in photo-editing behaviors may vary by the frequency with which participants experience online victimization.

The Current Study

Although previous studies have examined the bidirectional associations between appearance concerns and photo editing among adolescent girls and young women (Chang et al., 2019; Lamp et al., 2019; McLean et al., 2015; Sun, 2021; Tiggemann et al., 2020), young Black women remain underrepresented in this research. It is crucial to understand young Black women's photo-editing behaviors, given that their bodies and facial features are often devalued and excluded in digital spaces due to racial biases in beauty filters (Riccio et al., 2024; Riccio & Oliver, 2023). Specifically, it is critical to examine whether young Black women's internalization of white and Black cultural body ideals and online victimization experiences are associated with their photo-editing behaviors. In the current study, we investigated the potential moderating role of online victimization in the associations between young Black women's double consciousness body image internalization and body image- and facial image-based photo editing (see Figure 1). We controlled for subjective socioeconomic status (SES) in our regression models given prior studies showing that higher SES is associated with a more positive body image (Babayan et al., 2018; Winter et al., 2021). We hypothesized the following:

Figure 1.

Conceptual framework.

H1: Double consciousness body image internalization would be associated with more (a) body image-based photo editing and (b) facial image-based photo editing.

H2: Online victimization would moderate the association between double consciousness body image internalization and (a) body image-based photo editing and (b) facial image-based photo editing, such that these associations would be stronger at more frequent (vs. less frequent) levels of online victimization.

Method

Participants and Procedure

This study involved a sample of 354 Black American women (M_age = 24.34 years; SD_age = 3.70; range = 18–30). Most participants identified as cisgender women (99.7%, n = 353) with one participant (0.3%) identifying as a transgender woman. On average, participants reported having an average SES (M_SES = 5.88; SD_SES = 2.30; 1 = worst off to 10 = best off; see description below). The majority of the sample identified as heterosexual (75.1%; n = 266), followed by bisexual (17.5%; n = 62), gay/lesbian (4.8%; n = 17), and queer (0.8%; n = 3). Seven participants (1.7%) self-described their sexual orientation. Most participants identified as African American (72.6%; n = 257), followed by 10.2% as biracial or multiracial (n = 36), 9.0% as African (n = 32), 5.4% as Afro-Latina (n = 19), and 2.8% as Caribbean/West Indian (n = 10). The median household income in the sample was $25,000‒$34,999. Our sample reflected a broad distribution of educational levels, with 37.9% (n = 134) having graduated from high school, 25.9% having obtained a college degree (n = 92), and 6.0% (n = 21) having completed graduate school. Approximately one-third of our sample was currently enrolled in college (n = 120). Most reported working full-time (37.3%; n = 132) or part-time (20.6%; n = 73) and over one-third were unemployed, either as full-time students (17.8%; n = 63), nonstudents (17.5%; n = 62), or as stay-at-home parents (6.8%; n = 24).

Upon receiving institutional review board approval at a large Southeastern university, we recruited participants through Qualtrics Panels. Qualtrics Panels partners with panel organizations to recruit high quality samples from geographically diverse regions in the United States, such as the East, Midwest, South, and West. Data for this study are from a larger cross-sectional United States-based study in 2022 that investigated Black women's digital media use, identities, and mental health. Participants were required to self-identify as Black women between the ages of 18 and 30. Prior to taking the survey hosted on Qualtrics, participants reviewed a study description and provided informed consent. The survey took approximately 25 min to complete and included multiple attention checks. Upon survey completion, participants reviewed a debriefing form and received details on compensation. Participants who completed the survey received compensation from Qualtrics Panels in the form of their choosing, whether gift cards, game points, cash, airline miles, and other options. Given their direct handling of compensation, we did not have access to compensation details (Boas et al., 2020).

Measures

Double Consciousness Body Image

We used the 34-item unidimensional Double Consciousness Body Image Scale (DCBIS; Wilfred & Lundgren, 2021) to measure double consciousness body image internalization. Sample items included: “I feel pressure from society to have a small nose” and “I have had or have seriously considered surgery to make my butt bigger.” Participants indicated their agreement with statements on a 5-point scale (1 = never to 5 = always). Mean scores were computed such that higher scores indicated greater double consciousness body image internalization. The DCBIS has shown convergent validity with other measures related to body image and disordered eating. The DCBIS had excellent internal consistency in a sample of Black American women (α = .96; Wilfred & Lundgren, 2021) and with our sample (α = .98).

Online Victimization

We used the 21-item Online Victimization Scale (OVS; Tynes et al., 2010) to measure online victimization. The OVS was validated in a sample of young Black American women as having a four-factor structure: general online victimization, online individual racial victimization, online vicarious racial victimization, and online sexual victimization (Matsuzaka et al., 2022). In this study, we assessed online victimization from a unidimensional perspective given our desire to understand online victimization as an aggregate measure. Sample items included: “People have said negative things about how I look, act, or dress online” and “People have said mean or rude things about me because of my race or ethnic group online.” Participants rated the frequency of their experiences of online victimization on a 5-point scale (1 = never to 5 = always). Mean scores were computed such that higher scores indicated more frequent online victimization. The OVS has shown evidence of convergent validity, with positive correlations with anxiety and stress (Tynes et al., 2010). In a study involving young Black American women, the subscales in the OVS showed good to excellent internal consistency (α_range = .87–.95; Matsuzaka et al., 2022). In this study, the OVS showed excellent internal consistency (α = .96).

Body Image- and Facial Image-Based Photo Editing

We used two subscales of the Adapted Photo Manipulation Scale-R (APM-R; Gioia et al., 2023; McLean et al., 2015) to measure body image- and facial image-based photo editing. Specifically, we used the three-item body image-based photo-editing subscale (e.g., “How often do you make a specific part of your body look larger or look smaller?”) and the two-item facial identity-based photo-editing subscale (e.g., “How often do you edit or use apps to smooth skin?”). We did not use the filter use subscale (e.g., “How often do you adjust the light/darkness of the photo?”) because of its focus on changing the aesthetics of the photo at-large versus editing aspects of individual appearance. Participants indicated how frequently they engaged in photo editing on a 5-point scale (1 = never to 5 = always). Mean scores were computed for each subscale with higher scores indicating more photo editing. This APM-R was validated among a sample of Italian adolescents and shown to have acceptable internal consistency (α_body = .75; α_facial = .74). In the present study, the body image-based photo-editing subscale had good reliability (α = .87). Based on the Spearman–Brown formula, the facial image-based photo-editing subscale had a good predicted reliability of .82.

Subjective SES

We used Adler and colleagues’ (2000) measure to capture participants’ subjective SES. Participants viewed an image of a ladder and indicated their socioeconomic position using a 10-point scale (1 = worst off to 10 = best off).

Analytic Approach

We used Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS 28.0) to calculate descriptive statistics and bivariate correlations among the study variables. We used Pearson correlation tests to examine the correlations between SES, double consciousness body image internalization, online victimization, and body image- and facial image-based photo editing. Hierarchical multiple regression models were constructed to test our hypotheses. In step 1, we entered subjective SES as a control variable. In step 2, we added double consciousness body image internalization and online victimization. In step 3, we added the interaction term between double consciousness body image internalization and online victimization. The variables used to compute the interaction term were mean centered (Aiken et al., 1991). For moderation analysis using simple slopes testing, we plotted the interactions at low (1 standard deviation below the mean) and high (1 standard deviation above the mean) levels of double consciousness body image internalization and online victimization (Dawson, 2014).

Results

Preliminary Analyses

See Table 1 for descriptive statistics and bivariate correlations among our study variables. Subjective SES was weakly positively correlated with body image-based photo editing and facial image-based photo editing. Subjective SES was not significantly associated with double consciousness body image internalization or online victimization. Double consciousness body image internalization was strongly positively associated with online victimization, while being moderately positively associated with body image-based photo editing and facial image-based photo editing. Online victimization was moderately positively associated with body image-based photo editing and facial image-based photo editing. Body image- and facial image-based photo editing were strongly positively correlated.

Table 1.

Descriptive Statistics and Bivariate Correlations Among Main Study Variables.

Variable	M	SD	Range	1	2	3	4
1. SES	5.88	2.30	1–10
2. DCBI	2.25	1.03	1–5	−.07
3. OV	2.22	.96	1–5	.00	.66***
4. BODY	2.07	1.15	1–5	.18***	.46***	.47***
5. FACIAL	2.37	1.19	1–5	.13*	.44***	.41***	.66***

Note. N = 354. SES = socioeconomic status; DCBI = double consciousness body image internalization; OV = online victimization; BODY = body image-based photo editing; FACIAL = facial image-based photo editing.

*p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001.

Testing the Hypotheses

As shown in Table 2, the final regression model predicting body image-based photo editing was significant and accounted for 30.2% of the adjusted variance, F(4, 349) = 39.15, p < .001, R² = .31. In step 1, the model was significant, F(1, 352) = 11.25, p < .001, R² = .03. The inclusion of subjective SES as a control variable predicted 2.8% of the adjusted variance, ΔR² = .03, F(1, 352) = 11.25, p < .001. In step 2, the model was significant, F(3, 350) = 49.81, p < .001, R² = .30. The inclusion of double consciousness body image internalization and online victimization in this step contributed significantly to the model, ΔR² = .27, F(2, 350) = 66.99, p < .001. In the final step, the addition of the interaction term contributed slightly to the model, ΔR² = .01, F(1, 349) = 5.31, p = .02.

Table 2.

Final Models Predicting Body Image- and Facial Image-Based Photo Editing.

	Body image-based photo editing			Facial image-based photo editing
	β	SE	t	β	SE	t
SES	.17***	.02	3.77	.13**	.03	2.70
DCBI	.28***	.07	4.53	.30***	.07	4.71
OV	.26***	.07	4.34	.19**	.08	3.11
DCBI × OV	.11*	.05	2.31	.10*	.06	1.98
Adj. R²		.30			.24
Final F		39.15***			29.51***

Note. N = 354. SES = socioeconomic status; DCBI = double consciousness body image internalization; OV = online victimization.

*p ≤ .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001.

The final regression model predicting facial image-based photo editing was significant and accounted for 24.4% of the adjusted variance, F(4, 349) = 29.51, p < .001, R² = .25. In step 1, the model was significant, F(1, 352) = 5.88, p = .02, R² = .02. The inclusion of subjective SES as a control variable predicted 1.4% of the adjusted variance, ΔR² = .02, F(1, 352) = 5.88, p = .02. In step 2, the model was significant, F(3, 350) = 37.73, p < .001, R² = .24. The inclusion of double consciousness body image internalization and online victimization in step 2 contributed significantly to the model, ΔR² = .23, F(2, 350) = 52.78, p < .001. In the final step, the addition of the interaction term contributed slightly to the adjusted variance, ΔR² = .01, F(1, 349) = 3.92, p = .048.

H1 tested whether double consciousness body image internalization would be associated with more (a) body image-based photo editing and (b) facial image-based photo editing. H1a and H1b were supported. Double consciousness body image was associated with more body image-based photo editing (H1a), β = .28, t[349] = 4.53, p < .001, and more facial image-based photo editing (H1b), β = .30, t[349] = 4.71, p < .001. These findings suggest that young Black women with higher levels of double consciousness body image internalization were more likely to engage in both body image- and facial image-based photo editing.

H2 tested whether online victimization would moderate the association between double consciousness body image internalization and (a) body image-based photo editing and (b) facial image-based photo editing, such that these associations would be stronger at more frequent levels of online victimization. H2a and H2b were supported. Results indicated that online victimization significantly moderated the association between double consciousness body image and body image-based photo editing (H2a) ( $β$ = .11, t[349] = 2.31, p = .02). As shown in Figure 2, simple slopes analysis revealed that at both low ( $β$ = .20, t[349] = 4.19, p < .001) and high ( $β$ = .43, t[349] = 5.49, p < .001) frequencies of online victimization, double consciousness body image internalization was associated with more body image-based photo editing; however, this association was stronger at more frequent levels of online victimization. Analysis of output using the Johnson–Neyman technique revealed a cut-off point of online victimization = −1.03. In other words, the effect of double consciousness body image internalization on body image-based photo editing was nonsignificant when online victimization was less than −1.03, whereas this association was significant when online victimization was greater than −1.03. Thus, the association between double consciousness body image internalization and body image-based photo editing becomes nonsignificant only at a very low frequency of online victimization.

Figure 2.

Simple slopes analysis of the associations between double consciousness body image- and body image-based photo editing at two levels of online victimization.

Results indicated that online victimization also moderated the association between double consciousness body image internalization and facial image-based photo editing (H2b) ( $β$ = .10, t[349] = 1.98, p = .050). Further probing through simple slopes testing (see Figure 3) showed that at both low ( $β$ = .23, t[349] = 2.38, p = .02) and high ( $β$ = .45, t[349] = 5.83, p < .001) frequencies of online victimization, double consciousness body image internalization was associated with more facial image-based photo editing, although his association was stronger at more frequent levels of online victimization. Analysis using the Johnson–Neyman technique showed that the effect of double consciousness body image internalization on facial image-based photo editing was nonsignificant when online victimization was less than −1.19. This association was significant when online victimization was greater than −1.19. Thus, only at a very low frequency of online victimization does the association between double consciousness body image internalization and facial image-based photo editing become nonsignificant. Taken together, findings from moderation analyses suggest that the associations from double consciousness body image internalization to both body image- and facial image-based photo editing may depend on the level of online victimization experienced by participants.

Figure 3.

Simple slopes analysis of the associations between double consciousness body image- and facial image-based photo editing at two levels of online victimization.

Discussion

Informed by the tripartite influence model, the purpose of this study was to examine the associations between young Black American women's double consciousness body image internalization and body image- and facial image-based photo editing as well as the potential moderating role of online victimization in these associations. Consistent with our first hypothesis, we found that participants with greater internalization of double consciousness body image ideals were more likely to engage in photo editing of both their bodies and faces. Consistent with our second hypothesis, the associations between participants’ internalization of double consciousness body image ideals and their body image- and facial image-based photo editing were stronger among participants who experienced more frequent online victimization.

This study contributes to the literature in a few ways. First, this study answers the call for the use of more culturally relevant measures in research examining Black women's body image (Matsuzaka et al., 2022; Watson et al., 2019; Wilfred & Lundgren, 2021). In doing so, we provide novel insights into the association between young Black women's double consciousness body image internalization and photo-editing behaviors. Second, we contribute to an emerging body of literature examining Black women's body image in social media contexts (Frederick et al., 2022; Gahler et al., 2023; Matsuzaka et al., 2022). This includes building on prior tripartite influence model-informed research showing the associations between social media-specific variables and appearance-ideal internalization (Gahler et al., 2023). Specifically, we provide evidence of the association between appearance ideal internalization (i.e., double consciousness body image internalization) and sociocultural appearance influences (i.e., photo-editing behaviors). Third, our finding of online victimization as a moderator highlights the interplay between online social experiences, media engagement, and body image among young people.

We found that participants who more strongly internalized white and Black cultural appearance ideals were more likely to engage in photo editing of their bodies and faces. This finding contributes further evidence of the associations between appearance concerns and photo editing as shown in prior studies informed by the tripartite influence model (Beos et al., 2021; Terán et al., 2020; Tiggemann et al., 2020). These findings interrupt the body of literature that has centered the experiences of Asian and white adolescent girls and young women (McLean et al., 2015; Sun, 2021) by demonstrating that the association between appearance concerns and photo editing may also apply to young Black women. The links from double consciousness body image internalization to body image- and facial image-based photo editing were significant, even among the current sample which, on average, reported relatively low levels of double consciousness body image internalization and engagement in photo editing. Similarly, the associations between double consciousness body image internalization and body image- and facial image-based photo editing were stronger for those experiencing more frequent online victimization, despite online victimization occurring only moderately frequently among the samples. The associations between double consciousness body image internalization, photo editing, and online victimization may be even stronger for young Black women with higher levels of double consciousness body image internalization, more frequent photo-editing behaviors, or those who experience more frequent online victimization.

As expected, the associations between double consciousness body image internalization and both body image- and facial image-based photo editing were stronger for young Black women who experienced more frequent online victimization. These findings corroborate prior research demonstrating the relations between online victimization and body image-related concerns among adolescents and young people (Matsuzaka et al., 2022; Näsi et al., 2014). Thus, at both low and high frequencies of online victimization, harmful social encounters may magnify the associations between internalized restrictive appearance ideals and body image- and facial image-based photo editing. Given research indicating that photo editing may be associated with fears of being negatively evaluated (Mustafa & Akram, 2022), it is possible that by digitally manipulating body parts or facial characteristics, our participants may have been trying to avoid further experiences of online victimization; however, this needs to be explored through future research.

Finally, our results suggested that having a higher self-perceived socioeconomic standing was associated with more body image- and facial image-based photo editing, which contrasts with results from prior studies linking SES to positive body image outcomes (Babayan et al., 2018; Winter et al., 2021). We explain this discrepancy by pointing to the unique pressures that Black American women with higher SES navigate as they increase their proximity to white institutional spaces (e.g., retail spaces and professional workplaces; Hogans & Lyu, 2022). It is possible that young Black women with higher SES may feel pressure to enhance their online self-presentation, particularly for professional purposes; however, future research on the topic is recommended.

Limitations and Future Directions

Several limitations should be considered when interpreting our results. First, this study used a cross-sectional design and, as such, we were unable to make causal inferences from the data. However, we used the direction of the associations proposed in the tripartite influence model (Thompson et al., 1999) to inform our interpretation of the findings. Future longitudinal research is recommended to examine whether double consciousness body image internalization and appearance comparison explain relations between social media-based peer and family pressures, body dissatisfaction, and photo-editing behaviors. Second, as the influence of social media use on young women's body image is suggested to vary by type and how social media platforms are being used (Evens et al., 2021; Lazuka et al., 2020), this study could have been enhanced by collecting data on which social media platforms our participants used, along with other related psychosocial factors, such as their motivations for photo editing and whether they edited alone or as a social activity. We also recommend future research examining how Black women are portrayed in social media, such as in commercial marketing/advertising and influencer roles, and how this may influence their body image as well as photo-editing behaviors.

Third, our study had a specific focus on young Black American women aged 18–30, given their social media use. Thus, our results are not generalizable to Black women younger than age 18 or older than age 30 or to Black women outside of the United States (Park et al., 2024). Research is recommended to explore potential differences in photo-editing behaviors across different age segments of Black women. As scholars have stressed the importance of measuring aspects of social media use engagement, rather than just frequency (Choukas-Bradley et al., 2022; Volpe et al., 2021, 2023), future studies examining whether age is associated with various types of photo editing, ranging from the use of basic lighting filters to augmented reality beauty filters, are warranted.

Next, there were methodological limitations to our study. While we used the DCBIS as it was originally validated (i.e., as a unidimensional scale; Wilfred & Lundgren, 2021), items from the scale ask participants about body image pressures that they have received from a variety of sources, including society, their families, and peers. Given prior research that highlights the critical role that different social message sources play in body image processes (Watson et al., 2019), future studies should seek to determine whether there are distinct associations between appearance-ideal message source, online victimization, and photo editing. Although our study showed the DCBIS had good internal consistency, we recommend that future studies test the factor structure of the DCBIS among Black American women with varied ethnic identities (e.g., African American, African immigrant, Afro-Latina, Caribbean/West Indian, etc.).

In addition, we used indexes of the APM-R (Gioia et al., 2023; McLean et al., 2015) to measure body image- and facial image-based photo editing. We selected this measure given the lack of validated multidimensional scales specifically measuring body image- and facial image-based photo editing, which have cultural relevance to Black women who report both body and facial image concerns (Awad et al., 2015; Wilfred & Lundgren, 2021). Although the body image index had items broad enough to encompass culturally specific appearance ideals among Black women (e.g., “How often do you make specific parts of your body look larger or look smaller?”), the facial image index may have been limited in its ability to capture Black women's experiences, given that the index only includes two items related to smoothing skin or removing blemishes (e.g., “How often do you edit or use apps to smooth skin?”). Furthermore, the composition of the facial image-based photo-editing subscale via two items is below the recommended minimum of three items per factor, therefore it may not fully capture the construct (Hair et al., 1995). Thus, we recommend the development and validation of a culturally specific multidimensional scale measuring photo editing among Black women.

Implications for Practice and Advocacy

Our study findings can be applied by practitioners to better serve young Black American women presenting with appearance concerns and related maladaptive social media behaviors (Keum et al., 2022). While not generalizable to the broader population of young Black American women, our findings build on prior studies suggesting that young Black women may be facing gender- and race-based risks online (Amnesty International, 2018; Matsuzaka et al., 2022). Physicians, nurses, mental health counselors, psychologists, and social workers should assess how much and in what ways young Black American women are engaging with social media, experiencing online victimization, and negotiating appearance pressures online (Keum et al., 2022; Rodgers & Rousseau, 2022).

Findings from this study highlight the need for advocacy that focuses on reducing appearance concerns and encouraging healthier social media practices among young Black women. For instance, we recommend the increased accessibility of culturally relevant online resources for young Black women experiencing appearance concerns. This might include using online resources to build awareness about blogs, campaigns, Black feminist influencers, and websites that promote healthy body image development among Black girls and women (e.g., Crunk Feminist Collective, #BlackGirlMagic, #YouOkSis; Peterson-Salahuddin, 2022). It is also important to promote greater media literacy among young Black women so they may better identify social media content that depicts unrealistic ideals; and understand the harms that are associated with comparing oneself to unrealistic appearance ideals (Evens et al., 2021; Rodgers et al., 2022). Finally, there is a need for greater regulation of social media algorithms with efforts to identify and address racially biased algorithms on photo-editing tools (Harriger et al., 2022).

Conclusion

The current study contributes to a greater understanding of the associations between double consciousness body image internalization, online victimization, and photo-editing behaviors among young Black women. Our results suggested that young Black women with greater internalization of white and Black cultural appearance ideals were more likely to engage in body and facial photo-editing behaviors. The associations between participants’ internalization of double consciousness body image ideals and their body image- and facial image-based photo editing were stronger among participants with more frequent experiences of online victimization. Taken together, findings from this study suggest that young Black women's body image, online social interactions, and photo-editing behaviors may be intertwined. Future research is recommended to provide greater clarity around the interplay of these variables. Practitioners are recommended to explore how young Black women are receiving, internalizing, and negotiating potentially harmful appearance ideals in digital spaces.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iDs

Sara Matsuzaka

Vanessa V. Volpe

Lanice R. Avery

Alexis G. Stanton

References

Adler

Epel

Castellazo

Ickovics

(2000). Relationship of subjective and objective social status with psychological and physiological functioning: Preliminary data in healthy, white women. Health Psychology, 19(6), 586–592. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-6133.19.6.586

Aiken

L. S.

West

S. G.

Reno

R. R.

(1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Sage.

Amnesty International. (2018). Crowdsourced Twitter study reveals shocking scale of online abuse against women. http://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/press-release/2018/12/crowdsourced-twitter-study-reveals-shocking-scale-of-online-abuse-against-women/

Avery

L. R.

Stanton

A. G.

Ward

L. M.

Cole

E. R.

Trinh

S. L.

Jerald

M. C.

(2021). “Pretty hurts”: Acceptance of hegemonic feminine beauty ideals and reduced sexual well-being among Black women. Body Image, 38, 181–190. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2021.04.004

Awad

G. H.

Norwood

Taylor

D. S.

Martinez

McClain

Jones

Holman

Chapman-Hilliard

(2015). Beauty and body image concerns among African American college women. The Journal of Black Psychology, 41(6), 544–564. https://doi.org/10.1177/0095798414550864

Babayan

Saeed

B. B.

Aminpour

(2018). A study on body image, sexual satisfaction, and marital adjustment in middle-aged married women. Journal of Adult Development, 25(4), 279–285. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10804-018-9292-2

Bell

B. T.

Cassarly

J. A.

Dunbar

(2018). Selfie-objectification: Self-objectification and positive feedback (“likes”) are associated with frequency of posting sexually objectifying self-images on social media. Body Image, 26, 83–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2018.06.005

Beos

Kemps

Prichard

(2021). Photo manipulation as a predictor of facial dissatisfaction and cosmetic procedure attitudes. Body Image, 39, 194–201. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2021.08.008

Boas

T. C.

Christenson

D. P.

Glick

D. M.

(2020). Recruiting large online samples in the United States and India: Facebook, Mechanical Turk, and Qualtrics. Political Science Research and Methods, 8(2), 232–250. https://doi.org/10.1017/psrm

10.

Boepple

Thompson

J. K.

(2018). A content analytic study of appearance standards for women of color in magazines. Psychology of Popular Media Culture, 7(3), 264–273. http://doi.org/10.1037/ppm0000136

11.

Capodilupo

C. M.

(2015). One size does not fit all: Using variables other than the thin ideal to understand Black women’s body image. Cultural Diversity & Ethnic Minority Psychology, 21(2), 268–278. http://doi.org/10.1037/a0037649

12.

Capodilupo

C. M.

Kim

(2014). Gender and race matter: The importance of considering intersections in Black women’s body image. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 61(1), 37–49. http://doi.org/10.1037/a0034597

13.

Chang

Loh

R. S. M.

Chua

T. H. H.

(2019). A study of Singapore adolescent girls’ selfie practices, peer appearance comparisons, and body esteem on Instagram. Body Image, 29, 90–99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2019.03.005

14.

Chen

van Tilburg

W. A. P.

Leman

P. J.

(2023). Women’s self-objectification and strategic self-presentation on social media. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 47(2), 266–282. https://doi.org/10.1177/03616843221143751

15.

Choukas-Bradley

Roberts

S. R.

Maheux

A. J.

Nesi

(2022). The perfect storm: A developmental–sociocultural framework for the role of social media in adolescent girls’ body image concerns and mental health. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review, 25(4), 681–701. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10567-022-00404-5

16.

Dawson

J. F.

(2014). Moderation in management research: What, why, when, and how. Journal of Business and Psychology, 29(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-013-9308-7

17.

Evens

Stutterheim

S. E.

Alleva

J. M.

(2021). Protective filtering: A qualitative study on the cognitive strategies young women use to promote positive body image in the face of beauty-ideal imagery on Instagram. Body Image, 39, 40–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2021.06.002

18.

Fardouly

Pinkus

R. T.

Vartanian

L. R.

(2017). The impact of appearance comparisons made through social media, traditional media, and in person in women’s everyday lives. Body Image, 20, 31–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2016.11.002

19.

Francisco

S. C.

Felmlee

D. H.

(2022). What did you call me? An analysis of online harassment towards Black and Latinx women. Race and Social Problems, 14(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12552-021-09330-7

20.

Frederick

Pila

Malcarne

Compte

Nagata

Best

Cook-Cottone

Brown

T. A.

Convertino

Crerand

Parent

Pennesi

Perez

Rodgers

Schaefer

Thompson

Tylka

Murray

(2022). Demographic predictors of objectification theory and tripartite influence model constructs: The U.S. Body Project I. Body Image, 40, 182–199. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2021.12.012

21.

Gahler

Dajches

Terán

Yan

Aubrey

J. S.

(2023). Instagram influences: An examination of the tripartite influence model of body image among a racially diverse sample of young adult women. Computers in Human Behavior, 145, 107785. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2023.107785

22.

Gioia

McLean

Griffiths

M. D.

Boursier

(2023). Adolescents’ selfie-taking and selfie-editing: A revision of the photo manipulation scale and a moderated mediation model. Current Psychology, 42(5), 3460–3476. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-021-01702-x

23.

Hair

Anderson

R. E.

Tatham

R. L.

Black

W. C.

(1995). Multivariate data analysis (4th ed.). Prentice-Hall Inc.

24.

Harriger

J. A.

Evans

J. A.

Thompson

J. K.

Tylka

T. L.

(2022). The dangers of the rabbit hole: Reflections of social media as a portal into a distorted world of edited bodies and eating disorder risk and the role of algorithms. Body Image, 41, 292–297. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2022.03.007

25.

Hawley

(2024). The “problem” of Black skin: The naturalization of technological racial bias through the discourse of Adobe Lightroom presets and wedding photography. The Velvet Light Trap, 93(1), 29–39. https://doi.org/10.7560/VLT9304

26.

Hogans

Lyu

(2022). Double consciousness of Black millennial consumers: Their experiences in the retail space. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, 42(2), 87–102. https://doi.org/10.1177/0887302X221100176

27.

Hunter

E. A.

Kluck

A. S.

Ramon

A. E.

Ruff

Dario

(2020). The curvy ideal silhouette scale: Measuring cultural difference in the body shape ideals of young U.S. women. Sex Roles: A Journal of Research, 84(3-4), 238–251. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-020-01161-x

28.

Jankowski

Tshuma

Hylton

(2017). Light except Lupita: The representation of Black women in magazines. Psychology of Women Section Review, 19(1), 27–42. http://www.bps.org.uk/publications/member-network-publications/member-publications/psychology-women-section-review

29.

Jones

Shorter-Gooden

(2003). Shifting: The double lives of Black woman. Harper Collins.

30.

Kelch-Oliver

Ancis

J. R.

(2011). Black women’s body image: An analysis of culture-specific influences. Women & Therapy, 34(4), 345–358. http://doi.org/10.1080/02703149.2011.592065

31.

Keum

B. T.

Wang

Y. W.

Callaway

Abebe

Cruz

O’Connor

(2022). Benefits and harms of social media use: A latent profile analysis of emerging adults. Current Psychology, 42(27), 23506–23518. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-022-03473-5

32.

Lamp

Cugle

Silverman

Thomas

Liss

Erchull

(2019). Picture perfect: The relationship between selfie behaviors, self-objectification, and depressive symptoms. Sex Roles, 81(11), 704–712. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-019-01025-z

33.

Lazuka

R. F.

Wick

M. R.

Keel

P. K.

Harriger

J. A.

(2020). Are we there yet? Progress in depicting diverse images of beauty in Instagram’s body positivity movement. Body Image, 34, 85–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2020.05.001

34.

Lewis

(2019, January 18). The racial bias built into photography: Sarah Lewis explores the relationship between racism and the camera. New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/25/lens/sarah-lewis-racial-bias-photography.html

35.

Lewis

J. A.

Neville

H. A.

(2015). Construction and initial validation of the gendered racial microaggressions scale for Black women. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 62(2), 289–302. https://doi.org/10.1037/cou0000062

36.

Matsuzaka

Avery

L. R.

Stanton

A. G.

(2023). Black women’s social media use integration and social media addiction. Social Media + Society, 9(1). https://doi.org/10.1177/20563051221148977

37.

Matsuzaka

Avery

L. R.

Stanton

A. G.

Espinel

(2022). Online victimization, womanism, and body esteem among young Black women: A structural equation modeling approach. Sex Roles, 86(11-12), 681–694. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-022-01296-z

38.

McGovern

Collins

Dunne

(2022). The associations between photo-editing and body concerns among females: A systematic review. Body Image, 43, 504–517. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2022.10.013

39.

McLean

S. A.

Paxton

S. J.

Wertheim

E. H.

Masters

(2015). Photoshopping the selfie: Self photo editing and photo investment are associated with body dissatisfaction in adolescent girls. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 48(8), 1132–1140. https://doi.org/10.1002/eat.22449

40.

Mihaila

Braniste

(2021). Digital semantics of beauty apps and filters: Big data-driven facial retouching, aesthetic self-monitoring devices, and augmented reality-based body-enhancing technologies. Journal of Research in Gender Studies, 11(2), 100–112. https://doi.org/10.22381/JRGS11220217

41.

Musgrave

Cummings

Schoenebeck

(2022). Experiences of harm, healing, and joy among Black women and femmes on social media. Proceedings of the 2022 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, USA, 240, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1145/3491102.3517608

42.

Mustafa

Akram

(2022). Self-consciousness, self-objectification, and social anxiety as predictors of photo editing behavior among emerging adults. Human Behavior and Emerging Technologies, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/6609752

43.

Näsi

Räsänen

Oksanen

Hawdon

Keipi

Holkeri

(2014). Association between online harassment and exposure to harmful online content: A cross-national comparison between the United States and Finland. Computers in Human Behavior, 41, 137–145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.09.019

44.

Onuoha

A. C.

Matsuzaka

Stanton

A. G.

Volpe

V. V.

Avery

L. R.

(2024). Young Black American women’s social media use and online victimization. Social Media + Society, 10(3). https://doi.org/10.1177/20563051241277607

45.

Overstreet

N. M.

Quinn

D. M.

Agocha

V. B.

(2010). Beyond thinness: The influence of a curvaceous body ideal on body dissatisfaction in Black and White women. Sex Roles: A Journal of Research, 63(1–2), 91–103. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-010-9792-4

46.

Park

Hallman

Liu

X. S.

Hancock

(2024). Black representation in social media well-being research: A scoping review of social media experience and psychological well-being among Black users in the United States. New Media & Society, 26(3), 1670–1702. https://doi.org/10.1177/14614448231191542

47.

Perkins

T. R.

Ward

L. M.

Jerald

M. C.

Cole

E. R.

Avery

L. R.

(2023). Revisiting self-objectification among Black women: The importance of Eurocentric beauty norms. Journal of Black Psychology, 49(6), 868–896. https://doi.org/10.1177/00957984221127842

48.

Peterson-Salahuddin

(2022). Posting back: Exploring platformed Black feminist communities on Twitter and Instagram. Social Media + Society, 8(1). https://doi.org/10.1177/20563051211069051

49.

Pew Research Center. (2024). American’s social media use. https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2024/01/31/americans-social-media-use/

50.

Riccio

Colin

Ogolla

Oliver

(2024). Mirror, mirror on the wall, who is the whitest of all? Racial biases in social media beauty filters. Social Media + Society, 10(2). https://doi.org/10.1177/20563051241239295

51.

Riccio

Oliver

(2023). Racial bias in the beautyverse: Evaluation of augmented-reality beauty filters. In Karlinsky

Michaeli

Nishino

(Eds.), Computer vision – ECCV 2022 (pp. 714–721). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-25066-8_43

52.

Rodgers

R. F.

Rousseau

(2022). Social media and body image: Modulating effects of social identities and user characteristics. Body Image, 41, 284–291. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2022.02.009

53.

Rodgers

R. F.

Wertheim

E. H.

Paxton

S. J.

Tylka

T. L.

Harriger

J. A.

(2022). #Bopo: Enhancing body image through body positive social media-evidence to date and research directions. Body Image, 41, 367–374. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2022.03.008

54.

Roth

(2009). Looking at Shirley, the ultimate norm: Colour balance, image technologies, and cognitive equity. Canadian Journal of Communication, 34(1), 111–136. https://doi.org/10.22230/cjc.2009v34n1a2196

55.

Schroeder

Behm-Morawitz

(2024). Digitally curated beauty: The impact of slimming beauty filters on body image, weight loss desire, self-objectification, and anti-fat attitudes. Computers in Human Behavior, 165, 108519. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2024.108519

56.

Sun

(2021). Selfie editing and consideration of cosmetic surgery among young Chinese women: The role of self-objectification and facial dissatisfaction. Sex Roles, 84(11-12), 670–679. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-020-01191-5

57.

Sun

Fan

(2018). Is there a gender difference in cyber-victimization? A meta-analysis. Journal of Media Psychology: Theories, Methods, and Applications, 30(3), 125–138. https://doi.org/10.1027/1864-1105/a000185

58.

Swerzenski

J. D.

(2021). Fact, fiction or photoshop: Building awareness of visual manipulation through image editing software. Journal of Visual Literacy, 40(2), 104–124. https://doi.org/10.1080/1051144X.2021.1902041

59.

Terán

Yan

Aubrey

J. S.

(2020). “But first let me take a selfie”: U.S. adolescent girls’ selfie activities, self-objectification, imaginary audience beliefs, and appearance concerns. Journal of Children and Media, 14(3), 343–360. https://doi.org/10.1080/17482798.2019.1697319

60.

Thompson

J. K.

Heinberg

L. J.

Altabe

Tantleff-Dunn

(1999). Exacting beauty: Theory, assessment, and treatment of body image disturbance. American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/10312-000

61.

Tiggemann

Anderberg

Brown

(2020). Uploading your best self: Selfie editing and body dissatisfaction. Body Image, 33, 175–182. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2020.03.002

62.

Tiggemann

McCourt

(2013). Body appreciation in adult women: Relationships with age and body satisfaction. Body Image, 10(4), 624–627. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2013.07.003

63.

Tynes

B. M.

Rose

Williams

D. R.

(2010). The development and validation of the Online Victimization Scale for adolescents. Cyberpsychology: Journal of Psychosocial Research on Cyberspace, 4(2), 1–15. https://cyberpsychology.eu/article/view/4237

64.

Volpe

V. V.

Buhrman

G. W.

Boaheng

Holliday

Nick

E. A.

Criss

(2023). “Speak[ing] my mind”: Reasons for using Twitter and the online experiences, critical media literacy, and racial identity of Black American emerging adults. Journal of Media Psychology, 35(5), 268–279. https://doi.org/10.1027/1864-1105/a000387

65.

Volpe

V. V.

Collins

Zhou

E. S.

Bernard

D. L.

Smith

N. A.

(2025). Online and offline gendered racial microaggressions and sleep quality for Black women. Health Psychology, 44(1), 35–43. https://doi.org/10.1037/hea0001408

66.

Volpe

V. V.

Willis

H. A.

Joseph

Tynes

B. M.

(2021). Liberatory media literacy as protective against trauma for emerging adults of color. Journal of Traumatic Stress, 34(5), 1045–1055. https://doi.org/10.1002/jts.22640

67.

Watson

Lewis

Moody

(2019). A sociocultural examination of body image among Black women. Body Image, 31, 280–287. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2019.03.008

68.

Wilfred

S. A.

Lundgren

J. D.

(2021). The double consciousness body image scale: A body image assessment centering the experiences of Black women. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 54(10), 1771–1781. https://doi.org/10.1002/eat.23581

69.

Winter

V. R.

O’Neill

Cook

(2021). An investigation of socioeconomic status and body image among hook-up app users. Journal of the Society for Social Work and Research, 12(4), 789–801. https://doi.org/10.1086/717187

70.

Zimmer-Gembeck

M. J.

Rudolph

Webb

H. J.

Henderson

Hawes

(2021). Face-to-face and cyber-victimization: A longitudinal study of offline appearance anxiety and online appearance preoccupation. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 50(12), 2311–2323. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-020-01367-y