Filtering the I From the Ideal: Examining Preadolescents’ Online Self-Presentation in Relation to Their Perceived Attractiveness

Abstract

Social media use among preadolescents continues to increase each year. The current cross-sectional study examined how preadolescents’ different (i.e., authentic and inauthentic) online presentation strategies, as well as the social feedback these representations receive, are associated with their perceived attractiveness. The results of our study (n = 638; 52.4% girls, 9–13 years, M_age = 10.94, SD_age = 0.85) showed that more truthful online self-presentation practices coincided with feeling more positive about one’s appearance. A significant moderation effect was found for social feedback, with the association becoming stronger as levels of online feedback (e.g., online popularity, likes, comments, and tags by other users) increased. Contrary to our expectations, inauthentic self-presentation was negatively related to preadolescents’ perceived attractiveness, while no significant interaction effect with online feedback was found.

Keywords

social media appearance self-presentation social feedback preadolescents

With billions of users worldwide, social networking sites (SNS) are rapidly transforming the way young people connect (Common Sense Media, 2019). These platforms provide users with the convenience to effortlessly interact with one another, express themselves, establish networks, foster belonging, and form various relationships (Common Sense Media, 2019). Notably, social media also constitute attractive platforms for engaging in self-presentation (Chua & Chang, 2016). The concept of self-presentation refers to the deliberate process through which individuals try to shape others’ impressions of themselves (DeAndrea & Walther, 2011; Rui & Stefanone, 2013; Siibak, 2009), and has been widely recognized as a crucial component of SNS use (Lang & Barton, 2015; Pempek et al., 2009; Seidman, 2013).

More recently, scholars have started to draw attention to the potential transformative effects of online self-presentation, and the subsequent feedback to these efforts, on the beliefs individuals hold toward the self (Carr & Hayes, 2019; Valkenburg, 2017; Vogel & Rose, 2016). As such, it is argued that the personal content users choose to post online can be incorporated into the self-concept, as users come to view the self as possessing the same characteristics that were put forward in their online presentations, a process denoted as “identity shift” (Carr & Foreman, 2016; Carr & Hayes, 2019; Gonzales & Hancock, 2008, 2011). In view of the highly visual nature of social media platforms, users’ self-beliefs regarding their own physical appearance could be especially sensitive to such changes (Holland & Tiggemann, 2016).

Because online presentations tend to be positively biased, reminding users mostly about the positive facets of their lives, these processes of self-affirmation or “self-effects” (Valkenburg, 2017: 478) are believed to be mostly beneficial in nature (Chua & Chang, 2016; Toma & Hancock, 2013; Vogel & Rose, 2016). Confirmatory feedback, in the form of prominent feedback cues such as “likes,” “tags,” or comments by followers, further validate—and thus reinforce—the integration of the presented traits into individuals’ self-beliefs, while also increasing the perceived publicness of the claims (Carr et al., 2021; Carr & Hayes, 2019; Vogel & Rose, 2016).

The information users choose to post online, however, can differ in terms of truthfulness, which may influence the validation of self-presentation claims (Carr et al., 2021; Harter et al., 1996; Kim & Lee, 2011; Michikyan et al., 2014). Specifically, when self-presentations are perceived to be not fully truthful, one’s self-concept may remain unaffected by positive self-affirmation. Since inauthentic self-behaviors remain underexplored in the literature to date, the present study will examine how specific online self-presentation strategies (i.e., authentic and inauthentic), and the social feedback that is elicited, are associated with preadolescents’ appearance-related self-understanding or perceived attractiveness. Given that preadolescence (defined here as the ages of 9–13 years) is a critical, but understudied, period for the construction of the self (Antheunis et al., 2016; Erikson, 1968; Harter, 1999), while simultaneously marking the start of increased SNS use for many children (Common Sense Media, 2019), the present study will focus on this age group in particular.

Preadolescence

Preadolescence is a developmental period that is characterized by vast changes in psychosocial, biological, and cognitive domains (Brown & Larson, 2009; Harter, 1999). One particularly important challenge during this time is the development of a sense of self. That is, preadolescents are faced with the difficult task to construct a personal identity that is both coherent and continuous, and can serve as a strong foundation on which to build future self-concepts (Harter, 1999). Such identity processes do not occur within a vacuum, however, but partly find their source and expression in the individual’s surrounding social contexts (Harter, 1990). In this vein, social media could provide preadolescents with a valuable context for identity development (Quinn & Oldmeadow, 2013).

As advances in cognitive development promote the skills needed for perspective taking, preadolescents increasingly start to view themselves through the eyes of others (Harter, 1999). This increased appreciation of others’ attitudes allow preadolescents to be self-critical, and can make their self-concept vulnerable in those domains that are deemed important (Harter, 1999). Two domains of particular concern to preadolescents’ self-understanding are physical appearance and peer relationships (Antheunis & Schouten, 2011; Brown & Larson, 2009; Harter, 1999; Salomon & Brown, 2019). Not only do these domains become more salient, they also circumscribe the characteristics in terms of which preadolescents evaluate and perceive themselves (Wood et al., 1996). As such, these developmentally normative changes usher in a new sensitivity to body image concerns (Harter, 1999; Salomon & Brown, 2019). Moreover, preadolescence typically also marks the onset of mobile device ownership and increased SNS usage (Common Sense Media, 2019), which may introduce additional social pressures into children’s lives.

Despite these observations, however, research on SNS use during this pivotal period remains relatively modest in comparison to studies including older adolescents and students (Antheunis et al., 2016). This is surprising, given that preadolescents are not only at the age where they are starting to present themselves online, they are also at a critical time regarding the formation of their identity as the foundations of a stable and coherent self-concept are being established (Harter, 1999; Tatlow-Golden & Guerin, 2017). The first aim of the present study is therefore to address this gap by investigating the online self-presentation practices of 9 to 13-year-old preadolescents in relation to their appearance-perceptions.

Online Self-Presentation

While young people have always been preoccupied with the presentation of the self, SNS have created a new background for their identity development (Mendelson & Papacharissi, 2010; Siibak, 2009). Indeed, certain SNS features, such as their asynchronicity and strong emphasis on visuality, have been found to shape the ways in which users manage information about themselves (Lang & Barton, 2015; Rui & Stefanone, 2013). When presenting the self online, individuals commonly adapt to these features by posting implicit self-descriptions, such as specific photos or videos of themselves (Ahadzadeh et al., 2017). In doing so, SNS users are prompted to selectively disclose information of themselves (Hum et al., 2011). Friends or followers can in turn react to these presentations by leaving comments, “tags,” or “likes,” thereby contributing to a norm in which these online appraisals imply social approval (Meeus et al., 2019). Research has accordingly shown that these online self-presentations are often carefully edited (Duffy & Hund, 2019; Mendelson & Papacharissi, 2010), and in compliance with peer standards (Chua & Chang, 2016). For instance, early content analyses on college students’ Facebook galleries indicated that uploaded photographs look flattering and conventional, and usually focus on the individual alone or with friends (Hum et al., 2011; Mendelson & Papacharissi, 2010). At the same time, undesirable Facebook photos uploaded by other users are limited or removed (Lang & Barton, 2015). As a result, SNS environments tend to create a constructed reality wherein users are both prompted to carefully select and showcase images of themselves, and are simultaneously exposed to other users’ filtered photos (Vogel & Rose, 2016). With the transformation of social media platforms from mostly text-based to predominantly image-based (Choi & Sung, 2018), users are thus encouraged to selectively construe the visual components of their identity.

When engaging in these self-presentation activities, some SNS users may therefore be inclined to present themselves in a highly strategic fashion, whereas others may prefer a more honest self-presentation strategy that includes profounder levels of self-disclosure (Kim & Lee, 2011). While SNS profiles in general do reflect their owners’ true selves (Back et al., 2010), users can feel inclined, or even pressured, to accentuate the most positive aspects of their lives (Chou & Edge, 2012; Siibak, 2009; Vogel & Rose, 2016). Studies have found that individuals strategically weigh the benefits of selective self-presentation against the social constraints imposed by social media (DeAndrea & Walther, 2011; Ellison et al., 2006; Marwick, 2013; Toma et al., 2008). According to warranting theory (Walther & Parks, 2002), the legitimatization of online information is dependent on (the controllability of) certain cues that “warrant” a reliable link between an individual’s online persona and their offline identity (Walther et al., 2009). The less control one has over their self-presentation claims, the more authentic they will seem (DeAndrea, 2014). Other-generated cues such as information posted by friends, for instance, have accordingly been found to lead to more credible impressions than the self-descriptions posted by users (Walther et al., 2009).

These dynamics may not only affect how self-presentations are being evaluated by others, they can also shape the ways in which users strategically generate self-presentations (DeAndrea, 2014; Marwick, 2013). In this way, the presence of friends or followers that personally know the user can limit possibilities for posting self-descriptions that are highly inaccurate. Managing online visibility can thus become a complex balancing act between appearing “too real” and “not real enough” (Duffy & Hund, 2019), while trying to appeal to multiple audience expectations at once (Marwick & boyd, 2011).

Consequently, users’ self-presentational strategies can differ in terms of their honesty as they present different aspects of the self online, such as their real (i.e., authentic representations) or not completely true self (i.e., encompassing elements that are not fully truthful) (Michikyan et al., 2014, 2015). Such false or inauthentic self-behavior can be defined as “the extent to which one is acting in ways that do not reflect one’s true self as a person or the ‘real me’” (Harter et al., 1996, p. 360), and can occur for a variety of reasons including self-exploration (i.e., presenting and “trying out” different facets of one’s identity), deceiving others to seek social validation (for instance, by excessively overstating the positive aspects of one’s life), and/or to comply to peer norms (DeAndrea et al., 2012; Michikyan et al., 2014).

Self-Understanding

Scholars have argued that the ways in which individuals present themselves may also have important consequences for their self-understanding (Carr & Hayes, 2019; Gonzales & Hancock, 2011). For instance, in one well-known experiment on computer-mediated self-presentation, participants who presented themselves on a public blog emphasizing a certain personality trait, later described themselves more in terms of that trait on a follow-up personality assessment (Gonzales & Hancock, 2008). When users focus on their self-images within the context of social media (which are often positively biased), then, they may experience self-affirmation, that is, “a psychological process through which one acquires a buffer against information or events that are threatening to the self” (Kim & Lee, 2011, p. 361). In other words, users’ positive self-presentations may remind them of their own positive aspects, which can result in beneficial outcomes such as a boost in self-esteem (Gonzales & Hancock, 2011; Vogel & Rose, 2016).

The underlying proposition of self-affirmation theory is that individuals have an inherent need to see themselves as worthy, and are therefore drawn to information that confirms this notion. As such, browsing one’s profile on SNS such as Facebook has been found to improve perceptions of self-worth, thereby acting as a source of self-affirmation even after receiving threats to the ego (Toma & Hancock, 2013).

However, previous work also suggests that the discrepancy between the actual and the ideal self is important in understanding how self-presentations can affect SNS users (Bailey et al., 2020; Gonzales & Hancock, 2011; Harter et al., 1996; Michikyan et al., 2014). When users perceive their self-presentations to be dishonest, they may serve as a reminder of their failure in reaching internal standards for self-worth (Toma & Hancock, 2013). Hence, the process of self-affirmation could be obstructed, and the potential beneficial element of online self-presentation may be diminished. In support of this assumption, scholars have uncovered links between inauthentic self-behaviors and negative outcomes such as depressive symptoms and low self-worth (Harter et al., 1996; Michikyan et al., 2014), and negative affective response to feedback on Instagram (Jackson & Luchner, 2018).

We therefore speculate that these self-presentation strategies will play a key role in the association between SNS use and appearance-related perceptions. While causality cannot be determined from the cross-sectional data used in this study, the outlined body of research suggests that if preadolescents perceive their own self-presentations to be true to their real selves (i.e., authentic self-presentation), a positive association will exist with appearance-related perceptions (Carr et al., 2021; Gonzales & Hancock, 2011; Vogel & Rose, 2016):

H1: Preadolescents’ perceived authentic self-presentation is positively related to their perceived attractiveness.

Conversely, we expect a more dishonest or inauthentic self-presentation strategy to curb the self-affirmation process, and not significantly relate to preadolescents’ self-understanding:

H2: Preadolescents’ perceived inauthentic self-presentation is not significantly related to their perceived attractiveness.

Social Endorsement

Finally, the current study will also take into account the interactive role of social feedback in these associations. SNS have transformed the nature of interaction practices, allowing users to efficiently maintain large numbers of contacts (Burke et al., 2010; Ellison et al., 2011). SNS have therefore been described as ideal platforms where “relationship maintenance interactions (. . . .) occur quickly, with multiple others, and with low transaction costs” (Ellison et al., 2014, p. 858). Because online contexts lack visible, nonverbal cues that are typically used in interpersonal contexts to signal attention to one’s conversational partner (e.g., eye contact, nodding), users often rely on other explicit cues such as “liking” or commenting to indicate their engagement with others (Ellison et al., 2014). These forms of other-provided feedback, while seemingly simple, carry affective power to many users and are associated with higher perceived social support (Wohn et al., 2016).

Research has suggested that such feedback plays an important role in the internalization of self-presentations: that is, receiving feedback cues such as likes, tags, and comments could further verify (the credibility of) the presented self-images, thus strengthening an individuals’ accordant self-perceptions (Carr & Hayes, 2019; Walther et al., 2009, 2011). Online social feedback may therefore allow users to feel validated in the identity they project, and feel more inclined to incorporate these positive aspects into their self-concept (Carr & Hayes, 2019; Meeus et al., 2019). Moreover, social feedback is also believed to increase users’ perceptions of publicness regarding their self-presentations, leading them to experience more pressure to act in consistence with the presented attributes (Carr & Foreman, 2016; Valkenburg, 2017). In this vein, research has also found that users’ assumptions regarding the size of their audience can moderate the effects of publicness on self-transformation effects (Carr et al., 2021).

In line with these insights, we hypothesize that the self-affirming benefits of self-presentation will be strengthened when users perceive more social feedback online:

H3: Preadolescents’ perceived social feedback will enhance the positive association between preadolescents’ perceived authentic self-presentation and their perceived attractiveness.

In sum, the current study will extend this line of research by examining the associations of online self-presentation and perceived social feedback with perceived attractiveness among preadolescents.

Method

Data for this study were collected via schools in Flanders, Belgium. In total, 16 schools agreed to participate in the study (69,6%). After having been given written permission from the school principals, pupils were invited to complete a paper-and-pencil survey during class hours. Prior to participation, information letters containing contact info of the researchers, as well as information regarding the goal and practicalities of the study, were sent out to participating pupils, their teachers, and parents. In addition to the teacher, one research assistant was present during fieldwork to clarify instructions and answer any questions the pupils might have. English survey items were translated to Dutch by two bilinguals so that all participants could take the questionnaire in their native language. Two experts reviewed each construct to confirm the content validity for the translated version. The questionnaire used in the study was pretested among 20 preadolescents and reliability tests were calculated for each construct. Permission for this study was obtained from the Institutional Review Board of the authors’ university (Ref No. G-2018 12 1443).

A total of 638 preadolescents aged 9–13 years (M_age = 10.94, SD = 0.85, 52.4% girls) filled in the final questionnaire. Supporting materials used for this study are publicly available on OSF: https://osf.io/6ngfa/?view_only=d9a86c2027d84640a17a3fd8a87595e1

Measures

Self-Presentation

Preadolescents’ self-presentation strategies on social media were measured using the real and false self-presentation subscales of the Facebook Self-Presentation Scale by Michikyan et al. (2014). Items were adapted to address general SNS use, as opposed to being focused on Facebook use like the original scale. Using a 5-point Likert-type scale (1 = not at all true, 5 = completely true), respondents indicated their agreement with statements concerning presentation of the real or authentic self (e.g., “The way I present myself on social media is how I am in real life”) and their false or inauthentic self (e.g., “I am a completely different person online than I am offline”). A principal component analysis with oblimin rotation (“PCA”) (Kaiser – Meyer – Olkin [“KMO”] = .92, p < .001) revealed two components that corresponded with the intended constructs, with a total of 58.65% of variance explained. All items showed satisfactory loading (>.52). Consequently, two means were computed for both real (5 items, M = 2.74, SD = 0.98, α = .83) and false (10 items, M = 1.90, SD = 0.76, α = .90) self-presentation strategies.

Perceived Attractiveness

Respondents filled in the physical appearance subscale from the Harter Self-Perception Profile for Children (Harter, 1985/2012). Because the pretest indicated that children had difficulty understanding the answer options, wording was simplified to fit a 4-point Likert-type scale, as opposed to the differential response format used in the original scale. Respondents rated six statements such as “Some kids are happy with the way they look” and “Some kids wish their body was different” using response options consisting of (1) really untrue for me, (2) somewhat untrue for me, (3) somewhat true for me to, and (4) really true for me. A PCA using one factor (KMO = .75, p < .001) explained 47.3% of variance, with all items scoring >.61 on their component loading. Items were then averaged into a new mean score (M = 3.14, SD = 0.65, α = .78), with a higher score indicating a greater level of satisfaction with one’s appearance.

Social Feedback

Respondents reported their perceived social endorsement on social media using the 3-item online popularity scale by Meeus et al. (2019). Items include “I receive a lot of likes when I post something,” with responses ranging from (1) = strongly disagree to (5) = strongly agree. To cover a more diverse measure of online feedback, we included two additional items: “I have a lot of followers or online friends” and “People tag me a lot.” All five items loaded sufficiently on one factor (all >.75) explaining 64.42% of variance. Internal reliability of the scale was sufficient (α = .86), after which items were averaged into an overall score (M = 2.60, SD = 0.98).

SNS Use

Finally, respondents also filled in an open-ended question gauging their SNS use. Specifically, participants were asked how long they used any type of social media on a typical school day and a typical day during the weekend, in the morning, afternoon, and evening. The total volume of SNS use was obtained by multiplying the weekday score by 5, and the weekend score by 2, after which a daily average (in number of hours) was calculated by dividing the total score by 7 (M = 2.25, SD = 1.77).

Analytical Approach

Zero-order correlations were used to assess the relationships between the key variables. Although gender was not a primary focus, t-tests were conducted for descriptive purposes. Prior to analyses, assumptions were checked. As the PP-plot indicated the presence of heteroscedasticity in model errors, we decided to use a bootstrapping procedure (5,000 samples) for the null hypothesis tests. A hierarchical regression analysis was used to test the first two hypotheses regarding the associations between preadolescents’ self-presentation strategies and their appearance-related perceptions. Next, interaction models examining the reinforcing role of online feedback were calculated using Model 1 of the PROCESS macro for SPSS (Hayes, 2013).¹

Results

Table 1 presents an overview of the zero-order correlations among the key variables, as well as the results of the t-tests exploring potential gender differences. Significant differences were found for our measure of perceived attractiveness, with boys scoring significantly higher, while girls engaged significantly more often in authentic self-presentation, and reported more online feedback. With the exception of authentic self-presentation strategies, all SNS-related variables were negatively related to appearance-related perceptions.

Table 1.

Descriptive Statistics and Zero-Order Inter-Correlations Between the Key Variables.

	1.	2.	3.	4.	5.
1. Authentic SP	M = 2.74, SD = 0.98
2. Inauthentic SP	.53**	M = 1.90, SD = 0.76
3. Online feedback	.57**	.52**	M = 2.60, SD = 0.98
4. Perceived attractiveness	.03	–.23**	–.09*	M = 3.14, SD = 0.65
5. SNS Use	.26**	.26**	.29**	–.12*	M = 2.25, SD = 1.77
M (SD)_girls	2.84 (0.89)	1.95 (0.71)	2.70 (0.93)	3.04 (0.69)	2.27 (1.76)
M (SD)_boys	2.64 (1.06)	1.84 (0.80)	2.50 (1.02)	3.25 (0.58)	2.23 (1.79)
ΔM	t(503.2) = 2.30, p = .022	N.S.	t(522.9) = 2.33, p = .020	t(599,1) = –4.06, p < .001	N.S.

Note. SP = Self-presentation; SNS = social networking sites.

Significant at the .05 level, **significant at the .01 level.

To test H1 and H2 regarding the direct associations between the two self-presentation strategies and perceived attractiveness, a multiple linear regression analysis was conducted with authentic and inauthentic self-presentation as independent variables, gender as a covariate, and finally participants’ perceived attractiveness as the dependent variable. Bias-corrected bootstrap confidence intervals were calculated to account for heteroscedasticity.

Together, the model explained 10% of the variance in our outcome, F(3, 503) = 18.75, p < .001. All three independent variables significantly predicted perceived attractiveness: gender (b = .16, 95% CI = [.06, .27], p = .004), authentic self-presentation (b = .14, 95% CI = [.07, .21], p < .001), and inauthentic self-presentation (b = −.28, 95% CI = [−.37, −.20], p < .001). As such, we can corroborate H1 regarding the positive association between authentic self-presentation and perceived attractiveness. Contrary to our expectations, however, inauthentic self-presentation was significantly negatively related to our outcome variable (as opposed to the null findings we expected).

Next, the moderating role of social feedback was examined. Two interaction models were set up using the Hayes (2013) process macro for SPSS: One including inauthentic self-presentation as a predictor, with authentic self-presentation as a covariate, and a second interaction model examining authentic self-presentation as the independent variable while controlling for inauthentic self-presentation. As significant gender differences were found, we controlled for gender in both models. Online feedback was added as a moderator in both models, while our variable on perceived attractiveness was included as the outcome. Consistent with H3, results of the moderation analyses pointed to a significant interaction effect in the case of authentic self-presentation, b = 0.07, SE = .03, t(5, 481) = 2.43, p = .02. In total, the model, R² = .12, F(5, 481) = 12.71, p < .001, supported our prediction that online feedback enhances the positive association between preadolescents’ authentic self-presentation and their perceived attractiveness. When inauthentic self-presentation was included as an independent variable, however, no significant interaction effect was found.

Discussion

Using self-presentation as a framework, the current study sought to examine preadolescents’ SNS use in relation to their self-concept. Given the highly social and visual nature of these platforms, we expected associations between such use and preadolescents’ self-understanding, especially in relation to their physical appearance (Holland & Tiggemann, 2016). Building on earlier scholarly insights, we reasoned that preadolescents’ authentic self-presentation strategies, or presentations that are perceived to be truthful, relate to processes of self-affirmation, as SNS users are reminded of their own positive qualities when posting self-content online (Carr & Hayes, 2019; Valkenburg, 2017). In contrast, we reasoned that when self-presentation is not seen as fully truthful, such self-affirmation is obstructed and no positive association between preadolescents’ self-presentation and self-understanding is to be expected.

In a next step, we examined the reinforcing role of social feedback in these associations. Specifically, we predicted that positive social feedback in the form of online cues or online popularity (i.e., likes, tags, . . . by other users), would further validate and/or increase the perceived publicness of preadolescents’ self-presentation claims and thus strengthen the positive association between authentic self-presentation, and preadolescents’ attractiveness-related self-perceptions.

Authentic Self-Presentation

First, results showed that engaging in authentic self-presentation was indeed positively related to preadolescents’ perceived attractiveness. Our study is therefore in line with the central tenets of online self-affirmation processes and identity shift, whereby the aspects an individual chooses to present online can affect how she or he perceives the self (Carr & Hayes, 2019). Given that self-presentation on social media is inherently selective, users tend to present the most desirable aspects of their lives (Chou & Edge, 2012; Schreurs & Vandenbosch, 2021). Consequently, SNS use can be beneficial when users focus on their own profiles or the self-content they post (Gentile et al., 2012; Gonzales & Hancock, 2011; Toma & Hancock, 2013).

In experimental research, such transformative effects appeared stronger in conditions where respondents self-presented in public contexts, rather than private contexts (Carr & Hayes, 2019; Gonzales & Hancock, 2008, 2011; Walther et al., 2011). In line with these findings, our study found a moderation effect of social feedback. When respondents perceived more feedback in the form of online popularity or cues such as likes and comments on SNS, the relation between authentic self-presentation and preadolescents’ appearance-related self-understanding became stronger. According to identity shift theory, the transformative effects of self-presentation are exacerbated by the publicness of the presented statements. In this way, the social feedback that preadolescents receive online may have augmented the perceived presence of the online audience, resulting in an increased “awareness that one is the object of another’s attention” (i.e., public self-awareness; Orive, 1984, p. 730, as cited in Carr et al., 2021). In turn, this increased public self-awareness could have augmented preadolescents’ sense of commitment to the presented aspects, accelerating their internalization (Carr et al., 2021). Similarly, another key mechanism of identity shift that is related to the notion of public commitment is that of confirmatory feedback (Carr et al., 2021). In general, receiving online feedback cues such as likes is positively linked to perceived social support (Wohn et al., 2016) and can augment the credibility of self-presentations (DeAndrea, 2014). As such, the presented self-aspects that receive confirmatory feedback tend to be regarded as favorable, thereby making their internalization and use in subsequent presentations more likely (Carr et al., 2021).

The observation that social feedback strengthened the relation between self-presentation and preadolescents’ perceived attractiveness is in line with these theoretical propositions. An important contribution of the current study is therefore its extension of this line of work to include the conjoint role of online social feedback and self-presentation for preadolescents, addressing research calls for increased clarity on the interplay of these factors (e.g., Walther et al., 2011).

It is important to note, however, that by examining SNS use through the lens of self-presentation, we expressly focused on self-oriented behavior, as opposed to other-oriented social media use. Indeed, ample research has demonstrated that social media can constitute a fertile ground for social comparisons, which have been linked to a wide array of psychosocial effects depending on the orientation of the comparison and certain personality traits of the user (Vogel & Rose, 2016). Given the strong focus on idealized appearances, social comparison within online environments is likely to be upward (i.e., comparing the self with individuals believed to be better off) (Chou & Edge, 2012). Such exposure to others’ idealized comparison has been found to negatively affect users’ body satisfaction and well-being (Hendrickse et al., 2017), and has been linked to an increase in body image concerns (Holland & Tiggemann, 2016). In line with these findings, our study equally uncovered a negative correlation between overall SNS use and preadolescents’ own perceived attractiveness. Nevertheless, when authentic self-presentation behaviors were considered separately, a positive relation was found with preadolescents’ perceived attractiveness. As such, it seems important that researchers remain aware of the multifaceted and dynamic nature of SNS use, as online activities may be differentially related to psychosocial outcomes among users. This study confirms that self-presentation offers one such perspective through which to consider these differential associations.

Inauthentic Self-Presentation

However, our findings also suggest that it is important to recognize the type of self-presentation individuals engage in. While SNS environments have provided users with an unprecedented array of tools for identity management, these increased possibilities for selective self-presentation may also result in users experiencing additional pressure to curate and tailor the content they post to confirm to idealized standards (Duffy & Hund, 2019; Meeus et al., 2019). As such, the content that appears on social media may not fully reflect users’ true selves. We reasoned that when users perceive their presentations to be inaccurate, self-affirmation processes may be obstructed and no positive relation with appearance perceptions would exist. However, contrary to our expectations, inauthentic self-presentation was significantly, and negatively, associated with preadolescents’ perceived attractiveness. An explanation for this negative association may be found within developmental literature. While false self-behavior is considered a developmentally appropriate part of adolescence, such behavior can become a cause of concern when it is prompted by a strive for the social approval of others (Harter et al., 1996; Michikyan et al., 2014; Selman, 1980). Within online environments, such approval is oftentimes gained by presenting the most desirable aspects of the self (Chou & Edge, 2012). However, as individuals attempt to distort what they feel is their true self, they may come to devalue it, resulting in lower feelings of self-worth (Harter et al., 1996). Such a sense of devaluation of the self-concept may therefore also explain the negative association between inauthentic self-presentation and perceived attractiveness in our study. Our study also showed that even when online feedback was provided, no positive relationship was found with preadolescents’ self-understanding. It thus appears that the validation of others may only be effective when preadolescents feel that is their true self, and not an idealized or inaccurate version that is being validated.

It remains important to stress, however, that false self-behavior is not inherently a cause for concern. Indeed, experimentation with different versions of the self is a normative part of adolescence that promotes self-discovery, and aids in the development of a validated “core self” or coherent self-concept (Fullwood et al., 2016). Moreover, preadolescents reported to engage significantly more often in authentic self-behaviors than inauthentic self-presentation strategies. This may be due to the fact that self-presentation on social media, although selective, is still bound to restrictions pertaining to users’ social relationships, thus limiting possibilities for versions that are not fully accurate (DeAndrea, 2014). As such, we should be careful not to overinterpret our findings.

Limitations and Directions for Future Research

The current study expands on prior work by examining the associations of online self-presentation and social feedback with perceived attractiveness. However, our study is subject to a number of important limitations that must be considered in the interpretation of our findings. First and foremost, because we used cross-sectional data, we did not address the issue of causality regarding the associations between our variables. Although our theoretical rationale was in part based on experimental research that has established a causal link between self-presentation and constructs such as self-esteem (e.g., Gonzales & Hancock, 2011), the direction of associations represents the main limitation of this study and may have been different than we theorized. In reality, these associations may also very well be transactional in nature, so that greater self-worth motivates online presentations that are more truthful to the self, and, in turn, these presentations lead to a more successful self-affirmation that results in higher self-worth. Conversely, individuals who feel more dissatisfied with the self may be more prone to exploring alternative identities, leading to a stronger sense of devaluation of the true self. Future research may explore these interesting dynamics in further detail.

Furthermore, our study uncovered significant gender differences regarding a number of key variables that warrant future research. Specifically, girls engaged more in authentic self-presentation and reported more online feedback, while they scored significantly lower on perceived attractiveness. These findings are consistent with a well-document link between gender and self-worth during adolescence, with girls consistently scoring lower than boys in almost every domain (Quatman & Watson, 2001). Research has also found that the impact of social media on life satisfaction varies depending on individuals’ age and sex, with girls experiencing earlier increases in sensitivity to social media than boys (Orben et al., 2022). This difference is also apparent in the domain of perceived attractiveness, as girls typically feel pressured to adhere to cultural norms surrounding attractiveness—even already at the young age of 6 (Dohnt & Tiggemann, 2006). During preadolescence, girls may also start to feel increasingly insecure about their changing physical appearance due to the onset of puberty, which occurs earlier for girls than boys (Quatman & Watson, 2001).

As such, these gender differences could produce a disparity in sensitivity to sources of social affirmation and self-evaluation, which explains why girls reported lower levels of perceived attractiveness despite engaging more often in authentic self-presentation and receiving more online feedback. In this vein, research has shown that online feedback cues such as “likes” convey varied meaning to users, and should therefore be recognized in their diversity (Hayes et al., 2016). Gender may be one such factor that shapes these interpretations, thereby constituting a fruitful avenue for future research. In exploring this topic, future studies should also take into account the complexities of gender identity. The current study was limited to binary gender identification, which may have excluded some preadolescents. In addition, as we already outlined above, self-presentation offers only one lens through which to examine the interplay between social media and users’ self-understanding. Indeed, while SNS have provided users with a new sense of agency over their identity, these platforms also encourage other types of behavior that may be harmful to individuals, such as social comparison (Chou & Edge, 2012; Vogel & Rose, 2016). As such, our study also further encourages communication scholars to be attentive to the complex nature of social media practices.

Finally, for the reasons we outlined in our literature section, we opted to limit our scope to preadolescents. Because preadolescence typically is a developmental period during which children start to experiment with their different identities (Harter, 1999), and tends to mark the first time children start to use SNS (Common Sense Media, 2019), inauthentic self-behaviors may have been especially impactful for this age group. Hence, we must be careful generalizing our findings to other age categories. Future studies may provide additional insight in the potential developmentally specific mechanisms at play.

Conclusion

In sum, the current study investigated how two types of self-presentation strategies (i.e., authentic and inauthentic), and the online feedback that is elicited are associated with preadolescents’ appearance-related self-understanding. Our findings confirmed that these strategies were indeed differentially related to our outcome. When preadolescents reported engaging in more truthful online self-presentation practices, they also reported feeling more positive about their appearance. This association was strengthened when social feedback in the form of online popularity cues was added as a moderator. Contrary to our expectations, inauthentic self-presentation was negatively related to preadolescents’ appearance-related perceptions, while we did not find a significant interaction effect with online feedback. As SNS use plays an integral part in the lives of young people, we hope that this study provides an impetus for further theoretical and empirical inquiry into the role of social media in users’ self-understanding.

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) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: The first author of this manuscript is funded by a postdoctoral fellowship by the Research Foundation Flanders (FWO) (grant no. 12D2323N). We are thankful for the foundation’s support.

ORCID iD

Anneleen Meeus

Notes

Author Biographies

Anneleen Meeus (PhD, KU Leuven) is a postdoctoral researcher at the School for Mass Communication Research, KU Leuven (Belgium). Her research focuses on the role of mobile devices and social media use in preadolescents’ psychosocial well-being.

Geert Everaert (MD, KU Leuven) is Child and Adolescent psychiatrist at Neuro-Psychiatric Clinic Saint Joseph V.Z.W., Pittem (Belgium).

Steven Eggermont (PhD, KU Leuven) is Professor at the School for Mass Communication Research, KU Leuven (Belgium). His research focuses on the media use of children and adolescents, sexual media contents, media use and health behaviors, and the effects of media exposure on attitudes and behaviors.

Kathleen Beullens (PhD, KU Leuven) is Professor at the School for Mass Communication Research, KU Leuven (Belgium). Her research focuses on how different forms of digital media use may harm or enhance various components of individuals’ well-being.

References

Ahadzadeh

A. S.

Sharif

S. P.

Ong

F. S.

(2017). Self-schema and self-discrepancy mediate the influence of Instagram usage on body image satisfaction among youth. Computers in Human Behavior, 68, 8–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.11.011

Antheunis

M. L.

Schouten

A. P.

(2011). The effects of other-generated and system-generated cues on adolescents’ perceived attractiveness on social network sites. Journal of Computer-mediated Communication, 16, 391–406. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2011.01545.x

Antheunis

M. L.

Schouten

A. P.

Krahmer

(2016). The role of social networking sites in early adolescents’ social lives. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 36(3), 348–371. https://doi.org/10.1177/0272431614564060

Back

M. D.

Stopfer

J. M.

Vazire

Gaddis

Schmukle

S. C.

Egloff

Gosling

S. D.

(2010). Facebook profiles reflect actual personality, not self-idealization. Psychological Science, 21(3), 372–374. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797609360756

Bailey

E. R.

Matz

S. C.

Youyou

Iyengar

S. S.

(2020). Authentic self-expression on social media is associated with greater subjective well-being. Nature Communications, 11(1), Article 4889. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-18539

Brown

B. B.

Larson

(2009). Peer relationships in adolescence. In Lerner

R. M.

Steinberg

(Eds.), Handbook of adolescent psychology (pp. 75–103). John Wiley.

Burke

Marlow

Lento

(2010). Social network activity and social well-being. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 1909–1912). https://doi.org/10.1145/1753326.1753613

Carr

C. T.

Foreman

A. C.

(2016). Identity shift III: Effects of publicness of feedback and relational closeness in computer-mediated communication. Media Psychology, 19, 334–358. https://doi.org/10.1080/15213269.2015.1049276

Carr

C. T.

Hayes

R. A.

(2019). Identity shift effects of self-presentation and confirmatory and disconfirmatory feedback on self-perceptions of brand identification. Media Psychology, 22, 418–444. https://doi.org/10.1080/15213269.2017.1396228

10.

Carr

C. T.

Kim

Valov

J. J.

Rosenbaum

J. E.

Johnson

B. K.

Hancock

J. T.

Gonzales

A. L.

(2021). An explanation of identity shift theory: Getting our shift together. Journal of Media Psychology: Theories, Methods, and Applications, 33(4), 202–214. https://doi.org/10.1027/1864-1105/a000314

11.

Choi

T. R.

Sung

(2018). Instagram versus Snapchat: Self-expression and privacy concern on social media. Telematics and Informatics, 35(8), 2289–2298. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2018.09.009

12.

Chou

H. T. G.

Edge

(2012). “They are happier and having better lives than I am”: The impact of using Facebook on perceptions of others’ lives. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 15, 117–121. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2011.0324

13.

Chua

T. H. H.

Chang

(2016). Follow me and like my beautiful selfies: Singapore teenage girls’ engagement in self-presentation and peer comparison on social media. Computers in Human Behavior, 55, 190–197. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.09.011

14.

Common Sense Media. (2019). The common sense census: Media use by tweens and teens. https://www.commonsensemedia.org/sites/default/files/uploads/research/2019-census-8-to-18-full-report-updated.pdf

15.

DeAndrea

D. C.

(2014). Advancing warranting theory. Communication Theory, 24(2), 186–204. https://doi.org/10.1111/comt.12033

16.

DeAndrea

D. C.

Tom Tong

Liang

Y. J.

Levine

T. R.

Walther

J. B.

(2012). When do people misrepresent themselves to others? The effects of social desirability, ground truth, and accountability on deceptive self-presentations. Journal of Communication, 62(3), 400–417. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2012.01646.x

17.

DeAndrea

D. C.

Walther

J. B.

(2011). Attributions for inconsistencies between online and offline self-presentations. Communication Research, 38, 805–825. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650210385340

18.

Dohnt

H. K.

Tiggemann

(2006). Body image concerns in young girls: The role of peers and media prior to adolescence. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 35, 135–145. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-005-9020-7

19.

Duffy

B. E.

Hund

(2019). Gendered visibility on social media: Navigating Instagram’s authenticity bind. International Journal of Communication, 13, 4983–5002.

20.

Ellison

Heino

Gibbs

(2006). Managing impressions online: Self-presentation processes in the online dating environment. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 11, 415–441. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2006.00020.x

21.

Ellison

N. B.

Steinfield

Lampe

(2011). Connection strategies: Social capital implications of Facebook-enabled communication practices. New Media & Society, 13(6), 873–892. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444810385389

22.

Ellison

N. B.

Vitak

Gray

Lampe

(2014). Cultivating social resources on social network sites: Facebook relationship maintenance behaviors and their role in social capital processes. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 19(4), 855–870. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcc4.12078

23.

Erikson

E. H.

(1968). Identity: Youth and crisis. W.W. Norton.

24.

Fullwood

James

B. M.

Chen-Wilson

C. H.

(2016). Self-concept clarity and online self-presentation in adolescents. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 19, 716–720. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2015.0623

25.

Gentile

Twenge

J. M.

Freeman

E. C.

Campbell

W. K.

(2012). The effect of social networking websites on positive self-views: An experimental investigation. Computers in Human Behavior, 28, 1929–1933. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2012.05.012

26.

Gonzales

A. L.

Hancock

J. T.

(2008). Identity shift in computer-mediated environments. Media Psychology, 11, 167–185. https://doi.org/10.1080/15213260802023433

27.

Gonzales

A. L.

Hancock

J. T.

(2011). Mirror, mirror on my Facebook wall: Effects of exposure to Facebook on self-esteem. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 14(1–2), 79–83. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2009.0411

28.

Harter

(1990). Self and identity development. In Feldman

S. S.

Elliott

G. R.

(Eds.), At the threshold: The developing adolescent (pp. 352–387). Harvard University Press.

29.

Harter

(1999). The construction of the self: A developmental perspective. Guilford Press.

30.

Harter

(2012). Self-perception profile for children. https://www.apa.org/obesity-guideline/self-preception.pdf (Original work published 1985)

31.

Harter

Marold

D. B.

Whitesell

N. R.

Cobbs

(1996). A model of the effects of perceived parent and peer support on adolescent false self behavior. Child Development, 67(2), 360–374.

32.

Hayes

A. F.

(2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. Guilford Press.

33.

Hayes

R. A.

Carr

C. T.

Wohn

D. Y.

(2016). One click, many meanings: Interpreting paralinguistic digital affordances in social media. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 60(1), 171–187. https://doi.org/10.1080/08838151.2015.1127248

34.

Hendrickse

Arpan

L. M.

Clayton

R. B.

Ridgway

J. L.

(2017). Instagram and college women’s body image: Investigating the roles of appearance-related comparisons and intrasexual competition. Computers in Human Behavior, 74, 92–100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.04.027

35.

Holland

Tiggemann

(2016). A systematic review of the impact of the use of social networking sites on body image and disordered eating outcomes. Body Image, 17, 100–110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2016.02.008

36.

Hum

N. J.

Chamberlin

P. E.

Hambright

B. L.

Portwood

A. C.

Schat

A. C.

Bevan

J. L.

(2011). A picture is worth a thousand words: A content analysis of Facebook profile photographs. Computers in Human Behavior, 27, 1828–1833. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2011.04.003

37.

Jackson

C. A.

Luchner

A. F.

(2018). Self-presentation mediates the relationship between self-criticism and emotional response to Instagram feedback. Personality and Individual Differences, 133, 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2017.04.052

38.

Kim

Lee

J. E. R.

(2011). The Facebook paths to happiness: Effects of the number of Facebook friends and self-presentation on subjective well-being. CyberPsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 14, 359–364. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2010.0374

39.

Lang

Barton

(2015). Just untag it: Exploring the management of undesirable Facebook photos. Computers in Human Behavior, 43, 147–155. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.10.051

40.

Marwick

(2013). Status update: Celebrity, publicity, and selfbranding in Web 2.0. Yale University Press.

41.

Marwick

A. E.

boyd

(2011). I tweet honestly, I tweet passionately: Twitter users, context collapse, and the imagined audience. New Media & Society, 13(1), 114–133. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444810365313

42.

Meeus

Beullens

Eggermont

(2019). Like me (please?): Connecting online self-presentation to pre-and early adolescents’ self-esteem. New Media & Society, 21(11–12), 2386–2403. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444819847447

43.

Mendelson

A. L.

Papacharissi

(2010). Look at us: Collective narcissism in college student Facebook photo galleries. In Papacharissi

(Ed.), The networked self: Identity, community and culture on social network sites (pp. 251–273). Routledge.

44.

Michikyan

Dennis

Subrahmanyam

(2015). Can you guess who I am? Real, ideal, and false self-presentation on Facebook among emerging adults. Emerging Adulthood, 3, 55–64. https://doi.org/10.1177/2167696814532442

45.

Michikyan

Subrahmanyam

Dennis

(2014). Can you tell who I am? Neuroticism, extraversion, and online self-presentation among young adults. Computers in Human Behavior, 33, 179–183. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.01.010

46.

Orben

Przybylski

A. K.

Blakemore

S. J.

Kievit

R. A.

(2022). Windows of developmental sensitivity to social media. Nature Communications, 13, 1649. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-022-29296-3

47.

Orive

(1984). Group similarity, public self-awareness, and opinion extremity: A social projection explanation of deindividuation effects. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47(4), 727–737. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.47.4.727

48.

Pempek

T. A.

Yermolayeva

Y. A.

Calvert

S. L.

(2009). College students’ social networking experiences on Facebook. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 30, 227–238. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appdev.2008.12.010

49.

Quatman

Watson

C. M.

(2001). Gender differences in adolescent self-esteem: An exploration of domains. The Journal of Genetic Psychology, 162(1), 93–117. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221320109597883

50.

Quinn

Oldmeadow

J. A.

(2013). Is the igeneration a ‘we’generation? Social networking use among 9-to 13-year-olds and belonging. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 31(1), 136–142. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjdp.12007

51.

Rui

Stefanone

M. A.

(2013). Strategic self-presentation online: A cross-cultural study. Computers in Human Behavior, 29, 110–118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2012.07.022

52.

Salomon

Brown

C. S.

(2019). The selfie generation: Examining the relationship between social media use and early adolescent body image. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 39, 539–560. https://doi.org/10.1177/0272431618770809

53.

Schreurs

Vandenbosch

(2021). The development and validation of measurement instruments to address interactions with positive social media content. Media Psychology, 25(2), 262–289. https://doi.org/10.1080/15213269.2021.1925561

54.

Seidman

(2013). Self-presentation and belonging on Facebook: How personality influences social media use and motivations. Personality and Individual Differences, 54, 402–407. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2012.10.009

55.

Selman

(1980). The growth of interpersonal understanding. Academic Press.

56.

Siibak

(2009). Constructing the self through the photo selection—Visual impression management on social networking websites. Cyberpsychology: Journal of Psychosocial Research on Cyberspace, 3(1), Article 1.

57.

Tatlow-Golden

Guerin

(2017). Who I am: The meaning of early adolescents’ most valued activities and relationships, and implications for self-concept research. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 37(2), 236–266. https://doi.org/10.1177/0272431615599064

58.

Toma

C. L.

Hancock

J. T.

(2013). Self-affirmation underlies Facebook use. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 39(3), 321–331. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167212474694

59.

Toma

C. L.

Hancock

J. T.

Ellison

N. B.

(2008). Separating fact from fiction: An examination of deceptive self-presentation in online dating profiles. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34, 1023–1036. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167208318067

60.

Valkenburg

P. M.

(2017). Understanding self-effects in social media. Human Communication Research, 43, 477–490. https://doi.org/10.1111/hcre.12113

61.

Vogel

E. A.

Rose

J. P.

(2016). Self-reflection and interpersonal connection: Making the most of self-presentation on social media. Translational Issues in Psychological Science, 2, 294–302. https://doi.org/10.1037/tps0000076

62.

Walther

J. B.

Liang

Y. J.

DeAndrea

D. C.

Tong

S. T.

Carr

C. T.

Spottswood

E. L.

Amichai-Hamburger

(2011). The effect of feedback on identity shift in computer-mediated communication. Media Psychology, 14, 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1080/15213269.2010.547832

63.

Walther

J. B.

Parks

M. R.

(2002). Cues filtered out, cues filtered in: Computer-mediated communication and relationships. In Knapp

M. L.

Daly

J. A.

(Eds.), Handbook of interpersonal communication (3rd ed., pp. 529–563). SAGE.

64.

Walther

J. B.

Van Der Heide

Hamel

L. M.

Shulman

H. C.

(2009). Self-generated versus other-generated statements and impressions in computer-mediated communication: A test of warranting theory using Facebook. Communication Research, 36(2), 229–253. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650208330251

65.

Wohn

D. Y.

Carr

C. T.

Hayes

R. A.

(2016). How affective is a “Like”?: The effect of paralinguistic digital affordances on perceived social support. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 19(9), 562–566. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2016.0162

66.

Wood

K. C.

Becker

J. A.

Thompson

J. K.

(1996). Body image dissatisfaction in preadolescent children. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 17, 85–100. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0193-3973(96)90007-6