Body-Image Control

Body-Image Control Affects

Digital photo editing, or Photoshop, is a frequently controversial online subject. Roughly nine in ten people using the internet also use social media, so chances are likely to witness an edited image or related content (Kepios, n.d.). With or without Photoshop, social media has long celebrated the thin ideal and encourages conscious body-image control and photo investment; in the sense of being aware of one's photo quality, how one looks in it, and how it appears online (Gioia et al., 2020). Links between extended social media use, higher body-image dissatisfaction are commonly found, and disordered (Saul et al.red eating, 2022). A study on female undergraduate students indicated that viewing edited photos increases the tendency to self-photoshop (Wolfe & Yakabovits, 2022). Viewing the edited content had little impact on participants' recorded temperament. However, manipulating one's selfies, Wolfe & Yakabovits (2022) relay, decreased perceived personal attractiveness and worsened participants' moods. Prevalent exposure to highly edited versions of other individuals normalizes extreme alteration of one's pictures and allocates increasingly impossible standards. Editing may create adverse effects because its goal is to look for flaws to rid of, effectively making one feel uglier than they are Wolfe & Yakabovits (2022). While it fosters a safety net and the illusion of control, photoshopping oneself may make one's insecurities more perceivably significant and prevalent in and outside the app. Body-control tendencies can become reaffirmed when deliberately crafted posts receive likes and comments, validating the incorrect mindset that the edited version is preferable (Wolfe & Yakabovits, 2022). Photo manipulation and editing are skills increasing in general knowledge, use, and relevance. However, they likely unconsciously destroy self-perception and what qualifies as "normal."

Adolescents and young adults are among the top social media users, typically engaged in building their social networks and personal identities. (Gioia et al., 2020). Celebrities, brands, and magazines are renowned for utilizing Photoshop to improve their image or product, receiving criticisms for the impossible standards set for youth and hilariously apparent Photoshop errors (Staff, 2022c). An article by the New York Times (Wilson, 2009) shares this criticism toward commercial Photoshop and cites several celebrities, such as Kate Winslet, where severe editing occurred without consent. Winslet appeared in the magazine drastically thinner than in actuality, adhering to a standard that even the actress could not physically obtain. Currently, the actress has a "no photoshop" clause in her contract with L'Oréal, and multiple celebrities have followed suit in their brand contracts (Wilson, 2009). With malleable brains and a need to belong, adolescents often find themselves compared to favorable people, body types, and accounts, unaware of how much a photo may be altered. Adolescents' self-concept is typically still building or recently established; researchers like Gioia et al. (2020) advance that they may likely engage in body image control and photo investment practices. Reviewing one's photos repeatedly, having a set position for pictures, having a "bad" side, editing oneself more thin or muscular, and agonizing over when to post are varying examples of body image control and photo investment practices.

Previous studies suggest that individuals who experience a differentiation between their body and their culture's physical standards likely experience shame toward themselves and their appearance, known as body shame (Gioia et al., 2020). A variation of impact on gender is suggested as adolescent males from an Italian-based study by Gioia et al. (2020) reported a higher tendency to gear their online appearance toward improving their sexual attractiveness, while the females were more likely to execute body-image control over their posts by cultivating their best overall image. Following common belief, female adolescent participants reported more significant body shame than the tested males and a likelihood of problematically using social media to regulate emotions through their online persona (Gioia et al. (2020). However, social media use as a coping mechanism was reported in boys who also experienced body shame and were found likely to avoid the photo aspects of social media. As encountered by Wolfe & Yakabovits (2022), spending time manipulating photos of oneself intensifies already perceived flaws or constructs previously nonexistent ones worsening their mental state. While further research is required to speculate causation sufficiently, body shame is highly linked to self-objectification. Potentially because of the misplaced importance of physical appearance and disregard for general well-being. However, there is a possibility that social media facilitates self-objectification in adolescents already experiencing the sentiment and provides an avenue for expression and perceived control (Gioia et al., 2020). Regardless, photo manipulation is widely normalized, so education surrounding what natural bodies look like and discussions regarding hurtful societal expectations and why they are unattainable are essential.

To combat the effects of over-editing, many brands now opt to use more realistically representative models and apply minimal retouching (Schirmer et al., 2018). Globally, some countries have passed regulations on Photoshop by restricting its use commercially, aiming to lower misled consumers; a similar act was suggested and failed in the United States (Schirmer et al., 2018). In countries like France, the disclosure of manipulated photos for commercial use is among the newly implemented rules. While helpful in its design, the extent to which this may assist the public needs to be clarified and more research be done. Schirmoremer et al. (2018) used an all-women participant selection from Germany to study and gain insight into how women perceive the ads with disclosure, as they are often the targets of manipulated ads. Their results indicate that women commonly expect ads to have Photoshop and that the disclosure's content would likely not be surprising; however, the ads with editing disclosure increased the women's intent to purchase (Schirmer et al., 2018). Additionally, the women disclosed they would prefer ads without Photoshop, whether or not there was a disclosure (Schirmer et al., 2018). It is worth noting that minor manipulation, such as the background or lighting, did not affect this; instead, the lengthening, enlarging, or shrinking of various limbs and organs was their primary concern (Schirmer et al., 2018). There is some argument still toward photoshopping and editing models as "they are supposed to be unattainable" and "magazines (or commercials) make them into art." However, although young women reported a tendency to expect beautiful models, thinness was not a factor (Schirmer et al., 2018). The generalizability of the disclosure findings was limited to the ones presented; however, there are multiple implications for consumers wanting brands to focus on the un-edited and genuine version of people. And overall, meaningful implications for the societal necessity of unedited individuals and a healthy body image.

Made by Elizabeth Russell and Mikayla Henesy, undergraduates at Shippensburg University. Made for the Psychology of Computers and the Internet.

Page updated

Google Sites

Report abuse