Body Image 46 (2023) 356–371

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Body Image
journal homepage: www.journals.elsevier.com/body-image

Are humorous or distractor images more effective than self-compassion

messages for combatting the negative body image consequences of social
media? An experimental test of possible micro-intervention stimuli
Bryony Davies *, 1, Mark Turner 2, Julie Udell 3
Department of Psychology, King Henry Building, University of Portsmouth, Portsmouth PO1 2DY, United Kingdom

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Appearance-focused images on social media are thought to be particularly detrimental for body image. However,
Instagram social media sites can also be used to encourage positive health behaviours. Three linked experiments with 620
Self-compassion Instagram users explored the protective capabilities of appearance-related self-compassion and appearance-
Humour
related humorous messages for women’s body image during Instagram use. Using simulated Instagram
Micro-intervention
Appearance Comparison
browsing tasks, participants were exposed to a set of fitspiration Instagram posts mixed with either self-
Body Dissatisfaction compassion or humorous body image messages, or appearance-neutral images. Results indicated that
appearance-related self-compassion and humorous messages were not more effective at protecting against
negative appearance and life satisfaction outcomes than appearance-neutral images, and did not influence
appearance comparison (Experiment 1), even when the personal relevance to participants’ health was reinforced
through experimental manipulation (Experiment 2). Rather, the presence of any image which did not contain
pictures of women, regardless of image content, led to improved body image outcomes compared to exposure to
fitspiration images alone (Experiment 3). Interpersonal factors such as the similarity of a female target’s
appearance also influenced the nature of comparisons made. The study highlights the importance of diluting
appearance-focused content with other social media images in ongoing research practice and for user well-being.

1. Introduction
Social media platforms are a popular, ubiquitous and accessible form
of communication which have been widely embraced by the public,
providing opportunities for users to seek out information, share opin­
ions, and learn from others across a broad range of formats. However,
the provision of reliable health communication in this context is often
varied (Moorhead et al., 2013) and an effective strategy is yet to exist,
which exploits the influence of social media in a positive way, to
counteract the impact of pervasive appearance ideals (Tiggemann,
2022). Social media use has been linked to body image disturbance,
particularly among younger users (e.g. Saiphoo & Vahedi, 2019), with
the viewing of images depicting idealised appearance thought to be
particularly detrimental to body image (de Valle et al., 2021). Browsing
the social media profiles of other users has also been associated with
poorer psychological well-being (e.g. Burnell et al., 2020), whilst tem­
porary periods of abstinence from social media can improve mood and
life satisfaction (Fioravanti et al., 2020). Despite the negative conse­
quences of use, some authors have identified the ‘immense potential’ of
social media for disseminating health-related information and encour­
aging positive health behaviours (e.g. Maher et al., 2014, p. 1). How­
ever, more research is needed to understand how social media site
usage, in its many forms, might specifically be adapted to better protect
body image online.
Instagram is a social media platform where users primarily share
photos and videos. Due to its emphasis on visual image sharing, Insta­
gram is thought to be one of the most harmful platforms and has been
associated with greater rates of increased appearance comparison and
decreased body satisfaction compared to Facebook (Engeln et al., 2020).
Engagement with appearance-focused content on Instagram in

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: Bryony.Davies@port.ac.uk (B. Davies).
1
Orcid: 0000-0002-3225-4940
2
Orcid: 0000-0001-9072-9708
3
Orcid: 0000-0003-0427-9216

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2023.07.003
Received 1 November 2022; Received in revised form 3 July 2023; Accepted 7 July 2023
Available online 18 July 2023
1740-1445/© 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
B. Davies et al.
particular, rather than more general use has been associated with
negative body image outcomes (Cohen et al., 2017), with exposure to
images of attractive peers and celebrities being detrimental to mood and
body satisfaction (Brown & Tiggemann, 2016). Instagram has also
become associated with the spread of different appearance trends. One
such trend, known as fitspiration, consists of idealised images of thin and
toned women, which aim to encourage exercise and healthy lifestyles,
often for appearance-focused reasons (Tiggemann & Zaccardo, 2018).
Exposure to fitspiration content is known to increase body dissatisfac­
tion and negative mood among women (Prichard et al., 2020; Tigge­
mann & Zaccardo, 2015). In previous research, the negative effects of
exposure to appearance-focused Instagram content have often been
identified through experimental comparison with exposure to
appearance-neutral images that demonstrate no negative impact on
body image outcomes (de Valle et al., 2021). Such appearance-neutral
images have included travel images (e.g. Brown & Tiggemann, 2016),
architecture or landscapes (e.g. Nelson et al., 2022), and interior design
images (e.g. Slater et al., 2017). However, such studies are not able to
show how body image outcomes might be improved.
1.1. Countering negative body image effects on social media
One approach that has been tested for protecting women’s body
image from exposure to ideal images is the use of digital disclaimer
messages. These seek to indicate the edited or unrealistic nature of the
physical appearance of media models as a means of highlighting their
inappropriateness as a comparison target. However, based on results
from their systematic review, McComb and Mills (2020) suggest that
overall, disclaimers had no positive effect on body image outcomes.
Moreover, disclaimers which detail how a model’s appearance has been
digitally altered, or included warnings of potential harm, can actually
lead to increases in body dissatisfaction. This may be because dis­
claimers do not reduce the tendency to make appearance comparisons
(Bury et al., 2016), whilst evidence from eye tracking studies suggests
that the presence of disclaimers may even act to direct participants’
attention to the model’s body to a greater extent (Tiggemann et al.,
2019a).
Some studies have explored whether messages, in the form of ‘self-
disclaimers’ communicated via image captions (e.g. ‘not real life – took
over 100 images trying to look good’) are more persuasive when origi­
nating from the individual in the image (Fardouly & Holland, 2018).
However, exposure to idealised Instagram images was found to increase
body dissatisfaction regardless of the presence or absence of a
self-disclaimer label. Self-disclaimers also do not lead to reduced
appearance comparisons with the person in the image or lead to images
being seen as less realistic (Livingston et al., 2020). Disclaimer messages
in the form of ‘reality check’ comments made by other users which call
out idealised Instagram posts for being fake or unrealistic have been
shown to reduce body dissatisfaction compared to positive appearance
appraisal comments, but do not effect appearance comparisons (Tigge­
mann & Velissaris, 2020). Taken together, current research suggests that
the effectiveness of disclaimer labels is sensitive to who authors the
message; disclaimers are less effective and seen as more insincere when
produced by the same person who is believed to have edited the image.
However, peer-messages which identify images as inauthentic may be
more effective at protecting body image.
Other studies have examined the impact of different types of social
media post. For example, Fioravanti et al. (2021) investigated the effects
of following either fitspiration, body positive or appearance-neutral
content over 28 days. They found that daily exposure to body positive
content led to increased body satisfaction and positive mood, compared
to exposure to fitspiration content. However, exposure to both types of
content led to increased appearance comparison. They also found that
participants who viewed appearance-neutral content (e.g. travel/nature
images) experienced increases in body satisfaction and positive mood,
suggesting that such posts could hold some value for reducing negative
357
Body Image 46 (2023) 356–371
body image outcomes online, although it was not clear why this might
be the case. More recently, the benefit of interacting with body positive
and appearance-neutral content has been replicated on Facebook. Far­
douly et al. (2023) exposed participants to either body positive or
interesting science/culture content via Facebook groups, over a
two-week period. They found that both body positive and
appearance-neutral content was associated with decreased body
dissatisfaction, but that only body positive content was associated with
decreased reports of appearance comparison. The authors speculated
that the impact of appearance-neutral content might encourage users to
focus on things not related to appearance or reduce the salience of
appearance-focused content on Facebook.
An alternative theoretical explanation for the efficacy of different
types of content for protecting against the negative impacts of social
media, are their links to different mechanisms of coping. Both self-
compassion and humour are known emotion-focused and avoidant
strategies, respectively, for coping with negative experiences (Allen &
Leary, 2010; Plester, 2009) and have been linked to coping via social
media (Cauberghe et al., 2021; Keyte et al., 2021). Slater et al. (2017)
were amongst the first to note the popularity of self-compassion themes
on Instagram, where in 2017 the search ‘#selfcompassion’ yielded 60,
000 results. In the intervening years, this trend has continued with, as of
2023, ‘#selfcompassion’ yielding over 1.5 million results. By compari­
son, humour has also come to hold an important place on social media,
for example through the use of memes which provide a foundation for
circulating ideas, and influencing and reflecting discourse within society
(Miltner, 2018). Memes are images, videos or text which are shared
peer-to-peer, circulated widely and transformed online by multiple users
(Shifman, 2013), with the humorous nature of their content being the
key driver behind their circulation. Such humour is now widespread on
Instagram where, to date, a simple search for ‘#funnymemes’ yields over
76 million results. While researchers are beginning to gain insight into
how such trends may be linked to coping in some areas (e.g. Akram &
Drabble, 2022; Myrick et al., 2022), further research is needed to un­
derstand how memes may be used to protect women against negative
body image outcomes experienced through social media.
1.1.1. Self-compassion and body image
Self-compassion involves replacing self-critical tendencies with un­
derstanding, and the acceptance of flaws as being part of human nature
(Neff, 2011). Evidence has suggested that interventions designed to
encourage self-compassion can be effective at protecting body image,
and can help women cope with the negative impact of
appearance-focused images. Moffitt et al. (2018) found that the negative
impact of exposure to thin-ideal images could be lessened by women
engaging in writing tasks involving expressing kindness towards their
own appearances. The benefit of self-compassion on social media has
been demonstrated in studies where self-compassion messages posted
alongside idealised appearance images have been found to improve
body image outcomes for women (Barron et al., 2021; Slater et al.,
2017), although it is less clear whether such messages also reduce the
tendency to make appearance comparisons.
Content alleging to promote body positivity has become increasingly
popular on social media, with several different forms of expression un­
derlying the concept (Darwin & Miller, 2021). Themes that have been
identified in body positive content on Instagram include the promotion
of self-love, the acceptance of different body types, and an appreciation
for health and gratitude for the body’s capabilities rather than focusing
on appearance (Cohen et al., 2019). However, evidence of the impact of
body positivity on body image outcomes appears mixed. Davies et al.
(2020) found that body positive captions encouraging self-acceptance of
appearance were associated with improved weight-esteem compared to
captions encouraging the improvement of personal fitness, when posted
alongside images of thin and toned women. In contrast, Tiggemann et al.
(2020) found body positive captions had no overall effect on body
dissatisfaction after viewing images of average-sized and thin models,
B. Davies et al.
compared to the same images with no captions. More recently, Legault
and Sago (2022) have demonstrated that messages which pressured
women to feel body positive (e.g. ‘you must accept your body’) may be
more detrimental to body image outcomes, than messages which
emphasised personal agency (e.g. ‘you are the author of you own
happiness’) or acceptance from others in the evaluation of appearance
(e.g. ‘there are lots of people out there who appreciate you just the way
you are’). It follows that not all forms of ostensibly supportive body
image messages may help to reduce the negative effects of social media
on body image, and that the manner through which communications
express positivity or specifically focus on appearance may be critical in
determining their effectiveness.
1.1.2. Humour and body image
Some research has highlighted the possible utility of humour for
counteracting the effects of appearance-focused images. Specifically,
Slater et al. (2019) found that the negative impact of idealised celebrity
images was reduced when they were presented alongside parody images
which mimicked the original source. The authors suggest that humorous
content designed to critique unrealistic appearance standards may hold
value for improving body image outcomes online. Despite this, the use of
parody for comic effect may be limited in its practical application, since
this specific form of imitation requires user knowledge or reference to
original source being parodied to be effective.
The ability of other forms of humour to protect body image outcomes
online is not yet known. However, the benefit of humour has been evi­
denced in broader well-being research, where humour interventions
have successfully led to improvements in emotional well-being (Craw­
ford & Caltabiano, 2011). Humour can be used by women to reject
traditional female stereotypes and roles (Case & Lippard, 2009), and as a
way of allowing audiences to contest accepted social hierarchies and
behaviours (Amarasingam, 2010). Satirical humour can also be used to
challenge unrealistic beliefs by reflecting their absurdity (Barreca,
1988). It follows that humour may offer a possible strategy for pro­
moting the notion that appearance ideals on social media are unrealistic,
and for discouraging appearance comparison. As a popular form of hu­
morous online content, memes are known to spread effectively when
audiences emotionally resonate with them (Miltner, 2014), and the use
of memes has been shown to increase interest in internet campaigns (e.g.
Lenda et al., 2020). Memes could, therefore, provide a suitable vehicle
through which messages protective of body image could be shared.
Previous authors have emphasised the importance of health com­
munications which can be targeted to the specific audiences, are tailored
to suit specific means of dissemination (Klassen et al., 2018) and harness
salient cultural practices to encourage engagement (Kostygina et al.,
2020). It may therefore be expected that health communications which
are congruent with the typical form of messages seen on social media
platforms, such as Instagram, and offer some level of personal relevance
may be more effective at producing attitudinal or behavioural change
(Schmid et al., 2008). Messages are known to be processed more care­
fully and thought to be more persuasive when they are perceived as
being more personally relevant (Petty et al., 1983). It may therefore be
expected that humorous messages about body image and appearance,
which are relatable to participants and delivered in a format that is
familiar and relevant, may provide an effective means of reducing body
image concern.
1.2. Social comparison and other forms of appraisal
A further factor that is important to consider when attempting to
address the negative impact of social media on body image is that of
social comparison. The tendency to compare ourselves to others is well-
established as a predictor of body dissatisfaction (Myers & Crowther,
2009). It follows that an intervention which works effectively to
discourage the occurrence of social comparisons will be more effective
at protecting body image. However, the occurrence of
358
Body Image 46 (2023) 356–371
appearance-focused social comparison is thought to be very difficult to
change, partly because they tend to occur spontaneously, and partly
because women knowingly choose to compare themselves to other
attractive women, since they represent the standards by which they
expect themselves to be judged (Tiggemann, 2022). The tendency of
women to assess their level of attractiveness relative to others has long
been recognised (Leahey et al., 2007), with ‘upward’ comparisons to­
wards targets who are perceived to have superior attributes being the
most common (Fardouly et al., 2017). The emotional outcome of up­
ward comparisons is thought to depend on whether an individual as­
similates or contrasts their own appearance with a target. For example, a
perception of similarity between the individual and an attractive target
can lead the individual to develop more positive self-evaluations of their
own appearance through association (Mussweiler, 2001; Kang & Liu,
2019). If the upward comparison target’s status is also seen by the in­
dividual as being personally achievable, then upward comparisons can
create positive feelings of inspiration and hope (Lockwood & Kunda,
1997). In this manner, it has been argued that ‘benign envy’ (Meier &
Schäfer, 2018) towards a comparison target on social media who is
believed to deserve their status, can motivate positive change in other
users. The nature of interpersonal appraisals including perceived simi­
larity to a target and the achievability of the target’s appearance may
therefore be expected to influence how appearance comparisons impact
women online, beyond the simple consideration of whether or not
comparisons to a target are made. While there is some evidence of the
role of interpersonal appraisals on social media (e.g. Kang & Liu, 2019),
more experimental research is needed to explore how they impact body
image outcomes in response to appearance-focused images.
1.3. The current study
Currently, no clear intervention strategy exists for protecting female
body image during exposure to idealised appearance images on social
media. However, popular online trends which link to mechanisms of
coping, for example self-compassion and humour, may provide insight
into how digital messages could be used to protect body image online. At
present, there are a number of gaps in the literature. Firstly, previous
studies have included an array of generalised self-compassion state­
ments (e.g. about the importance of kindness and understanding) with
more directive statements about the body, such that the specific utility
of appearance-related, self-compassion (ARSC) messages cannot be
easily determined. Secondly, while a prominent trend on social media
and an important mechanism for coping, the utility of humour for pro­
tecting body image online is relatively unexamined. Research is yet to
fully consider the impact of humorous messages on body dissatisfaction,
and the application of satirical themes to critique accepted appearance
norms. Finally, we believe the examination of social comparison in
relation to idealised images has generally overlooked the importance of
interpersonal appraisals such as appearance achievability or the desire
to look like a comparison target, beyond simple consideration of the
direction of comparison.
The current research was designed to address the identified gaps in
the literature through a series of three linked experiments. Experiment 1
explored the respective impact of ARSC and humorous body image
messages posted to Instagram on mood, appearance and life satisfaction
outcomes. To do this, participants completed a simulated Instagram
browsing task in one of three conditions. Each condition contained a mix
of fitspiration images with either images containing ARSC messages,
images containing humorous messages or appearance-neutral images.
To further explore the results of Experiment 1, Experiment 2 used an
induction task to influence the extent to which participants would feel
that their body image is negatively impacted by Instagram, and thereby
influence the perceived relevance of the ARSC or humorous messages to
the participants’ personal situation. This was done before completing a
simulated browsing task similar to that used in Experiment 1. Finally,
Experiment 3 confirmed the impact of the ARSC and humorous messages
B. Davies et al.
on Instagram, during a free browsing task on Instagram itself. This
browsing task exposed participants to one of 5 profiles which contained
fitspiration images on their own, or mixed with images containing ARSC
messages, humorous messages or one of two different types of
appearance-neutral images. In this final experiment, measures of inter­
personal appraisal were taken after the browsing task to explore how
this was related to the impact of appearance comparisons made by
participants. As a whole, the experiments provide a structured approach
to evaluating and comparing the effectiveness of different body image
health communications on Instagram that are aimed at reducing body
dissatisfaction and harmful appearance comparisons.
2. Experiment 1
A controlled browsing task was used to investigate the relative
effectiveness of two different types of body image message conditions
(ARSC or humorous) for combatting the negative impact of fitspiration
images, when compared to a third condition of appearance-neutral
Instagram images which contained no depictions of, or reference to,
physical appearance. All conditions contained a mix of fitspiration im­
ages with either images containing ARSC messages, images containing
humorous messages or appearance-neutral images. The inclusion of the
appearance-neutral condition was to ensure that any benefit from the
exposure to the body image messages could be attributed to the content
of the message and was not simply a result of diluting the fitspiration
themes with another type of Instagram content.
We hypothesised that body image messages depicting ARSC or hu­
morous themes would mitigate some of the negative impacts of fitspi­
ration images on mood, appearance and life satisfaction outcome
measures, compared to appearance-neutral images. Specifically, it was
expected that the outcome measures of negative mood, appearance
dissatisfaction and appearance comparison taken in the study would
decrease, and life satisfaction increase, after viewing images in the ARSC
or humorous conditions, whereas the opposite effect would occur in the
appearance-neutral image condition, resulting in a significant interac­
tion between image condition and time (Hypothesis 1).
2.1. Method
2.1.1. Participants
Participants were 241 women aged between 18 and 25 years old (M
= 22.04, SD = 2.13), who were purposively sampled based on being
active Instagram users. Participants were not filtered by ethnicity, but
were all current residents of the UK. A priori power analysis using
G*Power (Faul et al., 2007) revealed a minimum sample size of 120
would be required for the proposed experimental design (assuming a
significance level, α = 0.05, effect size of Cohen’s f = 0.25 and assumed
power of 80%).
2.1.2. Materials
2.1.2.1. Stimuli. All participants viewed a total of 32 Instagram posts in
one of three conditions. All conditions contained the same 24 fitspira­
tion images and were mixed with 8 images containing either ARSC
messages (ARSC condition), humorous messages (humorous condition)
or appearance-neutral images (appearance-neutral condition). This fol­
lowed a 4:1 ratio as used in previous research (Slater et al., 2017). All
conditions contained the same fitspiration images to test whether the
ARSC or humorous messages could help to reduce the negative effects of
exposure to appearance-focused images, compared to
appearance-neutral images.
Fitspiration images were sourced from Instagram searches using the
terms ‘fitspiration’ and ‘fitspo’. The images depicted young women with
thin and toned bodies either engaging in exercise, or posing in exercise
clothes or in exercise settings, with captions encouraging exercise and
359
Body Image 46 (2023) 356–371
fitness. An initial pool of 50 images presented as Instagram posts were
piloted with an independent sample of 30 raters to identify the best
examples of fitspiration (taking into account the combination of the
image and its accompanying caption), based on the definition ‘physical
fitness-based images of women in exercise clothes, designed to motivate and
inspire others to engage in exercise and healthy lifestyles’. The final images
included women from different ethnic backgrounds at a ratio of 18 white
to 6 other ethnicities, to approximately reflect the ethnic balance of the
UK population.
The 8 images containing ARSC messages encouraging body positivity
were sourced through Instagram and internet searches using terms such
as ‘appearance self-compassion’, ‘body acceptance’, ‘body positivity’. ARSC
images consisted of quotes with simple backgrounds (e.g. patterns), for
example ‘Speak to your body the way you would speak to your closest friend
about hers… with kindness and compassion’. An initial pool of 16 examples
were piloted to identify the 8 which best fit the definition ‘messages
encouraging kind appearance-related self-talk, the acceptance of physical
flaws as natural and commonplace, and the ability to recognise when to avoid
overidentification with appearance concerns’.
The 8 images containing humorous body image messages were
sourced through Instagram and internet searches using the terms ‘funny
body positivity’, ‘body image meme’. All images contained satirical quotes
with a supporting cartoon-like picture, for example ‘How to get a bikini
body: put a bikini on a body’. An initial pool of 16 were piloted to identify
the 8 which best fitted the definition ‘funny messages using humour, irony
or exaggeration to expose and criticise unrealistic appearance standards for
women (e.g. preference for thin and toned bodies)’.
Appearance-neutral images were sourced via Instagram and focused
on ‘interior design’ following similar previous studies (e.g. Slater et al.,
2017). These images depicted rooms or furniture only and contained no
people. The initial pool of 16 were piloted to identify the 8 which were
rated lowest for ‘containing themes relating to female body image or that
may inspire positive or negative emotion’.
All pilot testing was completed by a sample of 30 independent raters
from the target demographic. All images were presented within Insta­
gram posts. For all posts, author captions were included which rein­
forced the theme definitions for each image type and were consistent
with the specific theme. The captions were either adapted from real
Instagram posts or created to match the image. For example, for the
fitspiration posts captions were reflective of real fitspiration captions
online (e.g. ‘summer bodies are made in the winter’). For the ARSC and
humorous posts, captions were consistent with the specific theme (e.g.
‘embrace the flaws that make you human’ for ARSC). For appearance-
neutral posts, captions were reflective of the interior design theme (e.
g. ‘homes with charm’). Identifying characteristics including profile
names, likes and comments were removed from each post.
2.1.3. Measures
2.1.3.1. Sample characteristics. Participants self-reported their height
and weight, which was used to calculate the average BMI for the sample.
Participants also self-rated their own level of Instagram use. This was
done on a scale from 0 (Never use Instagram) to 100 (Constantly use
Instagram).
2.1.3.2. Pre- and post-exposure measures. Following previous studies (e.
g. Heinberg & Thompson, 1995; Brown & Tiggemann, 2016) visual
analogue scales (VAS) were used to measure state changes in outcome
variables at pre- and post-exposure. Using 100-point sliding scales, from
‘not at all’ (0) to ‘very much’ (100), participants rated how they felt right
now, in that moment, in response to each question prompt. VAS scales
are believed to be less prone to memory effects and therefore more
sensitive to brief experimental manipulations, and have been shown to
correlate well with more detailed psychological measurements of mood
and body dissatisfaction (Heinberg & Thompson, 1995).
B. Davies et al.
2.1.3.2.1. State mood. Five VAS mood indicators were used (angry,
happy, anxious, depressed, confident). The two positive mood adjectives
were reverse scored and the five ratings were combined into one mea­
sure of negative mood (from 0 to 100). The internal reliability for
negative mood in the current sample was acceptable at both pre-
exposure (α = 0.77) and post-exposure (α = 0.74).
2.1.3.2.2. State body and facial dissatisfaction. VAS scales were used
to measure 7 different aspects of physical appearance. Four items
assessed participants’ evaluation of their own bodies (body shape, body
weight, body fat, physical appearance) and 3 items assessed partici­
pants’ feelings regarding their facial appearance (facial attractiveness,
skin complexion, hair condition) following similar attributes to those
used in the Body Esteem Scale BES-R (Frost et al., 2018). VAS scales
were scored such that higher values indicated greater dissatisfaction
with the body or face. Both measures overall showed acceptable internal
reliability at pre-exposure (body dissatisfaction: α = 0.93; facial dissat­
isfaction α = 0.63) and post-exposure (body dissatisfaction: α = 0.95;
facial dissatisfaction α = 0.77).
2.1.3.2.3. State appearance comparison. State appearance compari­
son was measured using an adapted form of Tiggemann and McGill’s
(2004) State Appearance Comparison Scale. Participants rated how
much they thought about their appearance and how much they
compared their overall body, specific body parts and their facial
attractiveness to other women (from ‘not at all’ to ‘a lot’). At
pre-exposure, participants were asked to imagine the extent to which
they would compare themselves to others or think about appearance, if
they were using Instagram right now. At post-exposure, participants
answered based on the extent to which they had compared themselves to
others, or thought about appearance, during the browsing task. VAS
ratings were combined to provide a single measure of state appearance
comparison which showed acceptable internal reliability at
pre-exposure (α = 0.90) and post-exposure (α = 0.91).
2.1.3.2.4. State body shame. State body shame was assessed using
items adapted from the Body Image Shame Scale (BISS) (Duarte et al.,
2015) and the Body Shame sub-scale of the Objectified Body Con­
sciousness Scale (OBCS) (Dakanalis et al., 2017). The resulting scale
consisted of 6 statements (e.g. ‘It bothers me to see my body undressed’)
where participants indicated how true each statement was for them from
‘not true for me’ to ‘completely true for me’. This measure of state body
shame had acceptable internal reliability at pre-exposure (α = 0.88) and
post-exposure (α = 0.91).
2.1.3.2.5. State life satisfaction. State life satisfaction was assessed
using a modified version of the Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWLS;
Diener et al., 1984). The scale consists of 5 statements (e.g. ‘The con­
ditions of my life are excellent.’) where participants indicate their level
of agreement with each statement from ‘strongly disagree’ to ‘strongly
agree’. While typically used as a trait measure, the SWLS has shown
sufficient sensitivity during clinical interventions to detect change
(Pavot, Diener (1993)), and items on the scale are thought to be sensitive
to situational factors (Joshanloo, 2022). To increase the ability of the
scale to detect acute changes, participants were instructed to answer
scale items by thinking about how they feel ‘right now’, with responses
being measured on a 100-point sliding scale. The measure had accept­
able internal reliability at pre-exposure (α = 0.91) and post-exposure (α
= 0.94).
2.1.4. Procedure
Participants were recruited through the online participant service
Prolific, where it was advertised as an ‘Instagram browsing study’.
Reference was not specifically made to body image, but potential par­
ticipants were informed that they would see images of other women and
be asked to answer questions about their appearance, prior to consent­
ing to take part. Any participants who felt they would not be comfortable
doing this were advised not to take part. Participants received a small
financial reward for taking part, commensurate with other comparable
studies on the Prolific platform. The experiment was conducted online
360
Body Image 46 (2023) 356–371
using Qualtrics XM. After providing basic demographic information
participants completed all pre-exposure state measures. Participants
were then randomly assigned to one of the three experimental condi­
tions: (i) ARSC condition, (ii) humorous condition or (iii) appearance-
neutral condition. In each condition, the experimental images (ARSC,
humorous or appearance-neutral) were combined with the 24 fitspira­
tion images, in a random order. All images were presented within
Instagram posts and were shown as a slideshow. To ensure engagement
with the stimuli, each image was presented individually for a minimum
of 15 s before participants were able to move on to the next slide. Par­
ticipants were also instructed, prior to completing the browsing task,
that they would be given a short memory test regarding the images they
had seen at the end of the study. The time participants spent viewing
each image was also recorded, with the average for each image ranging
from 19 to 25 s, and an average of 23 min being taken to complete the
full study. After the browsing task and memory test, participants then
completed all measures for a second time to capture post-exposure
scores.
2.2. Results
2.2.1. Preliminary analysis
The average BMI for the sample was 24.40 (SD = 6.44) and their self-
rated level of Instagram use was high (M = 80.90; 95% CI 78.01–83.79).
Preliminary one-way ANOVAs confirmed that participants in the
three conditions did not differ in terms of age (F(2, 238) = 0.26, p =
.772, η2p = .002), BMI (F(2, 238) = 0.95, p = .390, η2p = .008), self-
reported Instagram use (F(2, 238) = 0.22, p = .805, η2p = .002), or the
total time spent observing the images (F(2, 238) = 0.46, p = .630, η2p =
.004).
Further preliminary one-way ANOVAs confirmed that there were no
baseline differences for negative mood (F(2, 238) = 0.58, p = .563, η2p =
.005), body dissatisfaction (F(2, 238) = 0.43, p = .651, η2p = .004), facial
dissatisfaction (F(2, 238) = 0.152, p = .859, η2p = .001), body shame (F
(2, 238) = 0.12, p = .887, η2p = .001), appearance comparison (F(2, 238)
= 0.37, p = .694, η2p = .003), or life satisfaction (F(2, 238) = 0.32, p =
.723, η2p = .003) across the three conditions.
2.2.2. Effect of time and image condition
Pre- and post-exposure scores for each of the six dependent measures
in each image condition are shown in Table 1. To test Hypothesis 1, a
series of 3 (image condition) × 2 (time) mixed design factorial ANOVAs
were conducted using the main dependent measures (negative mood,
body dissatisfaction, facial dissatisfaction, body shame, appearance
comparison and life satisfaction).
These tests showed no significant two-way interaction to occur be­
tween time and condition in the case of all six dependent measures:
negative mood (F(2, 238) = 2.97, p = .053, η2p = .024), body dissatis­
faction (F(2, 238) = 2.51, p = .084, η2p = .021), facial dissatisfaction (F(2,
238) = 1.76, p = .175, η2p = .015), body shame (F(2, 238) = 0.87, p =
.419, η2p = .007), appearance comparison (F(2, 238) = 1.96, p = .143, η2p
= .016), or life satisfaction (F(2, 238) = 2.80, p = .063, η2p = .023). This
suggests that any changes in pre- and post-exposure scores were
consistent across the different image conditions, for each measure. Hy­
pothesis 1 was therefore rejected.
With respect to the main effect of time, a significant increase in scores
was found from pre- to post-exposure with respect to: negative mood (F
(2, 238) = 14.14, p < .001, η2p = .056), body dissatisfaction (F(2, 238) =
38.12, p < .001, η2p = .138), facial dissatisfaction (F(2, 238) = 29.66, p <
.001, η2p = .111) and body shame (F(2, 238) = 8.30, p = .004, η2p = .034),
although no significant difference in appearance comparisons was
observed (F(2, 238) = 0.49, p = .487, η2p = .002). A significant decrease in
life satisfaction scores was also found from pre- to post-exposure (F(2,
238) = 11.86, p < .001, η2p = .047). With respect to image condition, no
significant main effects were found for any of the six measures at the p <
.05 level.
B. Davies et al. Body Image 46 (2023) 356–371

Table 1 relevant to them and to their goals (Petty & Cacioppo, 1986). Recog­
Experiment 1. Pre- and Post-exposure means (M) and standard deviations (SD) nition that an issue is personally important and meaningful to an in­
for all outcome variables (n = 241). dividual’s life, has been found to positively influence their attention to a
Outcome Variable Condition topic and motivation to engage with message content (Kruglanski et al.,
ARSC (n Humorous (n Appearance-
2006). Previous research has suggested that individuals who perceive
= 79) = 80) Neutral (n = 82) themselves to have greater personal involvement with a health topic,
will be more likely to be persuaded by messages about the topic, as they
Negative mood Pre M 40.33 38.66 (18.81) 41.97 (22.12)
(SD) (17.52) will recognise that the message has relevance to their situation (Brav­
Post M 43.51 44.96 (19.17) 42.83 (21.54) erman, 2008). This bias towards information that holds personal rele­
(SD) (19.55) vance being less likely to be ignored or disregarded, has been used to
Body Pre M 62.63 66.26 (27.56) 65.77 (27.03) enhance the processing of health communication (Kreuter & Wray,
dissatisfaction (SD) (25.64)
Post M 70.50 69.61 (28.65) 70.31 (27.32)
2003), and improve the effectiveness of advertisements on social media
(SD) (26.08) (Jung, 2017). Previous qualitative research has similarly shown that
Facial Pre M 56.39 54.55 (21.78) 55.93 (22.25) women express the need to feel personally involved with a health topic
dissatisfaction (SD) (21.57) in order to pay attention to, and connect with, a specific message about
Post M 62.85 57.17 (25.65) 60.47 (26.43)
that topic (Aldoory, 2001). This has been corroborated in a more recent
(SD) (23.96)
Body shame Pre M 49.64 51.02 (27.00) 51.68 (27.65) study where recognition that an issue is of personal relevance was linked
(SD) (26.05) to more effortful processing of message content (Dhanesh & Nekmat,
Post M 51.86 54.20 (27.37) 52.54 (28.23) 2019). Previous surveys of young social media users (e.g. Anderson &
(SD) (27.47) Jiang, 2018) have indicated that they mostly do not consider themselves
Appearance Pre M 63.44 66.79 (27.12) 65.50 (26.27)
comparison (SD) (20.72)
to be adversely affected by the medium, with only 26% reporting social
Post M 65.56 62.12 (30.51) 65.10 (27.12) media use has negatively impacted their esteem, fewer than 4%
(SD) (25.23) reporting that it made them feel ‘a lot’ worse. Taken together, this might
Life satisfaction Pre M 47.90 46.57 (25.90) 44.72 (25.88) suggest that while there is awareness of the psychological impacts of
(SD) (23.73)
social media, young people may not perceive themselves to be at great
Post M 43.63 46.14 (28.70) 42.60 (26.86)
(SD) (25.47) personal risk, which may have limited the impact of the body image
messages in Experiment 1.

2.3. Brief discussion 3. Experiment 2

The aim of Experiment 1 was to demonstrate that embedding ARSC
or humorous body image messages would be an effective means of off­
setting the negative impacts of exposure to fitspiration images, across a
range of mood, appearance and life satisfaction outcome measures.
Contrary to expectations, mean body dissatisfaction, facial dissatis­
faction, body shame and negative mood scores increased from pre- to
post-exposure, in all three image conditions, and no significant inter­
action was found between time and image condition. This suggests that
the inclusion of either ARSC or humorous message types in the simulated
browsing task failed to prevent the increases in appearance dissatisfac­
tion and negative mood typically found after viewing fitspiration im­
ages, nor did their impact differ markedly from the pattern of results
seen when appearance-neutral images were included. No significant
change in appearance comparison scores was observed from pre- to post-
exposure when aggregated across the different image conditions, and no
interaction was observed between image condition and pre/post
appearance comparison scores. As speculated by Tiggemann (2022) in
the case of digital disclaimers, it may be that the manipulations intro­
duced failed to combat the influence of fitspiration images because the
messages did not successfully reduce the number of appearance com­
parisons made by participants during the browsing tasks. It could be that
brief exposure to such messages is, therefore, not sufficient to reduce
practiced tendencies for comparing oneself to other users online or to
disrupt the negative impact of appearance ideal images.
Since each condition ensured participants spent a minimum of 15 s
viewing each post, it seems unlikely that the results could be attributed
to inattentiveness to the images. However, the findings might reflect a
lack of depth to the processing of body image messages, or that partic­
ipants may not have recognised that the ARSC or humorous messages
might be applicable to them. In other words, if participants did not
consider themselves to be negatively influenced by appearance-focused
images online, they may be unlikely to heed messages attempting to
protect women’s body image from such images. Previously, the role of
personal involvement with the topic of a message has been identified to
influence its persuasive capability (Petty et al., 1983). Personal
involvement refers to when an individual recognises that a message is
In Experiment 2, the level of personal involvement with body image
concern during Instagram use, and thus the relevance of body image
messages, was explored by introducing a manipulation to the same
design used in Experiment 1. This manipulation was intended to either
emphasise or minimise participants’ perception of personal involvement
with negative body image outcomes during Instagram use, and thus
increase or reduce how relevant the messages (ARSC or humorous)
would be to participants’ beliefs about their own body image.
We hypothesised that participants who were led to believe that their
risk of negative outcomes from Instagram use was high would experi­
ence greater negative mood, appearance and life satisfaction outcomes
after browsing fitspiration images, compared to participants who were
led to believe that their risk was low (Hypothesis 2a).
We further hypothesised a three-way interaction between image
condition, message relevance and time, whereby browsing body image
messages in the ARSC and humorous conditions would reduce the
negative impact of the fitspiration images to a greater extent for par­
ticipants who were led to believe that their risk of negative outcomes
from Instagram use was high, compared to participants who were led to
believe that their risk was low (Hypothesis 2b).
3.1. Method
3.1.1. Participants
Participants comprised a new sample of 189 females aged 18–25
years (M = 20.29, SD = 2.37), who were active Instagram users.
Approximately half of the participants were recruited through a
departmental participant pool scheme at our institution, with the
remaining participants being recruited through the participant recruit­
ment service Prolific. Participants were not filtered by ethnicity but were
all current residents of the UK. A priori power analysis using G*Power
(Faul et al., 2007) revealed a minimum sample size of 162 would be
required for the proposed experimental design (α = 0.05, effect size f =
0.25, assumed power of 80%).

361
B. Davies et al.
3.1.2. Materials and Measures
The Instagram images and outcome measures used in Experiment 2
exactly replicated those used in Experiment 1, with participants being
randomly allocated to one of the same three experimental conditions
(ARSC, humorous or appearance-neutral). Experimental images were
mixed with the same 24 fitspiration images in each condition at the
identical ratio (4:1) used in Experiment 1, with all images being dis­
played using the same simulated browsing task procedure.
3.1.3. Induction task
To influence the degree to which participants recognised themselves
to be at personal risk of negative body image outcomes when using
Instagram, and thus influence whether they considered the messages to
be relevant to their situation, an experimental manipulation was intro­
duced. Participants read one of two 250-word passages describing the
impact of Instagram use on young women in their age group in the UK.
The aim of the passage was to invoke participants’ awareness of the
negative consequences of social media and their own level of personal
risk, prior to completing the browsing task. Both passages provided
factual information about the impact Instagram can have on body
image. However, the specific wording of each paragraph was manipu­
lated either to emphasise (e.g. higher personal relevance, greater
severity of consequences) or minimise (e.g. lower personal relevance,
lower severity of consequences) participants’ personal risk of negative
body image from Instagram use. For example, one sentence read “9/10
women in your age group who use Instagram are unhappy with their bodies”
(high relevance) compared to “Some young women who use Instagram are
unhappy with their bodies” (low relevance). The information used in the
passages was informed by the #StatusofMind report (Royal Society for
Public Health, 2017).
A manipulation check was conducted to ensure the induction task
successfully manipulated the relevance of the messages. This assessed
participants’ perceived level of personal risk of body image harm from
Instagram use. Participants were asked to rate how susceptible to body
image harm they felt personally, answering on a 100-point sliding VAS
from ‘not at all susceptible’ to ‘extremely susceptible’. Time spent
completing the induction task was also measured to ensure that partic­
ipants paid adequate attention to the paragraph (average reading time,
around 1 m 30 s).
3.1.4. Procedure
The experiment was advertised using similar recruitment informa­
tion to Experiment 1. Those who participated via Prolific received a
small financial reward for taking part, whereas those who participated
via the institutional participant pool scheme received course credit
instead of a monetary reward. The experimental procedure replicated
that used in Experiment 1 exactly, with the exception that after
completing the pre-exposure measures, participants were randomly
allocated to the high (n = 95) or low (n = 94) relevance condition, and
read the appropriate paragraph of text relevant to their condition.
Following this, participants were then randomly allocated into one of
the three experimental conditions to complete the Instagram browsing
task, followed by the post-exposure measures, as in Experiment 1.
3.2. Results
3.2.1. Preliminary analysis
The mean BMI of the sample was 24.17 (SD = 5.25) and their self-
rated level of Instagram use was high (M = 74.47; 95% CI 71.22–77.72).
Preliminary one-way ANOVAs confirmed that participants did not
differ in terms of age (F(5, 183) = 0.57, p = .723, η2p = .015), BMI (F(5,
183) = 0.93, p = .462, η2p = .025), self-rated Instagram use (F(5, 183) =
1.16, p = .329, η2p = .031), or total time spent viewing the Instagram
posts (F(5, 183) = 0.93, p = .466, η2p = .025) as a function of their
allocation to the three image conditions or two relevance conditions.
Further preliminary one-way ANOVAs confirmed that there were no
362
Body Image 46 (2023) 356–371
baseline differences for negative mood (F(2, 186) = 0.94, p = .393, η2p =
.010), body dissatisfaction (F(2, 186) = 1.83, p = .163, η2p = .019), facial
dissatisfaction (F(2, 186) = 2.84, p = .061, η2p = .030), body shame (F(2,
186) = 1.17, p = .323, η2p = .012), appearance comparison (F(2, 186) =
1.15, p = .318, η2p = .012), or life satisfaction (F(2, 186) = 0.20, p = .816,
η2p = .002) across the three image conditions.
A one-way ANOVA confirmed that the induction task successfully
manipulated perceived personal relevance, whereby participants in the
high relevance condition (M = 56.73; SD = 26.13) considered them­
selves significantly more susceptible to body image harm on Instagram
(F(1, 187) = 8.63, p = .004, η2p = .044) after reading the passage
compared to participants in the low relevance condition (M = 45.86; SD
= 24.64).
Further preliminary checks confirmed that there were no baseline
differences between participants allocated to the high and low relevance
conditions with respect to negative mood (F(1, 187) = 0.20, p = .650, η2p
= .010), body dissatisfaction (F(1, 187) = 0.66, p = .420, η2p = .003),
facial dissatisfaction (F(1, 187) = 0.13, p = .716, η2p = .001), body shame
(F(1, 187) = 0.04, p = .843, η2p = .000), appearance comparison (F(1,
187) = 0.47, p = .492, η2p = .003), or life satisfaction (F(1, 187) = 1.73, p
= .191, η2p = .009).
3.2.2. Effect of time, image condition and perceived personal relevance
Pre- and post-exposure scores for each of the six dependent measures
in each image condition as a function of the personal relevance
manipulation are shown in Table 2. In order to test whether the effects of
the image condition on exposure outcome measures would be greater
when participants perceived their risk of negative outcomes from
Instagram use to be greater, a series of three-way mixed ANOVAs 3
(image condition) x 2 (relevance condition) x 2 (time) were conducted
on the six dependent measures.
With respect to Hypothesis 2a, no significant two-way interactions
were observed between time and the message relevance induction with
respect to all six dependent measures: negative mood (F(1, 183) = 2.32,
p = .129, η2p = .013), body dissatisfaction (F(1, 183) = 1.15, p = .286, η2p
= .006), facial dissatisfaction (F(1, 183) = 0.11, p = .736, η2p = .001),
body shame (F(1, 183) = 0.04, p = .840, η2p = .000), appearance com­
parison (F(1, 183) = 3.52, p = .062, η2p = .019), or life satisfaction (F(1,
183) = 1.38, p = .241, η2p = .007). This suggests that leading participants
to perceive their risk of negative outcomes from Instagram use to be
greater, did not influence changes in mood, appearance dissatisfaction,
appearance comparison or life satisfaction measures, any differently
from those who perceived their risk to be low. Therefore, Hypothesis 2a
was rejected.
With respect to Hypothesis 2b, no significant three-way interactions
were observed between image condition, message relevance and time,
with respect to all six dependent measures: negative mood (F(2, 183) =
1.24, p = .292, η2p = .013), body dissatisfaction (F(2, 183) = 0.65, p =
.525, η2p = .007), facial dissatisfaction (F(2, 183) = 0.05, p = .949, η2p =
.001), body shame (F(2, 183) = 0.58, p = .56, η2p = .006), appearance
comparison (F(2, 183) = 0.47, p = .626, η2p = .005), or life satisfaction (F
(2, 183) = 0.32, p = .728, η2p = .003). This suggests the impact of
browsing body image messages in the ARSC and humorous conditions
on pre- and post-exposure measures was not affected by the manipula­
tion of perceived risk of negative outcomes from Instagram use. There­
fore, Hypothesis 2b was rejected.
In addition, with respect to the three-way ANOVAs conducted, no
significant two-way interaction effects were observed between image
condition and time, or between image condition and message relevance,
at the p < .05 significance level. Furthermore, no significant main effects
of image condition or message relevance condition were observed at p <
.05.
With respect to the main effect of time, significant differences were
observed for 3 of the 6 outcome measures. Facial dissatisfaction signif­
icantly increased (F(1, 183) = 7.00, p = .009, η2p = .037) from pre- to
post-exposure, while appearance comparison significantly decreased (F
B. Davies et al. Body Image 46 (2023) 356–371

Table 2
Experiment 2. Pre- and Post-exposure means (M) and standard deviations (SD) for all outcome variables by image condition and relevance induction (n = 189).
Outcome Variable Condition

High relevance Low relevance

ARSC (n = Humorous (n = Appearance-Neutral (n = ARSC (n = Humorous (n = Appearance-Neutral (n =

33) 20) 42) 30) 41) 23)

Negative mood Pre M(SD) 46.87 (22.24) 39.49 (17.30) 38.13 (17.17) 38.15 (20.26) 42.68 (16.65) 38.30 (24.44)
Post M 46.22 (22.32) 42.75 (18.17) 42.55 (18.89) 38.30 (19.91) 42.85 (19.18) 36.62 (25.03)
(SD)

Body dissatisfaction Pre M(SD) 68.82 (26.63) 67.25 (25.77) 58.90 (25.95) 67.92 (27.22) 68.21 (21.36) 64.07 (27.43)
Post M 70.30 (27.07) 67.10 (24.73) 63.80 (24.27) 67.77 (27.92) 68.45 (23.46) 63.73 (29.93)
(SD)

Facial dissatisfaction Pre M(SD) 52.94 (22.63) 56.30 (21.56) 53.12 (23.04) 49.97 (20.27) 61.71 (23.39) 49.30 (22.72)
Post M 56.68 (24.69) 57.20 (26.12) 57.85 (24.78) 53.07 (25.36) 62.71 (23.23) 52.45 (23.42)
(SD)

Body shame Pre M(SD) 54.18 (24.25) 52.15 (30.18) 46.17 (26.24) 53.62 (29.87) 46.23 (23.94) 49.74 (27.28)
Post M 54.35 (24.18) 52.65 (29.51) 47.32 (27.65) 53.04 (30.17) 49.43 (24.14) 49.86 (27.42)
(SD)

Appearance Pre M(SD) 61.98 (25.18) 55.78 (24.92) 58.45 (27.80) 59.38 (25.45) 53.05 (24.35) 59.09 (25.87)
comparison Post M 60.20 (26.66) 56.41 (28.54) 57.59 (29.08) 52.75 (30.98) 50.90 (28.29) 48.12 (31.54)
(SD)

Life satisfaction Pre M(SD) 46.48 (22.16) 41.93 (21.42) 44.36 (22.37) 49.91 (20.45) 48.15 (22.18) 48.45 (24.56)
Post M 43.58 (23.42) 40.97 (23.33) 41.39 (22.87) 46.15 (23.36) 43.96 (23.13) 44.67 (30.13)
(SD)

(1, 183) = 5.28, p = .023, η2p = .028), and life satisfaction significantly
decreased (F(1, 183) = 19.92, p < .001, η2p = .098); from pre- to post-
exposure. No significant differences in negative mood (F(1, 183) =
1.06, p = .304, η2p = .006), body dissatisfaction (F(1, 183) = 0.97, p =
.325, η2p = .005) or body shame (F(1, 183) = 0.98, p = .325, η2p = .005)
were observed from pre- to post-exposure.
3.3. Brief discussion
The aim of Experiment 2 was to determine whether differences in the
6 mood, appearance and life satisfaction outcome variables would occur
between the three image conditions when participants felt body image
messages were more personally relevant to them. The perceived per­
sonal relevance of a health topic to an observer is thought to increase the
persuasiveness of health-related communication (Braverman, 2008;
Kreuter & Wray, 2003). However, contrary to our hypothesis, manipu­
lating the personal relevance of the messages did not impact on the
observed effectiveness of ARSC or humorous messages. This suggests
that, regardless of the apparent level of personal relevance or risk,
neither of these two body image message types appeared to influence the
impact of exposure to fitspiration images any differently than
appearance-neutral images. It can be concluded that ARSC and humor­
ous messages were, therefore, no more effective at counteracting the
negative influence of fitspiration images than appearance-neutral im­
ages, even when participants felt the potential severity of body image
harm from social media use was greater to them.
A further important observation was the absence of any interaction
between message relevance and time. This indicates that, contrary to our
hypothesis, participants who were led to believe that their risk of
negative outcomes from Instagram use was higher did not experience
greater negative outcomes after browsing fitspiration images, compared
to those who were led to believe their risk was lower. This could be
interpreted to suggest that with respect to body image, the experience of
dissatisfaction or shame regarding one’s appearance is not strongly
linked to the perception of being at risk. Interestingly, state appearance
comparison was found to decrease after image exposure compared to
before, regardless of the perceived personal relevance induction used.
This was contrary to previous research which has suggested that state
appearance comparison increases after viewing fitspiration images (e.g.
Jerónimo & Carraça, 2022). Since in Experiment 2, baseline ratings of
the main outcome measures were collected prior to reading the rele­
vance manipulation, it is likely that this text, in addition to the images,
combined to influence state appearance comparisons. More specifically,
it could be argued that reading any information drawing attention to the
likelihood of body image harm when viewing fitspiration images,
whether suggestive of high or low personal relevance, may serve to
reduce appearance comparisons. Whilst a ‘no information’ control group
was not used in Experiment 2, that would support a direct test of this
assumption, it should be noted that the observed trend in Experiment 2
was different to that seen in Experiment 1 where no relevance manip­
ulation was applied and no change in appearance comparisons was
found after viewing images. Subsequent research could therefore further
consider whether reading simple factual information about how Insta­
gram and appearance comparisons can be negative for young women,
might help to mitigate potential harmful body image effects.
Whereas Slater et al. (2017) found that self-compassion quotes about
self-love or kindness to the person could be effective at protecting ob­
servers from some negative impacts of fitspiration, the findings of Ex­
periments 1 and 2 suggest mood, appearance and life satisfaction
outcome measures either worsened or remained unchanged after
exposure to fitspiration images mixed with other message types used in
the current study, including ARSC messages. Whilst this should not be
taken to imply that viewing ARSC or humorous messages are harmful, it
does suggest that overall they had no positive effect on body
image-related outcomes. The difference in findings between these
studies might be attributed to the appearance-related nature of the
self-compassion messages used in the present study. As has been spec­
ulated by other authors (e.g. Tiggemann, 2022), body image messages,
no matter how well-intentioned, may still draw attention to different
aspects of appearance, and reinforce participants’ existing beliefs about
their own body image or the physical attractiveness of the women in the
fitspiration images. In this sense, it might be argued that any
appearance-related message (whether framed positively through
self-compassion or humour) which causes self-reflection on one’s own

363
B. Davies et al.
appearance may not have the expected effect of protecting body image.
Rather, it may be the distraction value of images which do not directly
show images of female physical appearance which may have greater
protective value. For example, Maddox (2021) reports that Instagram
users described seeking images of cute animals as a form of resistance
and rejection of typical social media appearance-focused content and as
a way of retaining some autonomy over dominant image trends. Pet
images were considered to make the platform more ‘habitable’ as a form
of opposition to the “faux-perfection, influencers, politics, and toxicity”
(p. 3338). Other research has also linked ‘cute’ animal pictures to pos­
itive emotional responses and carefulness (Sherman et al., 2009). Such
images present an interesting contradiction to fitspiration images that
focus on objectifying appearance features, or the guilt that may be
induced from messages surrounding issues of weight, exercise and diet
restraint (Tiggemann & Zaccardo, 2018).
4. Experiment 3
Experiments 1 and 2 concluded that ARSC and humorous messages
were no more effective at protecting against the negative impacts of
fitspiration images than appearance-neutral images, during controlled
browsing tasks. In Experiment 3, exposure to fitspiration images only
was compared to ‘mixed’ browsing of fitspiration images which were
combined with either ARSC, humorous, appearance-neutral or cute
animal images. The aim here was to explore whether diluting fitspira­
tion images with other types of image that do not contain images of
women, rather than the inclusion of body image messages per se, would
lead to reduced negative outcomes. The experiment also addresses
whether images which have been typically associated with positive
affect (i.e. images of cute animals) may serve to positively distract
participants from negative appearance themes. The impact of interper­
sonal appraisals concerning how participants position their own goals
and motivations with respect to the attainability of fitspiration is also
explored. In this experiment, participants were exposed to Instagram
images using a more naturalistic browsing task which involved access­
ing their own Instagram accounts to complete the browsing task within
Instagram itself (rather than via a slideshow of serially presented images
within Qualtrics as in Experiments 1 and 2). This was done to better
replicate everyday use of the platform.
We hypothesised that participants who browsed fitspiration images
only (mixed with no other images) would experience greater negative
mood, appearance and life satisfaction outcomes compared to partici­
pants who viewed fitspiration images embedded alongside other images
on Instagram (Hypothesis 3a).
We further hypothesised that participants who browsed fitspiration
images alongside positive distractor images depicting animal ‘cuteness’
would experience fewer negative outcomes, compared to participants
who viewed fitspiration images alongside body image (ARSC or hu­
morous) messages or appearance-neutral interior design images (Hy­
pothesis 3b).
Finally, we hypothesised that the specific nature of appraisals, made
by participants towards the women in the fitspiration images, would
influence how participants felt about their own appearance and their
appearance comparison tendency after completing the browsing task
(Hypothesis 3c).
4.1. Method
4.1.1. Participants
A further sample of 204 females, who were active Instagram users,
were recruited. Participants were not filtered by ethnicity but were all
current residents of the UK. A total of 14 participants were excluded
from the analysis based on the time taken to complete the browsing task
(< 1 min n = 6; > 10 min n = 4) or for failing the attention checks
(failing to correctly identify ≥75% of the images used in the experiment
during the memory test n = 4), leaving a total of 190 participants.
364
Body Image 46 (2023) 356–371
Participants were aged 18–25 years (M = 22.16, SD = 2.07). A priori
power analysis using G*Power (Faul et al., 2007) suggested a minimum
sample size of 150 would be required for the proposed experimental
design (α = 0.05, effect size f = 0.25, assumed power of 80%).
4.1.2. Materials
4.1.2.1. Stimuli. Five Instagram profiles were created for the purpose of
the experiment. Each profile contained the same 24 fitspiration images
from Experiment 1. One profile, the fitspiration only condition, con­
tained only these 24 images, while the remaining 4 profiles included 8
additional images which were dispersed amongst the fitspiration images
and served to dilute the fitspiration themes. The images were uploaded
as posts to each of the Instagram profiles in a random order. The profiles
were given generic names to associate them to the study, and partici­
pants were asked to browse the images as they would do while browsing
other Instagram feeds. Participants were informed that that all images
shown on the profile were real posts from the Instagram accounts of
different users, but that the profile names, likes and comments had been
removed. Participants were asked not to like or comment on any of the
posts.
Each of the five Instagram accounts defined a different experimental
condition. The 8 posts used for the ARSC condition, humorous condition
and appearance-neutral condition were identical to those used in
Experiment 1 (e.g. including identical author captions). A new condition
was introduced consisting of 8 images of cute animals which were
sourced through Instagram searches using terms such as ‘cute pets’. The 8
images were selected during pilot testing of 16 images based on the
perceived ‘cuteness’ of the animal in each image.
4.1.3. Measures
All pre- and post-exposure measures used in Experiment 1 were
replicated in the current experiment, with the inclusion of an additional
measure to explore appearance comparisons made during the browsing
tasks.
4.1.3.1. Appearance comparison: interpersonal appraisal. At post-
exposure, 6 additional questions about appearance comparison were
asked to explore the specific characteristics of comparisons made by
participants during the browsing task. The measures recorded how
similar participants perceived themselves to be to the female targets
they had seen in the fitspiration images, how achievable the target’s
appearance was and how much participants desired to look like the
targets. Each item was measured on a 100-point VAS from ‘not at all’ to
‘very much’. The direction of the appearance comparisons made with the
target’s body, face, and general lifestyle were also measured. Partici­
pants were asked to rate whether they considered their own appearance
and lifestyle to be better or worse than the target’s they had seen. These
ratings were taken on a 100-point scale from ‘worse’ (0) to ‘better’ (100),
with the mid-point labelled ‘about the same’ (50) and were made
collectively in response to all images seen.
4.1.3.2. Memory test. A post-exposure memory test was used to ensure
participants paid attention to the browsing task. Twelve sets of images
were created containing one image from the browsing task and another
image showing a similar theme, but that had not been included in the
browsing task. Participants were asked to identify which of the image
pairs (A or B) had been included in the browsing task. Following the
same ratio of images used in the browsing task (1:4), 8 image-pairs were
fitspiration images and 4 image-pairs were of non-fitspiration images (e.
g. ARSC), as relevant to the condition to which the participant had been
assigned.
4.1.4. Procedure
This experiment was advertised using the same procedure as
B. Davies et al.
Experiment 1, with all participants being recruited through the Prolific
online service and receiving a small financial payment for taking part.
The image browsing task took place within each participant’s own
Instagram account with their responses being recorded through the
Qualtrics XM online research platform. Participants first completed
consent, demographic and pre-exposure measures within the online
platform, before being randomly allocated to one of the five conditions
to complete their browsing task. Once allocated to a condition, partici­
pants were provided with instructions directing them to use their own
Instagram accounts to search for the named Instagram profile that was
unique to their condition. Participants were instructed to ‘browse all of
the images posted to this profile making sure to look at all of the posts. This
can be done in any order, spending as much or as little time on each image
and browsing up and down as you wish’. Participants spent on average 3
min and 34 s completing the browsing task. To ensure participants
engaged actively with the task, they were informed prior to taking part
that they would later be asked to complete a memory test regarding the
images they had seen. In addition, as part of the browsing task partici­
pants were asked to select their three favourite images they had seen on
the profile during the task and to send the links for these images, via
Instagram, to the Experimenter. Participants spent an average of 2 min
and 55 s completing this element of the task. After completing the
Instagram browsing task, participants were directed to return to the
Qualtrics platform in order to complete the remaining post-exposure
measures and memory test.
4.2. Results
4.2.1. Sample characteristics
Participants had a mean BMI of 24.54 (SD = 6.15) and self-rated their
use of Instagram to be high (M = 85.04; 95% CI 82.73–87.36). Pre­
liminary one-way ANOVAs confirmed that participants in the five con­
ditions did not differ in terms of their age (F(4, 185) = 1.32, p = .265, η2p
= .028), BMI (F(4, 185) = 1.47, p = .213, η2p = .031), self-reported
Instagram use (F(4, 185) = 0.42, p = .792, η2p = .009), or time spent
browsing the Instagram profile (F(4, 185) = 1.10, p = .357, η2p = .023).
4.2.2. The impact of diluting fitspiration images
To explore whether diluting the fitspiration images with other image
types during Instagram browsing would reduce the negative impact on
the measures taken, regardless of whether dilution came from body
image relevant messages (i.e. ARSC or humorous conditions) or other
distractor images (i.e. appearance-neutral interior design images or
images of cute animals), a series of one-way independent groups
ANOVAs were performed. For this experiment, change scores were
calculated for each of the 6 outcome variables, by subtracting the post-
exposure scores from the pre-exposure scores, and planned comparisons
were used to compare the change scores in the fitspiration only condi­
tion, to change scores observed in the remaining mixed conditions
(ARSC, humorous, appearance-neutral interior design, cute animals).
Since Experiment 1 and 2 had already demonstrated there was no
overall difference in the impact of ARSC, humorous or appearance-
neutral images on the outcome measures, relative to each other, the
rationale for this analysis was to test specifically whether diluting fit­
spiration images would lead to a different pattern of results compared to
exposure to fitspiration imagery alone. For the change scores, larger,
positive values indicated that the scores on the outcome measure had
reduced following exposure to the images.
Six planned orthogonal comparisons were made using the SPSS
LMatrix subcommand. For two of the planned comparisons, no signifi­
cant difference was observed between the fitspiration only condition
and the mixed conditions with respect to negative mood (F(1, 185) =
1.26, p = .263, η2p = .007) or appearance comparison (F(1, 185) = 3.77,
p = .054, η2p = .020).
Four planned comparisons revealed significant differences between
the fitspiration only condition and the mixed conditions with respect to
365
Body Image 46 (2023) 356–371
body dissatisfaction (F(1, 185) = 8.41, p = .004, η2p = .043), facial
dissatisfaction (F(1, 185) = 5.02, p = .026, η2p = .026), body shame (F(1,
185) = 12.63, p < .001, η2p = .064) and life satisfaction (F(1, 185) = 4.50,
p = .035, η2p = .024). These results provide support for Hypothesis 3a
since participants in the fitspiration only condition experienced signif­
icantly greater increases in body dissatisfaction, facial dissatisfaction
and body shame and a significantly greater decrease in life satisfaction,
compared to participants in the mixed conditions. Table 3 shows the
mean change scores for each of the 6 dependant variables.
In order to test the prediction that positive images of cute animals
would better mitigate the negative effects of the fitspiration images,
compared to the other body image (ARSC and humorous) messages or
appearance-neutral interior design images, a one-way independent
MANOVA was conducted. This compared the 4 mixed conditions
(excluding the fitspiration only condition) using the change scores for
the 6 outcome measures as dependent variables. This revealed no sig­
nificant multivariate effect of condition (F(18, 433.24) = 0.69, p = .821,
η2p = .026; Wilks’ λ = 0.923).
In addition, 6 planned orthogonal comparisons confirmed there were
no significant differences in the change scores between the cute animal
condition and the other three mixed conditions (ARSC, humorous or
appearance-neutral interior design) for all 6 outcome measures: nega­
tive mood (F(1, 158) = 0.01, p = .980, η2p = .000), body dissatisfaction (F
(1, 158) = 0.78, p = .380, η2p = .005), facial dissatisfaction (F(1, 158) =
0.07, p = .78, η2p = .000), body shame (F(1, 158) = 0.62, p = .432, η2p =
.004), appearance comparison (F(1, 158) = 0.79, p = .375, η2p = .005) or
life satisfaction (F(1, 158) = 0.18, p = .673, η2p = .001). These results
indicated that the mixed condition containing images of cute animals
did not lead to significantly better outcomes than any of the other three
mixed conditions. Therefore, Hypothesis 3b was rejected.
4.2.3. The role of appearance comparison: interpersonal appraisals
To assess the direction of comparisons relating to how participants
evaluated their own body and facial appearance, and overall lifestyle,
compared to the female images they had seen during the Instagram
browsing task, comparison ratings were categorised into three groups.
Ratings of ≤ 44 were classified as upward comparisons (participants
rated themselves to be ‘worse’ than the female targets), scores of 56 ≥
were classified as downward comparisons (participants rated them­
selves to be ‘better’ than the female targets) and scores ≥ 45 to ≤ 55
were considered as lateral comparisons (participants considered them­
selves as being no different from the targets). Across all conditions,
upward comparisons (body n = 164; face n = 128; lifestyle n = 147)
were more common than downward (body n = 12; face n = 22; lifestyle
n = 23) and lateral (body n = 14; face n = 40; lifestyle n = 20) com­
parisons. This suggested that the majority of participants were engaging
in upward comparisons to both the physical appearance and lifestyle of
the women in the fitspiration images shown during the browsing tasks.
Participants were also asked to appraise their similarity to the female
targets, how much they desired to look like them and how achievable
they thought the women’s bodies were. The sample averages were
compared to the mid-point (50) of each 100-point measure. Fig. 1 de­
picts how each of the measures, including the comparison direction
measures, related to the midpoint of the scale.
Statistical comparison to the mid-point of each rating revealed that
participants considered themselves to be more dissimilar than similar to
the fitspiration women (t(189) = − 17.06, p < .001, d = − 1.24). Par­
ticipants desired to look like the fitspiration women (t(189) = 10.48,
p < .001, d = 0.76) and considered the targets bodies to be achievable (t
(189) = − 2.28, p = .024, d = 0.17). For all three comparison attributes,
participants considered their bodies (t(189) = − 16.46, p < .001,
d = − 1.19), faces (t(189) = − 11.09, p < .001, d = − 0.80) and lifestyles
(t(189) = − 12.69, p < .001, d = − 0.92) to be worse than those of the
females in the fitspiration images.
To investigate the specific role played in the mood, appearance and
life satisfaction outcomes by the manner in which fitspiration images
B. Davies et al. Body Image 46 (2023) 356–371

Table 3
Experiment 3. Planned orthogonal comparisons between fitspiration-only condition and fitspiration-plus-distractor conditions. Data shown are mean change scores (
± 95% CI) for each VAS measure from pre- to post- exposure (n = 190).
Measure Mean change in VAS rating [ ± 95% CI] for each Browsing Task Condition Planned
Comparison

Fitspiration Only (n = 38) ARSC (n = 39) Humorous (n = 37) Appearance-Neutral (n = 38) Cute animals (n = 38) F p

Negative mood -1.11 [− 5.05, 2.84] 3.81 [− 0.09, 7.71] 0.01 [− 4.00, 4.01] 0.32 [− 3.63, 4.27] 1.50 [− 2.45, 5.44] 1.26 .263 ns
Body dissatisfaction -5.87 [− 10.33, − 1.41] 3.81 [− 0.59, 8.22] 1.64 [− 2.88, 6.16] 0.91 [− 3.56, 5.37] -0.51 [− 4.97, 3.96] 8.41 .004
Facial Dissatisfaction -4.19 [− 8.07, − 0.32] 2.32 [− 1.51, 6.14] 0.51 [− 3.41, 4.44] -0.84 [− 4.71, 3.03] 0.92 [− 2.95, 4.80] 5.02 .026
Body shame -7.12 [− 10.80, − 3.45] 0.79 [− 2.84, 4.42] 0.06 [− 3.67, 3.78] 0.72 [− 2.96, 4.39] -0.46 [− 4.14, 3.21] 12.63 < .001
Appearance -2.51 [− 8.87, 3.85] 7.23 [0.95, 13.51] 0.39 [− 6.05, 6.84] 3.86 [− 2.50, 10.22] 6.45 [− 0.09, 12.81] 3.77 .054 ns
comparison
Life Satisfaction 3.09 [0.05, 6.13] 0.45 [− 2.56, 3.45] -0.13 [− 3.21, 2.95] -1.50 [− 4.54, 1.54] -1.10 [− 4.14, 1.95] 4.50 .035

Note. Negative mean values indicate an increase in the measure from pre-exposure to post-exposure.

Fig. 1. Experiment 3. Mean participant-target comparison ratings ( ± 95% CI) for interpersonal appraisal measures using 100-point visual analogue scales. Statistical
data indicate single mean t-test probabilities (2-tailed) and effect size (Cohen’s d) values between sample mean and scale mid-point for each comparison rat­
ing (n = 190).

were evaluated, the relationships between the six interpersonal
appraisal factors, with the post-exposure measures were examined
across all conditions. Table 4 shows the zero-order correlations between
the post-exposure mood, appearance and life satisfaction measures and
interpersonal appraisal factors, and partial correlations for the same
variables when controlling for pre-exposure scores. Generally, the re­
lationships observed provide support for Hypothesis 3c since the data
suggest that the different interpersonal appraisal scores of participants
were significantly related to the outcome measures taken following the
browsing tasks. However, not all the relationships remained significant
after controlling for baseline levels of the relevant measure. The partial
correlations support the idea that, when participants considered their
own appearance to have greater similarity to the comparison target’s
appearance, outcomes across the body image measures were more

Table 4
Experiment 3. Pearson zero-order correlations (r, df=188) between VAS participant-target comparison ratings (interpersonal appraisal factors) and post-exposure
measures of mood, appearance dissatisfaction and comparison and life satisfaction, and partial correlations (rp, df = 187) controlling for baseline levels of the rele­
vant measure.
Comparison Ratings Correlation Type Post-Exposure Scores

Negative Mood Body Dissatisfaction Facial Dissatisfaction Body Shame Appearance Comparison Life Satisfaction

Similarity to target r -.41** -.64** -.33** -.57** -.38** .43**

rp -.22* -.36** -.25** -.28** -.25** .20
Body Comparison r -.36** -.65** -.38** -.52** -.43** .35**
rp -.18 -.42** -.30** -.25** -.31** .21*
Facial Comparison r -.36** -.53** -.56** -.39** -.43** .42**
rp -.17 -.34** -.35** -.14 -.37** .28**
Lifestyle Comparison r -.39** -.52** -.30** -.46** -.38** .42**
rp -.17 -.33** -.26** -.20 -.20 .24**
Target achievability r -.27** -.19** -.13 -.29** -.21** .25**
rp -.09 -.09 -.03 -.17 -.16 .03
Desire to look like target r .26** .44** .34** .39** -.48** .17
rp .15 .26** .25** .20 -.32** -.10
*
p < .005 (Bonferroni corrected p value);
**
p < .001.

366
B. Davies et al.
positive. Upward comparisons, where participants considered their
body and facial appearance to be inferior to the comparison target’s
appearance, led to poorer outcomes for appearance dissatisfaction,
appearance comparison and life satisfaction, but not negative mood.
Only upward body comparison, and not facial comparison, led to poorer
outcomes for body shame when baseline levels were controlled. Upward
lifestyle comparisons led to poorer outcomes for body and facial
appearance dissatisfaction and life satisfaction only. Where participants
desired to look like the comparison target to a greater extent, they
experienced poorer outcomes for appearance dissatisfaction and
appearance comparison, but not negative mood, body shame or life
satisfaction. How achievable the targets’ physical appearance was for
the observer was not related to any of the outcome measures, after
controlling for baseline levels. Therefore, Hypothesis 3c was partially
supported.
4.3. Brief discussion
The aim of Experiment 3 was to explore whether diluting fitspiration
images with other image types, rather than the inclusion of body posi­
tive communication (ARSC or humorous messages) per se would lead to
less negative outcomes for participants, and whether the use of other
distraction (appearance-neutral interior design or cute animal images)
would further improve this effect. In partial support of Hypothesis 3a, the
results indicated that participants in the fitspiration only condition
experienced significant increases in body dissatisfaction, facial dissat­
isfaction and body shame and significant decreases in life satisfaction,
compared to participants in any of the four mixed conditions. This
suggests that combining fitspiration posts with any of the other posts
included in this study negated some of the negative effects of viewing
the fitspiration images on their own. However, contrary to Hypothesis 3b
no differences in outcome measures were observed between the mixed
conditions. This suggests that positive distraction by using cute animal
images was not more protective for body image than appearance-neutral
interior design images or images containing body image-related
messages.
Experiment 3 also aimed to explore how interpersonal appraisals
with the target women would impact on the outcome measures. To this
extent, Hypothesis 3c, that type of appraisal made would influence mood,
appearance and life satisfaction outcomes after completing the browsing
tasks, was partially supported by correlational evidence. These findings
were consistent with the idea that contrasting or assimilating with a
comparison target influences the outcome of upward comparisons (e.g.
Mussweiler, 2001). The results add to the literature by evidencing that
participants who consider themselves to be dissimilar from a compari­
son target, who they desire to look like, experience the greatest negative
outcomes when browsing fitspiration images, particularly with respect
to appearance dissatisfaction and level of state appearance comparison.
Previous research has suggested that where the status or attributes of an
upward comparison target are considered personally achievable (e.g.
their attractive appearance could be matched by the observer), then
upward comparisons may result in more positive feelings and inspira­
tion (Lockwood & Kunda, 1997). It might therefore, have been expected
that perceiving the appearance of the fitspiration women to be more
achievable would be associated with more positive outcomes in the
current study. However, this was not the case for any of the mood,
appearance and lifestyle outcomes, when baseline levels were
controlled. This implies that the connection between these outcomes
and a fitspiration-style body type being considered achievable, was
better accounted for by the observer’s pre-existing level of dissatisfac­
tion or shame with their appearance, rather than as a direct result of
their experience when viewing images. It was found in the present study
that participants overall tended to rate themselves as being dissimilar to
the females in the images seen, with a strong desire to look like them, but
generally indicating an average possibility of achieving this appearance
(with respect to absolute levels of the measures taken). It is therefore
367
Body Image 46 (2023) 356–371
likely that the dynamic range of scores on these variables was artificially
restricted in the current study, by the use of fitspiration images. Future
research could further explore the interaction between similarity, ach­
ievability and desirability, across a broader range of body types to better
understand their combined effect on body image outcomes.
5. General discussion
The current research builds on previous literature by exploring the
protective impact of ARSC and humorous body image messages when
posted alongside fitspiration content. The results show that images
containing ARSC or humorous messages did not influence the negative
effects of fitspiration images on users any differently than appearance-
neutral images (Hypothesis 1), irrespective of whether participants rec­
ognised that the messages were relevant to their personal body image
(Hypothesis 2b). Both ARSC and humorous messages also failed to impact
state appearance comparison. In Experiment 3, the addition of a fitspi­
ration only condition demonstrated that combining fitspiration images
with any other image used in the study, regardless of type, negated the
impact observed in the fitspiration only condition (Hypothesis 3a and
Hypothesis 3b). This suggests that mixing fitspiration posts with other
types of Instagram post that does not contain appearance-related im­
ages, may be enough to counter some of the short-term impacts of
exposure to fitspiration themes. This finding has important methodo­
logical implications as it draws into question the appropriateness of the
use of fitspiration-only control conditions when making claims about the
protective influence of different image types. It can be argued that there
is a benefit to the inclusion of other image types during appearance-
focused Instagram use, which results not from the content of the im­
ages per se, but from the diluting effect they create on appearance
themes. Future studies could therefore usefully consider the balance of
appearance-neutral to appearance-focused images used in experimental
research, in order to more carefully evaluate and make recommenda­
tions regarding the level of image dilution needed to create a beneficial
effect on body image-related outcomes. This conclusion is consistent
with the recent analysis of body positive and science/culture Facebook
pages (Fardouly et al., 2023) which resulted in no differences in body
dissatisfaction outcomes being found between the two page types.
While in general self-compassion interventions have shown positive
effects for body image concern and eating behaviour (Turk & Waller,
2020), the findings of the current study suggest that ARSC messages are
not effective at promoting positive body image during acute exposure to
fitspiration images. This is in contrast to previous research, which has
shown benefits from self-compassion quotes about the whole self (Slater
et al., 2017). The current findings may have implications for the use of
social media messages about body image alongside appearance-focused
social media content, since humorous messages were also found to be
ineffective. Taken together, with the findings of previous research that
neither disclaimer or body positive captions were able to reduce the
negative impact of exposure to appearance-focused images, it might be
suggested that the influence of images is too great to be countered by
short messages alone (Brown & Tiggemann, 2020). This notion might
also be consistent with the disparity in the effectiveness of using hu­
morous parody images (Slater et al., 2019), versus the humorous mes­
sages in the current experiments which also aimed to critique the
common sense of beauty standards. Combined with the lack of support
for disclaimer-type labels, it may be that rather than employing
message-based techniques, efforts to protect body image online should
look to create strategies which are focused on image-based in­
terventions. For example, one strategy could be to utilised efforts that
seek to increase the representation of larger body sizes, where exposure
to body positive posts including images of women with a range of body
sizes can lead to increased body satisfaction and appreciation, compared
to exposure to the thin-ideal and appearance-neutral images (Nelson
et al., 2022). Furthermore, unlike exposure to fitspiration images of thin
women, exposure to ‘curvy fitspiration’ (exercise images of women with
B. Davies et al.
larger body sizes) is known to lead to improvements in body satisfaction
and reduced weight bias among women (Cha et al., 2022). This suggests
that even within appearance-focused domains the impact of more in­
clusive images may be beneficial.
State appearance comparison was measured in the current research
to explore the potential of the ARSC and humorous messages for
reducing appearance-based comparison, since this is a known mediator
of the relationship between appearance-focused social media use and
body dissatisfaction (Hendrickse et al., 2017). However, evidence from
all three experiments suggested that neither ARSC or humorous message
types had any impact on levels of appearance comparisons made by
participants, nor did fitspiration images shown in isolation have a sig­
nificant impact on appearance comparison in Experiment 3. It may be
that acute exposure to body image messages intended to dissuade people
from making comparisons, are not sufficient on their own to combat a
practiced tendency to make upward comparisons on social media
(Verduyn et al., 2020). In this way, combatting the frequency of
appearance comparisons may only be feasible through more compre­
hensive intervention strategies.
Tiggemann et al. (2019b) have suggested that women may actively
choose to compare themselves with attractive women on social media as
they set the standard for which they expect themselves to be judged.
This idea is linked to comparison research that has argued for the
motivational quality of some types of upward comparison (Lockwood &
Kunda, 1997). The current study adds to this evidence base by showing
that there are relationships between how participants feel after browsing
Instagram and some of the interpersonal appraisals they make with
comparison targets during browsing (Hypothesis 3c). Taken together,
rather than trying to reduce instances of upward comparison, which are
thought to be largely automatic and therefore inevitable
(Bocage-Barthélémy et al., 2018), alternative methods should look to
influence the nature of interpersonal appraisals made with upward
comparison targets as a means of making comparisons less harmful. In
other words, rather than trying to prevent comparisons, research should
look to explore how similar women perceive themselves to be to others
online, as a means of manipulating the nature of comparisons from being
disconcerting to be more inspirational. As previous research has
demonstrated, upward comparisons can result in benign envy which
encourages motivation for self-improvement (Meier & Schäfer, 2018),
rather than harmful dejection and body dissatisfaction. Some longitu­
dinal evidence has suggested that increased exposure to attractive
appearance-focused images was associated with both social comparison,
and inspiration, via social media up to four months later (Schreurs et al.,
2022). However, exercising for appearance reasons has also been asso­
ciated with feelings of guilt and negative body image (Hurst et al., 2017)
and disengagement with goals (Mailey et al., 2018) over time. Further
research is therefore needed to better understand the longer term out­
comes, and conditions under which, positive benefits of inspiration
derived from social media images may occur.
The current research has also demonstrated the potential impact of
exposure to fitspiration images on life satisfaction. Whilst some previous
research has demonstrated the negative impact on one’s own life satis­
faction levels of viewing positive posts made by strangers (de Vries et al.,
2018), the current study further shows that fitspiration content may
pose a threat to life satisfaction. This finding makes sense when
considering that fitspiration content often promotes body ideals through
the portrayal of a healthy and active lifestyle (Boepple et al., 2016).
Future research could usefully further explore this specific effect.
Overall, the implications of this study suggest that encouraging
women to avoid browsing Instagram feeds of images that are exclusively
appearance-focused (e.g. feeds associated with appearance-focused
hashtags such as ‘#fitspiration’) will help to protect their body image
online, by diversifying the range of content to which they are exposed.
Similarly, encouraging women to follow some Instagram accounts un­
related to appearance, may help protect users online, due to the dilution
effect this creates on their own feed. With respect to future digital
368
Body Image 46 (2023) 356–371
intervention strategies intended to protect body image online, the
findings of this study imply that a wealth of different possibilities may
exist, since intervention designs do not need to be tied to the topic of
body image in order to promote potential beneficial effects. On the
contrary, body image-related messages embedded within social media
pages that are intended to be protective may have no additional benefits
over other forms of non-appearance focused content.
5.1. Study limitations
The findings of the current experiments should be taken with the
following limitations in mind. Firstly, the experiments sampled from a
demographic of young women in the UK, therefore the results may not
generalise to other groups of women. In the present study, no data
pertaining to the cultural background of participants were collected
which may limit the applicability of the current findings to populations
with a similar ethnic mix to that found within the UK. Thin-ideal
internalisation and weight concern are known to differ between
different ethnic or cultural groups (Rakhkovskaya & Warren, 2014). For
example, some authors have noted the current trend of the desirability of
‘slim-thick’ figures which are newer to white-centred media, but have
been long established among other cultures (McComb & Mills, 2022).
Negative body image outcomes have also been shown to be greater
among women from different ethnic backgrounds in response to
white-focused images in mainstream media (Thomas, Kleyman, 2020).
It follows that both comparisons made towards, and the desirability of
the fitspiration figures included in the present study to some degree will
be influenced by both the ethnic background of the observer and the
target. Whilst a range of ethnicities were included within the fitspiration
images used in the present study, in an attempt to compensate for these
differences, more detailed and routine measurement of observer-target
differences in ethnicity may be required in future similar studies to
more fully consider these effects.
Secondly, in all three experiments, exposure to the different types of
image was relatively brief. Consequently, the conclusions drawn
regarding the efficacy of different images to protect body image are
based on, and may only apply to, single exposures that are short in
duration. Whilst it may be argued that this is perhaps consistent with the
nature of images to which people are exposed during typical social
media use, it remains unclear what the impact of exposure to different
message types would be over longer periods of exposure, both with
respect to fitspiration images and ARSC or humorous images.
Thirdly, since all three experiments took place online, it is not
possible to guarantee that participants were fully attending to the image
browsing tasks. Whilst safeguards were used, including timing partici­
pants’ responses and conducting memory tests to check for engagement,
it remains possible that participants did not interact with the content of
images as they would do typically in their own time. Controlled
browsing tasks were used in Experiments 1 and 2 which may increase
confidence that the findings are likely to reflect the efficacy of the
messages themselves, rather than a failure of the images to capture user
attention which could have been the case in Experiment 3. The use of
more naturalistic approaches or observation of participants during real-
world browsing may therefore be warranted to further reduce the gap
between experimental findings and everyday engagement with social
media.
5.2. Conclusions
The current study provides evidence that images containing ARSC
and humorous body image messages are no more effective at protecting
social media users from negative appearance and life satisfaction effects
than appearance-neutral images, when displayed alongside fitspiration
images. Neither type of message had an impact on state appearance
comparison. However, unexpectedly the results evidence that the
negative impact of fitspiration imagery is sensitive to the presence of
B. Davies et al.
other posts which do not contain images of women, regardless of
whether the posts include messages related to body image or images
unconnected to physical appearance. This is an important consideration
for the design of future studies in this field. Given the range of content
types that participants are simultaneously exposed to online, in order to
generalise claims about the effects of fitspiration to typical Instagram
use, future research should develop methodologies which better imitate
the range of content consumed online. The current research has also
demonstrated the importance of interpersonal appraisals, made in
relation to comparison targets, which may have potential implications
for alternative methods for combatting the harmful body image effects
of social media images.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
Bryony Davies: Conceptualization, Methodology, Investigation,
Formal analysis, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing.
Mark Turner: Supervision, Conceptualization, Methodology, Formal
analysis, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. Julie
Udell: Supervision, Conceptualization, Methodology.
Declaration of Competing Interest
This research was supported by an Economic and Social Research
Council, South Coast Doctoral Training Partnership studentship award.
Data Availability
Data will be made available on request.
References
Aldoory, L. (2001). Making health communications meaningful for women: Factors that
influence involvement. Journal of Public Relations Research, 13(2), 163–185. https://
doi.org/10.1207/S1532754XJPRR1302_3
Allen, A. B., & Leary, M. R. (2010). Self-Compassion, stress, and coping. Social and
Personality Psychology Compass, 4(2), 107–118. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-
9004.2009.00246.x
Akram, U., & Drabble, J. (2022). Mental health memes: beneficial or aversive in relation
to psychiatric symptoms. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 9(1), 1–6.
https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-022-01381-4
Amarasingam, A. (2010). Laughter the best medicine: Muslim comedians and social
criticism in post-9 / 11 America. Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs, 30(4), 463–477.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13602004.2010.533444
Anderson, M., & Jiang, J. (2018). Teen’s social media habits and experiences. PEW
Research Center, (November), 33. Retrieved from 〈https://www.pewinternet.or
g/2018/11/28/teens-social-media-habits-and-experiences/〉.
Barreca, R. (1988). Last-laughs-perspectives on women and comedy-introduction.
Women’s Studies: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 15, 1–3.
Barron, A. M., Krumrei-Mancuso, E. J., & Harriger, J. A. (2021). The effects of fitspiration
and self-compassion Instagram posts on body image and self-compassion in men and
women. Body Image, 37, 14–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2021.01.003
Bocage-Barthélémy, Y., Chatard, A., Jaafari, N., Tello, N., Billieux, J., Daveau, E., &
Selimbegović, L. (2018). Automatic social comparison: Cognitive load facilitates an
increase in negative thought accessibility after thin ideal exposure among women.
PLoS One, 13(3), Article e0193200. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0193200
Boepple, L., Ata, R. N., Rum, R., & Thompson, J. K. (2016). Strong is the new skinny: A
content analysis of fitspiration websites. Body Image, 17, 132–135. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.bodyim.2016.03.001
Braverman, J. (2008). Testimonials versus informational persuasive messages: The
moderating effect of delivery mode and personal involvement. Communication
Research, 35(5), 666–694. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650208321785
Brown, Z., & Tiggemann, M. (2016). Attractive celebrity and peer images on Instagram:
Effect on women’s mood and body image. Body Image, 19, 37–43. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.bodyim.2016.08.007
Brown, Z., & Tiggemann, M. (2020). A picture is worth a thousand words: The effect of
viewing celebrity Instagram images with disclaimer and body positive captions on
women’s. Body Image, 33, 190–198. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2020.03.003
Burnell, K., George, M. J., & Underwood, M. K. (2020). Browsing different Instagram
profiles and associations with psychological well-being. Frontiers in Human Dynamics,
2, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.3389/fhumd.2020.585518
Bury, B., Tiggemann, M., & Slater, A. (2016). The effect of digital alteration disclaimer
labels on social comparison and body image: Instructions and individual differences.
Body Image, 17, 136–142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2016.03.005
369
Body Image 46 (2023) 356–371
Case, C. E., & Lippard, C. D. (2009). Humorous assaults on patriarchal ideology.
Sociological Inquiry, 79(2), 240–255. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-
682X.2009.00282.x
Cauberghe, V., Van Wesenbeeck, I., De Jans, S., Hudders, L., & Ponnet, K. (2021). How
adolescents use social media to cope with feelings of loneliness and anxiety during
COVID-19 lockdown. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 24(4),
250–257. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2020.0478
Cha, H. S., Mayers, J. A., & Stutts, L. A. (2022). The impact of curvy fitspiration and
fitspiration on body dissatisfaction, negative mood, and weight bias in women.
Stigma and Health, 7(2), 226–233. https://doi.org/10.1037/sah0000367
Cohen, R., Irwin, L., Newton-John, T., & Slater, A. (2019). #bodypositivity: A content
analysis of body positive accounts on Instagram. Body Image, 29, 47–57. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2019.02.007
Cohen, R., Newton-John, T., & Slater, A. (2017). The relationship between Facebook and
Instagram appearance-focused activities and body image concerns in young women.
Body Image, 23, 183–187. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2017.10.002
Crawford, S. A., & Caltabiano, N. J. (2011). Promoting emotional well-being through the
use of humour. Journal of Positive Psychology, 6(3), 237–252. https://doi.org/
10.1080/17439760.2011.577087
Dakanalis, A., Timko, A. C., Clerici, M., Riva, G., & Carrà, G. (2017). Objectified body
consciousness (OBC) in eating psychopathology: Construct validity, reliability, and
measurement invariance of the 24-Item OBC Scale in clinical and nonclinical
adolescent samples. Assessment, 24(2), 252–274. https://doi.org/10.1177/
1073191115602553
Darwin, H., & Miller, A. (2021). Factions, frames, and postfeminism(s) in the body
positive movement. Feminist Media Studies, 21(6), 873–890. https://doi.org/
10.1080/14680777.2020.1736118
Davies, B., Turner, M., & Udell, J. (2020). Add a comment … how fitspiration and body
positive captions attached to social media images influence the mood and body
esteem of young female Instagram users. Body Image, 33, 101–105. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.bodyim.2020.02.009
de Valle, M. K., Gallego-García, M., Williamson, P., & Wade, T. D. (2021). Social media,
body image, and the question of causation: Meta-analyses of experimental and
longitudinal evidence. Body Image, 39, 276–292. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
bodyim.2021.10.001
de Vries, D. A., Möller, A. M., Wieringa, M. S., Eigenraam, A. W., & Hamelink, K. (2018).
Social comparison as the thief of joy: Emotional consequences of viewing strangers’
Instagram posts. Media Psychology, 21(2), 222–245. https://doi.org/10.1080/
15213269.2016.1267647
Dhanesh, G. S., & Nekmat, E. (2019). Facts over stories for involved publics: Framing
effects in CSR messaging and the roles of issue involvement, message elaboration,
affect, and skepticism. Management Communication Quarterly, 33(1), 7–38. https://
doi.org/10.1177/0893318918793941
Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1984). The satisfaction with life
scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49(1), 71–75. https://doi.org/10.1207/
s15327752jpa4901_13
Duarte, C., Pinto-Gouveia, J., Ferreira, C., & Batista, D. (2015). Body image as a source of
shame: A new measure for the assessment of the multifaceted nature of body image
shame. Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, 22(6), 656–666. https://doi.org/
10.1002/cpp.1925
Engeln, R., Loach, R., Imundo, M. N., & Zola, A. (2020). Compared to Facebook,
Instagram use causes more appearance comparison and lower body satisfaction in
college women. Body Image, 34, 38–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
bodyim.2020.04.007
Fardouly, J., & Holland, E. (2018). Social media is not real life: The effect of attaching
disclaimer-type labels to idealized social media images on women’s body image and
mood. New Media and Society, 20(11), 4311–4328. https://doi.org/10.1177/
1461444818771083
Fardouly, J., 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
Fardouly, J., Slater, A., Parnell, J., & Diedrichs, P. C. (2023). Can following body positive
or appearance neutral Facebook pages improve young women’s body image and
mood? Testing novel social media micro-interventions. Body Image, 44, 136–147.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2022.12.008
Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Lang, A.-G., & Buchner, A. (2007). G*Power 3: A flexible statistical
power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior
Research Methods, 39(2), 175–191. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193146
Fioravanti, G., Prostamo, A., & Casale, S. (2020). Taking a short break from Instagram:
The effects on subjective well-being. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social
Networking, 23(2), 107–112. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2019.0400
Frost, K. A., Franzoi, S. L., Oswald, D. L., & Shields, S. A. (2018). Revising the body
esteem scale with a U.S. college student sample: Evaluation, validation, and uses for
the BES-R. Sex Roles, 78(1–2), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-017-0776-5
Heinberg, L. J., & Thompson, J. K. (1995). Body image and televised images of thinness
and attractiveness: A controlled laboratory investigation. Journal of Social and
Clinical Psychology, 14(4), 325–338. https://doi.org/10.1521/jscp.1995.14.4.325
Hendrickse, J., 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
Hurst, M., Dittmar, H., Banerjee, R., & Bond, R. (2017). “I just feel so guilty”: The role of
introjected regulation in linking appearance goals for exercise with women’s. Body
Image, 20, 120–129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2016.12.002
B. Davies et al.
Jerónimo, F., & Carraça, E. V. (2022). Effects of fitspiration content on body image: a
systematic review. Eating and Weight Disorders-Studies on Anorexia, Bulimia and
Obesity, 27(8), 3017–3035. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40519-022-01505-4
Jung, A. R. (2017). The influence of perceived ad relevance on social media advertising:
An empirical examination of a mediating role of privacy concern. Computers in
Human Behavior, 70, 303–309. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.01.008
Joshanloo, M. (2022). Latent state-trait modeling of satisfaction with life scale: An item-
level analysis using Dutch panel data. Journal of Happiness Studies, 23(7),
3429–3440. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-022-00550-1
Kang, J., & Liu, B. (2019). A similarity mindset matters on social media: Using algorithm-
generated similarity metrics to foster assimilation in upward social comparison.
Social Media and Society, 5(4). https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305119890884
Keyte, R., Mullis, L., Egan, H., Hussain, M., Cook, A., & Mantzios, M. (2021). Self-
compassion and Instagram use is explained by the relation to anxiety, depression,
and stress. Journal of Technology in Behavioral Science, 6, 436–441. https://doi.org/
10.1007/s41347-020-00186-z
Klassen, K. M., Borleis, E. S., Brennan, L., Reid, M., McCaffrey, T. A., & Lim, M. S. C.
(2018). What people “like”: Analysis of social media strategies used by food industry
brands, lifestyle brands, and health promotion organizations on Facebook and
Instagram. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 20(6), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.2196/
10227
Kostygina, G., Tran, H., Binns, S., Szczypka, G., Emery, S., Vallone, D., & Hair, E. (2020).
Boosting health campaign reach and engagement through use of social media
influencers and memes. Social Media and Society, 6(2). https://doi.org/10.1177/
2056305120912475
Kreuter, M. W., & Wray, R. J. (2003). Tailored and targeted health communication:
Strategies for enhancing information relevance. American Journal of Health Behavior,
27(3). https://doi.org/10.5993/ajhb.27.1.s3.6
Kruglanski, A. W., Chen, X., Pierro, A., Mannetti, L., Erb, H. P., & Spiegel, S. (2006).
Persuasion according to the unimodel: Implications for cancer communication.
Journal of Communication, 56, S105–S122. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-
2466.2006.00285.x
Leahey, T. M., Crowther, J. H., & Mickelson, K. D. (2007). The frequency, nature, and
effects of naturally occurring appearance-focused social comparisons. Behavior
Therapy, 38(2), 132–143. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beth.2006.06.004
Legault, L., & Sago, A. (2022). When body positivity falls flat: Divergent effects of body
acceptance messages that support vs. undermine basic psychological needs. Body
Image, 41, 225–238. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2022.02.013
Lenda, M., Skórka, P., Mazur, B., Sutherland, W., Tryjanowski, P., Moroń, D.,
Meijaard, E., Hugh, P., & Wilson, K. A. (2020). Effects of amusing memes on concern
for unappealing species. Conservation Biology, 34(5), 1200–1209. https://doi.org/
10.1111/cobi.13523
Livingston, J., Holland, E., & Fardouly, J. (2020). Exposing digital posing: The effect of
social media self-disclaimer captions on women’s body dissatisfaction, mood, and
impressions of the user. Body Image, 32, 150–154. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
bodyim.2019.12.006
Lockwood, P., & Kunda, Z. (1997). Superstars and me: Predicting the impact of role
models on the self. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73(1), 91–103.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.73.1.91
Maddox, J. (2021). The secret life of pet Instagram accounts: Joy, resistance, and
commodification in the Internet’s cute economy. New Media and Society, 23(11),
3332–3348. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444820956345
Maher, C. A., Lewis, L. K., Ferrar, K., Marshall, S., De Bourdeaudhuij, I., &
Vandelanotte, C. (2014). Are health behavior change interventions that use online
social networks effective? A systematic review. Journal of Medical Internet Research,
16(2), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.2952
Mailey, E. L., Dlugonski, D., Hsu, W., & Segar, M. (2018). Goals matter: Exercising for
well-being but not health or appearance predicts future exercise among parents.
Journal of Physical Activity and Health, 15(11), 857–865. https://doi.org/10.1123/
jpah.2017-0469
McComb, S. E., & Mills, J. S. (2020). A systematic review on the effects of media
disclaimers on young women’s body image and mood. Body Image, 32, 34–52.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2019.10.010
McComb, S. E., & Mills, J. S. (2022). The effect of physical appearance perfectionism and
social comparison to thin-, slim-thick-, and fit-ideal Instagram imagery on young
women’s body image. Body Image, 40, 165–175. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
bodyim.2021.12.003
Meier, A., & Schäfer, S. (2018). Positive side of social comparison on social network sites:
How envy can drive inspiration on Instagram. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social
Networking, 21(7), 411–417. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2017.0708
Miltner, K. M. (2014). “There’s no place for lulz on LOLCats”: The role of genre, gender,
and group identity in the interpretation and enjoyment of an Internet meme. First
Monday. https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v19i8.5391
Miltner, K. M. (2018). Memes. In J. Burgess, T. Poell, & A. E. Marwick (Eds.), The SAGE
handbook of social media (pp. 412–428). SAGE Publications Ltd.. 〈https://us.sagepub.
com/en-us/nam/the-sage-handbook-of-social-media/book245739#description〉
Moffitt, R. L., Neumann, D. L., & Williamson, S. P. (2018). Comparing the efficacy of a
brief self-esteem and self-compassion intervention for state body dissatisfaction and
self-improvement motivation. Body Image, 27, 67–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
bodyim.2018.08.008
Moorhead, S. A., Hazlett, D. E., Harrison, L., Carroll, J. K., Irwin, A., & Hoving, C. (2013).
A new dimension of health care: Systematic review of the uses, benefits, and
limitations of social media for health communication. Journal of Medical Internet
Research, 15(4), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.1933
370
Body Image 46 (2023) 356–371
Mussweiler, T. (2001). Focus of comparison as a determinant of assimilation versus
contrast in social comparison. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27(1),
38–47. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167201271004
Myers, T. A., & Crowther, J. H. (2009). Social comparison as a predictor of body
dissatisfaction: A Meta-Analytic review. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 118(4),
683–698. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0016763
Myrick, J. G., Nabi, R. L., & Eng, N. J. (2022). Consuming memes during the COVID
pandemic: Effects of memes and meme type on COVID-related stress and coping
efficacy. Psychology of Popular Media, 11(3), 316–323. https://doi.org/10.1037/
ppm0000371
Neff, K. D. (2011). Self-compassion, self-esteem, and well-being. Social and Personality
Psychology Compass, 5(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-9004.2010.00330.x
Nelson, S. L., Harriger, J. A., Miller-Perrin, C., & Rouse, S. V. (2022). The effects of body-
positive Instagram posts on body image in adult women. Body Image, 42, 338–346.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2022.07.013
Pavot, W., & Diener, E. (1993). Review of the satisfaction with life scale. Psychological
Assessment, 5, 164–172.
Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986). The elaboration likelihood model of persuasion.
Communication and Persuasion (pp. 1–24). New York: Springer,. https://doi.org/
10.1007/978-1-4612-4964-1_1
Petty, R. E., Cacioppo, J. T., & Schumann, D. (1983). Central and peripheral routes to
advertising effectiveness: The moderating role of involvement. Journal of Consumer
Research, 10(2), 135. https://doi.org/10.1086/208954
Plester, B. (2009). Healthy humour: Using humour to cope at work. Kōtuitui: New Zealand
Journal of Social Sciences Online, 4(1), 89–102. https://doi.org/10.1080/
1177083X.2009.9522446
Prichard, I., Kavanagh, E., Mulgrew, K. E., Lim, M. S. C., & Tiggemann, M. (2020). The
effect of Instagram #fitspiration images on young women’s mood, body image, and
exercise behaviour. Body Image, 33, 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
bodyim.2020.02.002
Rakhkovskaya, L. M., & Warren, C. S. (2014). Ethnic identity, thin-ideal internalization,
and eating pathology in ethnically diverse college women. Body Image, 11(4),
438–445. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2014.07.003
Royal Society for Public Health. (2017). Social media and young people’ s mental health
and wellbeing. Royal Society for Public Health, 32. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.
pone.0055745
Saiphoo, A. N., & Vahedi, Z. (2019). A meta-analytic review of the relationship between
social media use and body image disturbance. Computers in Human Behavior, 101,
259–275. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.07.028
Schmid, K. L., Rivers, S. E., Latimer, A. E., & Salovey, P. (2008). Targeting or tailoring?
Marketing Health Services, 28(1), 32–37.
Schreurs, L., Meier, A., & Vandenbosch, L. (2022). Exposure to the positivity bias and
adolescents’ differential longitudinal links with social comparison, inspiration and
envy depending on social media literacy. Current Psychology, 1–21. https://doi.org/
10.1007/s12144-022-03893-3
Sherman, G. D., Haidt, J., & Coan, J. A. (2009). Viewing cute images increases behavioral
carefulness. Emotion, 9(2), 282–286. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0014904
Shifman, L. (2013). Memes in digital culture. MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.7551/
mitpress/9429.001.0001
Slater, A., Cole, N., & Fardouly, J. (2019). The effect of exposure to parodies of thin-ideal
images on young women’s body image and mood. Body Image, 29, 82–89. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2019.03.001
Slater, A., Varsani, N., & Diedrichs, P. C. (2017). #fitspo or #loveyourself? The impact of
fitspiration and self-compassion Instagram images on women’s body image, self-
compassion, and mood. Body Image, 22, 87–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
bodyim.2017.06.004
Thomas, F. N., & Kleyman, K. S. (2020). The influence of Western body ideals on Kenyan,
Kenyan American, and African Americans’ body image. Journal of Prevention &
Intervention in the Community, 48(4), 312–328. https://doi.org/10.1080/
10852352.2019.1627084
Tiggemann, M. (2022). Digital modification and body image on social media: Disclaimer
labels, captions, hashtags, and comments. Body Image, 41, 172–180. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.bodyim.2022.02.012
Tiggemann, M., Anderberg, I., & Brown, Z. (2020). #Loveyourbody: The effect of body
positive Instagram captions on women’s body image. Body Image. 33, 129–136.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2020.02.015
Tiggemann, M., Brown, Z., & Anderberg, I. (2019b). Effect of digital alteration
information and disclaimer labels attached to fashion magazine advertisements on
women’s body dissatisfaction. Body Image, 30, 221–227. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
bodyim.2019.07.008
Tiggemann, M., Brown, Z., & Thomas, N. (2019a). (Don’t) look here!: The effect of
different forms of label added to fashion advertisements on women’s visual
attention. Body Image, 31, 88–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2019.08.011
Tiggemann, M., & McGill, B. (2004). The role of social comparison in the effect of
magazine advertisements on women’s mood and body dissatisfaction. Journal of
Social and Clinical Psychology, 23(1), 23–44. https://doi.org/10.1521/
jscp.23.1.23.26991
Tiggemann, M., & Velissaris, V. G. (2020). The effect of viewing challenging “reality
check” Instagram comments on women’s body image. Body Image, 33, 257–263.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2020.04.004
Tiggemann, M., & Zaccardo, M. (2015). Exercise to be fit, not skinny”: The effect of
fitspiration imagery on women’s body image. Body Image, 15, 61–67. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2015.06.003
B. Davies et al. Body Image 46 (2023) 356–371

Tiggemann, M., & Zaccardo, M. (2018). ‘Strong is the new skinny’: A content analysis of Verduyn, P., Gugushvili, N., Massar, K., Täht, K., & Kross, E. (2020). Social comparison
#fitspiration images on Instagram. Journal of Health Psychology, 23(8), 1003–1011. on social networking sites. Current Opinion in Psychology, 36, 32–37. https://doi.org/
https://doi.org/10.1177/1359105316639436 10.1016/j.copsyc.2020.04.002
Turk, F., & Waller, G. (2020). Is self-compassion relevant to the pathology and treatment
of eating and body image concerns? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Clinical
Psychology Review, 79, Article 101856. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2020.101856

371