Abstract
Some studies have subtly demonstrated the existence of a tension of ambivalence in women’s subjective feelings while wearing makeup. This paper consists in analyzing how feelings of ambivalence towards cosmetics appear in women, and how women feel when they remove or put on cosmetics. The study consists of an online survey and a walk-along experience. The survey included 261 women, among these 229 cosmetics users and 32 non-users. It used the double-blank method while asking the participants to express their feelings about various situations evoking their facial appearance, such as looking at their face when being in front of the mirror. A multiple case analysis of four selected survey respondents has also been done in order to compare 2 regular users and 2 non-users in regard to their way of dealing with tension. The walk-along experience included interviews and observations in the following conditions according to the groups: 1. Removing makeup (for regular users) / wearing makeup (for non-regular users) in front of a mirror; 2. Walking outside in public; 3. Wearing makeup again (for regular users) / removing makeup again (for non-regular users) in front of a mirror. Our findings showed that ambivalent tension (in most users and non-users) was mostly visible through a divergence going from positive feelings (such as feelings of satisfaction) to negative, contradictive feelings and that some similarities were present between users’ and non-users’ tensions despite the context differences. Ambivalence is shown not only toward the “masked” face (i.e. face with makeup on it), but also the natural face. Makeup is therefore not necessary to experience a tension of ambivalence towards one’s own face. However, the tensions revealed themselves as being rather minimal, as the “mask” is minimal itself. An interesting possible direction in future research would be to explore the origin of this ambivalence about the natural (unmasked) face, especially with regard to the appearance of facial skin including the worry about facial flaws such as acne spots.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
Although a Korean study showed, for instance, that male makeup can be generally well received, especially with regard to the use of concealers and foundations (Park and Kwon 2017), we decided to focus only on women, while excluding male cosmetics users mainly because, despite an increase in the number of men using facial makeup (such as foundation, mascara, lipstick), an in-depth analysis of this phenomenon would require to take into account an extensive literature regarding heteronormative and gender performances which is beyond the scope of this paper (Hall et al. 2012).
So in our definition of ‘makeup’ and ‘cosmetics’, the following activities are excluded: hair styling, hair removal and facial skin care, such as moisturizer and lip balm.
For more information about the double-blank method, you can for example take a look in Kullasepp (2014).
In the context of our article, being ‘natural’ means being free from facial makeup.
In the present paper, we define as a “non-user” a person being usually with her ‘natural’ face and not using cosmetics at all.
The online survey was created using LimeSurvey, a program used to create various types of questionnaires. The link to the questionnaire has been distributed on social networks as well as to female acquaintances. The survey has been launched for 17 days.
In regard to the educational status of the participants, 87 had some college credit and no degree, n = 51 had a bachelor’s degree, n = 44 went to elementary school or high school, and n = 39 had a Master’s degree, n = 29 a professional degree and n = 1 participant had no schooling completed.
Regarding the participants’ work status, n = 174 of them were students, n = 58 had a full-time job while 14 worked part-time, n = 3 were housemakers, n = 3 were unemployed and n = 1 participant was retired. With regard to the occupations of the participants, n = 16 of them are teachers (various fields, e.g. kindergarten, university, etc.) and n = 14 of them work in educational support (e.g. educators, educator’s assistant, etc.). Other participants work either in research (n = 8), in administration (n = 2) or as an employee (n = 5), state employee (n = 5), manager (various fields, n = 5), psychologist or psychotherapist (n = 5), dance teacher (n = 2), nurse or nursing assistant (n = 3) or sales assistant (n = 2). Besides, n = 12 participants have other diverse and unique professions in this sample such as photographer, laboratory technician, musician, etc. (n = 12). One participant (n = 1, missing) working to full time did not specify her job.
In respect of their personal status, the majority of participants (n = 119) are in a relationship, n = 85 are single, n = 55 are married or in a domestic partnership and n = 2 are divorced or separated.
From the n = 261 participants who took part on the study, n = 30 have been eliminated from this item. Other responses in this item were: open tension / divergence (n = 45), circumvention (n = 30), positive convergence (n = 27), complimenting the picture (n = 17), negative convergence (n = 14) and no self-identification in regard to the picture (n = 8).
n = 67 participants have been eliminated from this item. Other reactions in regard to this item were: rejection (n = 30), circumvention (n = 25), complimenting the picture (n = 12), overcoming ambivalence (n = 8), indifference about the picture (n = 4) and negative convergence (n = 3).
n = 16 have been eliminated from this item. The other types of responses to this item were: positive convergence (n = 14), circumvention (n = 12) and negative convergence (n = 10).
n = 10 have been eliminated from this item, so in total, there were 251 participants for this item. Alternative responses to this item were: open tension (n = 21), circumvention (n = 10) and overcoming ambivalence (n = 1).
n = 52 have been eliminated from this item. Other reactions to this item were: positive convergence (n = 66), circumvention (n = 38), overcoming ambivalence (n = 1) and negative convergence (n = 1).
n = 29 have been eliminated from this item. Alternative types of responses were: negative convergence (n = 36), circumvention (n = 35), overcoming ambivalence (n = 34) and positive convergence (n = 18).
n = 43 have been eliminated from this item, therefore there were 281 participants for this item. Other reactions were: overcoming ambivalence (n = 50), negative convergence (n = 18) and circumvention (n = 16).
n = 59 have been eliminated from this item. Other types of reactions were: positive convergence (n = 56), circumvention (n = 23), negative convergence (n = 4) and overcoming ambivalence (n = 3).
As a reminder, the data from our online survey has been collected anonymously. The names here have been made up for a better reading experience.
For ethical reasons, we decided not to take extreme cases, i.e. no women always going out with makeup or women never wearing makeup.
The names of the participants have been changed.
At the end of the walk-along part, an appointment within three working days with each participant to perform a follow up interview was set,. However the follow-up parts did not reveal any conclusive data. That is why we did not report these interviews here.
The reasons for such a large sample of users can be multiple. On the one hand, it could be that many women feel a constraint and that in Western culture, beauty is part of the expectations of women as a sign of distinction to men and confirmation of their femininity (“gender performance”). On the other hand, makeup may well be a fascination for many women and therefore the result of a free choice to express one’s creativity by emphasizing the play of colors while accentuating specific parts of the face (see Jeffreys 2005).
We are aware of the religious use of cosmetics in certain countries.
References
Abbey, E., & Davis, P. C. (2003). Constructing One’s identity through music. In I. E. Josephs (Ed.), Dialogicality in development (pp. 69–86). USA: Praeger Publishers.
Albert, A., Abbey, E., & Valsiner, J. (2018). Looking at relations accross generations: Ambivalence in context [introduction of a book]. In a., Albert, E., Abbey, & J., Valsiner (Eds.), trans-generational family relations: Investigating ambivalences (pp. xiii-xxx). USA: Information age publishing Inc.
Baudelaire, C. (2010). Le peintre de la vie moderne. Paris, France: Mille et une nuits. (Original work published 1863).
Beausoleil, N. (1994). Makeup in everyday life: An inquiry into the practices of urban American women of diverse backgrounds. In N. L. Sault (Ed.), Many mirrors: Body image and social relations (pp. 33–57). New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press.
Borgerson, J. L., & Schroeder, J. E. (2018). Making skin visible: How consumer culture imagery Commodifies identity. Body & Society, 24(1–2), 103–136. https://doi.org/10.1177/1357034x18760987.
Carpiano, R. M. (2009). Come take a walk with me: The “go-along” interview as a novel method for studying the implications of place for health and well-being. Health & Place, 15(1), 263–272.
Cash, T., Dawson, K., Davis, P., Bowen, M., & Galumbeck, C. (1989). Effects of cosmetics use on the physical attractiveness and body image of American college women. The Journal of Social Psychology, 129(3), 349–355. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224545.1989.9712051.
Cometto, L. (2013, February 19). Maschere! Ma Il Carnevale non C’entra. [masks! But carnival has nothing to do with it.] [website post]. Retrieved from http:// www.studiopsicologiatorino.it/i-servizi-offerti-dallo-studio/#sthash.imwZp9 UM.Dpbs.
Conner, M., & Armitage, C. J. (2008). Attitudinal ambivalence. In W. D. Crano & R. Prislin (eds.), Frontiers of social psychology. Attitudes and attitude change (p. 261–286). New York: Psychology Press.
Cox, C. L., & Glick, W. H. (1986). Resume evaluations and cosmetics use: When more is not better. Sex Roles, 14(1–2), 51–58. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00287847.
Crutzen, C. K. (2013). Masks between the visible and the invisible. In W. Ernst & I. Horwath (Eds.), Gender in Science and Technology (pp.79-108). https://doi.org/10.14361/transcript.9783839424346.79.
Damasso, M. (2017). Pulcinella tra Maschera e persona: Un’esperienza di psicoterapia [Pulcinella between mask and person: A psychotherapy experience]. Babel, 35, 259–267. https://doi.org/10.4000/babel.4885.
De Rosa, A. S., & Holman, A. (2011). Social representations of female-male beauty and aesthetic surgery: A cross-cultural analysis. Temas em Psicologia, 19(1), 75–98.
Dellinger, K., & Williams, C. L. (1997). Makeup at work: Negotiating appearance rules in the workplace. Gender & Society, 11(2), 151–177. https://doi.org/10.1177/089124397011002002.
Duflos-Priot, M. (1987). Le maquillage, séduction protocolaire et artifice normalisé [makeup, protocol seduction and normalized artifice]. Communications, 46(1), 245–253. https://doi.org/10.3406/comm.1987.1697.
Garcia, C. M., Eisenberg, M. E., Frerich, E. A., Lechner, K. E., & Lust, K. (2012). Conducting go-along interviews to understand context and promote health. Qualitative Health Research, 22(10), 1395–1403. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732312452936.
Gillen, M. M., & Dunaev, J. (2017). Body appreciation, interest in cosmetic enhancements, and need for uniqueness among U.S. college students. Body Image, 22, 136–143. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2017.06.008.
Hall, M., Gough, B., & Seymour-Smith, S. (2012). “I’m METRO, NOT gay!”: A discursive analysis of Men’s accounts of makeup use on YouTube. The Journal of Men’s Studies, 20(3), 209–226. https://doi.org/10.3149/jms.2003.209.
Heilman, M. E., & Saruwatari, L. R. (1979). When beauty is beastly: The effects of appearance and sex on evaluations of job applicants for managerial and nonmanagerial jobs. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 23(3), 360–372. https://doi.org/10.1016/0030-5073(79)90003-5.
Huguet, P., Croizet, J., & Richetin, J. (2004). Is “what has been cared for” necessarily good? Further evidence for the negative impact of cosmetics use on impression formation. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 34(8), 1752–1771. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2004.tb02796.x2.
Jeffreys, S. (2005). The “grip of culture on the body”: Beauty practices as women’s agency or women’s subordination. In S. Jeffreys (Ed.), Beauty and Misogyny: Harmful cultural practices in the west (1st ed., pp. 5–27). London: Routledge.
Josephs, I. E., & Valsiner, J. (1998). How does autodialogue work? Miracles of meaning maintenance and circumvention strategies. Social Psychology Quarterly, 61(1), 68–82. https://doi.org/10.2307/2787058.
Kullasepp, K. (2014). Through the professional role to the world of new meanings. In S. Salvatore, A. Gennaro, & J. Valsiner (Eds.), Multicentric identities in a globalizing world (pp. 111–132). USA: Information Age Publishing Inc..
Kusenbach, M. (2003). Street phenomenology: The go-along as ethnographic research tool. Ethnography, 4(3), 455–485. https://doi.org/10.1177/146613810343007.
Lafrance, M. (2018). Skin studies: past, present and future. Body & Society, 24(1–2), 3–32. https://doi.org/10.1177/1357034x18763065.
Mulhern, R., Fieldman, G., Hussey, T., Lévêque, J. L., & Pineau, P. (2003). Do cosmetics enhance female Caucasian facial attractiveness? International Journal of Cosmetic Science, 25, 199–205. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1467-2494.2003.00188.x.
Park, J., & Kwon, H. (2017). Perception about makeup influence on Man's makeup and their success [abstract]. Journal of the Korea Convergence Society, 8(4), 231–237. https://doi.org/10.15207/jkcs.2017.8.4.231.
Pinheiro, M., & Carvalho, G. (2017). Singularity and myth: The body as a subversive power. Revista Latinoamericana de Psicopatologia Fundamental, 20(4), 728–748.
Pollock, D. (1995). Masks and the semiotics of identity. The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, 1(3), 581–597. https://doi.org/10.2307/3034576.
Richetin, J., Huguet, P., & Croizet, J.-C. (2007). Le rôle des cosmétiques dans les premières impressions : le cas particulier du maquillage. L’Année Psychologique, 107(01), 65. https://doi.org/10.4074/s0003503307001042.
Rudd, N. (1997). Cosmetics consumption and use among women: Ritualized activities that construct and transform the self. Journal of Ritual Studies, 11(2), 59–77 Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/44368986.
Savarese, G., Fasano, O., Mollo, M., & Pecoraro, N. (2013). From personal identity to pluralism of intercultural identity: A study on the transferability of self-knowledge to the multicultural social contexts. Knowledge Cultures, 1(6), 122–126.
Smelser, N. (1998). The rational and the ambivalent in the social sciences: 1997 presidential address. American Sociological Review, 63(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.2307/2657473.
Tateo, L. (2017). Poetic destroyers. Vico, Emerson and the aesthetic dimension of experiencing. Culture & Psychology, 23(3), 337–355.
Tateo, L. (2018). Tensegrity as existential condition: The inherent ambivalence of development. In I. Albert, E. Abbey, & J. Valsiner (Eds.), Trans-Generational Family Relations : Investigating Ambivalences (pp.3-20). Retrieved from http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/unilu-ebooks/detail.action?docID=5321756
Valence, A. (2010). Les représentations sociales [social representations]. Brussels: Groupe De Boeck.
Valsiner, J. (2002). Forms of dialogical relations and semiotic autoregulation within the self. Theory & Psychology, 12(2), 251–265.
Valsiner, J. (2006). Ambivalence under scrutiny: Returning to the future. Estudios de Psicología, 27(1), 117–130. https://doi.org/10.1174/021093906776173207.
Wegenstein, B., & Ruck, N. (2011). Physiognomy, reality television and the cosmetic gaze. Body & Society, 17(4), 27–54. https://doi.org/10.1177/1357034x11410455.
Westmore, M. G. (2001). Camouflage and makeup preparations. Clinics in Dermatology, 19(4), 406–412. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0738-081x(01)00180-8.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank Prof. Jaan Valsiner, Dr. Isabelle Albert and Dr. Luca Tateo for their contribution to the project. Many thanks go also to all the scholars who gave us a feedback during our presentation at the Kitchen seminar in September 2019 as well as to our reviewers for their insight about our work.
Funding
The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and publication of this article.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of Interest
Marina Spezzacatena declares that she has no conflict of interest. Giuseppina Marsico declares that she has no conflict of interest.
Ethical Approval
This article does not contain any studies with human participants performed by any of the authors.
Additional information
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Appendix 1
Appendix 1
CATEGORIES USED FOR THE FIRST BLANK
Admiration - shows admiration in regard to what is represented in the picture by complimenting it, such as: “I feel admiring the makeup skills”, “attracted and fascinated by this makeup”- shows admiration in general, such as: “I love it!”, “mesmerized”, “I feel perfection” - is interested or curious about the picture.
Anger - shows anger through adjectives like “irritated”, “angry” - feels mocked.
Circumvention - changes the focus by speaking about what she sees in the picture, and not about her feelings, such as: “this is a very black line. It reminds me the first picture of the woman on the other picture”, “I feel that make up has been used”.
Discomfort - shows feelings of discomfort such as “insecure”, “empty”, “exposed”, “fragile”, “distrustful”, “tired”, “embarrassed”- makes statements that express her discomfort such as “I feel older than her”, “whether with or without makeup, one must not see dark circles and double chin”- expresses a feeling of nudity (“I feel naked”)- says not to be able to identify herself with what is depicted in the picture, such as: “I feel not like myself”.
Frustration - states feelings of frustration such as “I feel sad” or “I feel frustrated”.
Happiness - shows feeling of happiness such as “happy”, “enthusiastic”, “amazing”, “accomplished”, “excited” - makes statements that express her happiness such as “happy to be a woman”, “glad, knowing that my face is the foundation and the compliment cannot be only because of the makeup”.
Incompetence - states feeling like she doesn’t measure up to what is depicted in the picture such as: “untalented”, “unable”, “unknowing”, “poorly qualified”- makes statements that express her feeling of incompetence such as: “no matter how busy I am with the makeup, I will never have the same result”.
Indifference - shows indifference in regard to the situation or the picture such as “indifferent”, “uninterested”, “like before”.
Jealousy - shows feeling of jealousy about what is represented in the picture- states that she would like to have certain body parts like the ones of the person in the picture.
Made-up - states feeling made-up, i.e. with makeup on.
Pensive - states feeling pensive, thoughtful.
Rejection - shows rejection in regard to what is represented in the picture, such as “too much artificial”, “vulgar”.
Sadness - shows feeling of sadness in regard to the picture or situation (“I feel sad”).
Satisfaction - shows feeling of satisfaction such as “good”, “ok”, “satisfied”- expresses feelings of satisfaction in regard to a compliment, such as “flattered”, “honored”.
Self-confidence - states feelings of beauty, such as “beautiful”, “sexy” - expresses feelings of self-confidence, such as “confident”, “strong”.
Self-identification - states that she identifies herself to what is represented in the picture.
Surprise - states feeling surprised in regard to the picture or situation.
Ugliness - states feeling ugly or that she doesn’t care enough about herself, i.e. her appearance such as “ugly”, “careless”
CATEGORIES USED FOR THE SECOND BLANK
Circumvention - changes the focus by speaking about what she sees in the picture, and not about her feelings, such as: “I have blue eyes”, “she has beautiful eyes” - hopes that (or wonders IF) the person also considers her as beautiful without makeup- uses rationalization, such as: “I feel this is a very black line. I reminds me the first picture of woman on the left, but the pupil in the eye is pretty and it is reflecting something, like someone running, so I am wondering what scene is happening there.”
Complimenting - compliments the picture or what is represented in the picture.
Desire imitation (incompetence) - expresses the desire to imitate the makeup in the picture, despite of feeling incompetent in regard to it.
Incompetence (admiration) - expresses feeling incompetent in regard to the picture, despite of her expressed admiration at first.
Negative Convergence - expresses negative feelings in both blanks, such as: “I feel vulgar, but provocative”, “I feel inadequate, but scared”.
No self-identification - states not being able to identify herself in what is represented in thepicture, such as: “it isn’t a part of me”, “maybe it’s a heavy makeup to do on myself”.
Open tension - shows an opposite or divergent feeling in regard to the first blank, i.e. the feelings of both blanks don’t go in the same direction, as for instance: “Mesmerized, but overwhelmed”, “Well, but stressed out” - states not feeling beautiful, or says that she knows she’s not beautiful without makeup, such as: “Good for the compliment, but then I think maybe for that person I am not equally beautiful without makeup”.
Overcoming - shows that she overcomes the negative feeling mentioned in the first blank such as “a bit of jealousy, but I can live without makeup” - shows that she overcomes ambivalence in the second blank “I feel it depends on the day: fresh, pale, but I don’t complex about myself”- shows a process of negotiation such as “when I go out without any makeup on, I feel a bit empty, but it’s ok, I doesn’t bother me too much”.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Spezzacatena, M., Marsico, G. How Does Ambivalence Appear in Women’s Relationship to Cosmetics?. Integr. psych. behav. 55, 128–166 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12124-020-09572-x
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12124-020-09572-x