Journal of Business Ethics

, Volume 154, Issue 2, pp 325–340 | Cite as

The Self-Deceived Consumer: Women’s Emotional and Attitudinal Reactions to the Airbrushed Thin Ideal in the Absence Versus Presence of Disclaimers

  • Sylvie BorauEmail author
  • Marcelo Vinhal Nepomuceno
Original Paper


The use of airbrushed “thin ideal” models in advertising creates major ethical challenges: This practice deceives consumers and can be harmful to their emotional state. To inform consumers they are being deceived and reduce these negative adverse effects, disclaimers can state that the images have been digitally altered and are unrealistic. However, recent research shows that such disclaimers have very limited impact on viewers. This surprising result needs further investigation to understand how women who detect that images have been airbrushed are still harmed by them. Three studies reported in this article address this question. The authors identify a typology, based on a combination of three emotional reactions experienced by women who are exposed to the airbrushed thin ideal. In further analyses, they investigate how detection of airbrushing—whether spontaneous or with the help of a disclaimer—relates to these emotional reactions and women’s attitudes to altered images. Results show that detection of airbrushing does not systematically protect women from either wanting to look like airbrushed thin models or the negative emotions triggered by exposure to thin ideal images, nor does it always generate defensive reactions toward ads using such images. Women who detect that images have been airbrushed may still process these images as realistic. In addition to discussing this irrational process of self-deception, this article suggests policy interventions to prevent it.


Deceptive advertising Self-deception Airbrushed images Female thin ideal Disclaimers Negative emotions 


Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest


Research Involving Human Participants and/or Animals

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. This article does not contain any studies with animals performed by any of the authors.

Informed Consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.


  1. Ata, R. N., Thompson, J. K., & Small, B. J. (2013). Effects of exposure to thin-ideal media images on body dissatisfaction: Testing the inclusion of a disclaimer versus warning label. Body Image, 10(4), 472–480.Google Scholar
  2. Batra, R., & Holbrook, M. B. (1990). Developing a typology of affective responses to advertising. Psychology and Marketing, 7(1), 11–25.Google Scholar
  3. Batra, R., & Ray, M. L. (1986). Affective responses mediating acceptance of advertising. Journal of Consumer Research, 13(2), 234–249.Google Scholar
  4. BBC. (2016). London mayor plans negative body image advert ban on Tube, buses and trains. Retrieved from on 25th October 2016.
  5. Bishop, J. D. (2000). Is self-identity image advertising ethical? Business Ethics Quarterly, 10(2), 371–398.Google Scholar
  6. Borau, S., & Bonnefon, J. F. (2016). The advertising performance of non-ideal female models as a function of viewers’ body mass index: A moderated mediation analysis of two competing affective pathways. International Journal of Advertising, 1–20.
  7. Bower, A. B. (2001). Highly attractive models in advertising and the women who loathe them: The Implications of negative affect for spokesperson effectiveness. Journal of Advertising, 30(3), 51–63.Google Scholar
  8. Boyer, V., Ameline, N., Beaudouin, P., Bignon, J., Blum, R., Bouchet, J. C., et al. (2009). Proposed law on photographs of retouched body images. Retrieved from on 25th October 2016.
  9. Brenkert, G. G. (2008). Marketing ethics. Hoboken, NJ: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  10. Bury, B., Tiggemann, M., & Slater, A. (2014). Directing gaze: The effect of disclaimer labels on women’s visual attention to fashion magazine advertisements. Body Image, 11(4), 357–363.Google Scholar
  11. Bury, B., Tiggemann, M., & Slater, A. (2016a). The effect of digital alteration disclaimer labels on social comparison and body image: Instructions and individual differences. Body Image, 17, 136–142.Google Scholar
  12. Bury, B., Tiggemann, M., & Slater, A. (2016b). Disclaimer labels on fashion magazine advertisements: Impact on visual attention and relationship with body dissatisfaction. Body Image, 16, 1–9.Google Scholar
  13. Cahill, S., & Mussap, A. J. (2007). Emotional reactions following exposure to idealized bodies predict unhealthy body change attitudes and behaviors in women and men. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 62(6), 631–639.Google Scholar
  14. Calfee, J. E., & Ringold, D. J. (1994). The 70% majority: Enduring consumer beliefs about advertising. Journal of Public Policy and Marketing, 13, 228–238.Google Scholar
  15. Chance, Z., & Norton, M. I. (2015). The what and why of self-deception. Current Opinion in Psychology, 6, 104–107.Google Scholar
  16. Cohan, J. A. (2001). Towards a new paradigm in the ethics of woman’s advertising. Journal of Business Ethics, 33, 323–337.Google Scholar
  17. Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2014). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. New York, NY: Sage.Google Scholar
  18. Craig, A. W., Loureiro, Y. K., Wood, S., & Vendemia, J. M. C. (2012). Suspicious minds: Exploring neural processes during exposure to deceptive advertising. Journal of Marketing Research, 49(3), 361–372.Google Scholar
  19. Darke, P. R., Ashworth, L., & Main, K. J. (2010). Great expectations and broken promises: Misleading claims, product failure, expectancy disconfirmation and consumer distrust. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 38(3), 347–362.Google Scholar
  20. Darke, P. R., & Ritchie, R. J. (2007). The defensive consumer: Advertising deception, defensive processing, and distrust. Journal of Marketing Research, 44(1), 114–127.Google Scholar
  21. Dittmar, H., Halliwell, E., & Stirling, E. (2009). Understanding the impact of thin media models on women’s body-focused affect: The roles of thin-ideal internalization and weight-related self-discrepancy activation in experimental exposure effects. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 28, 43–72.Google Scholar
  22. Donovan, K. C. (2012). Vanity Fare: The cost, controversy, and art of fashion advertisement retouching. Notre Dame Journal of Law Ethics and Public Policy, 26(2), 581.Google Scholar
  23. Duke, L. (2002). Get real! Cultural relevance and resistance to the mediated feminine ideal. Psychology and Marketing, 19(2), 211–233.Google Scholar
  24. Edell, J. A., & Burke, M. C. (1987). The power of feelings in understanding advertising effects. Journal of Consumer Research, 14(3), 421–433.Google Scholar
  25. Ferguson, C. J., Winegard, B., & Winegard, B. M. (2011). Who is the fairest one of all? How evolution guides peer and media influences on female body dissatisfaction. Review of General Psychology, 15(1), 11–28.Google Scholar
  26. Fitzsimmons-Craft, E. E., Harney, M. B., Koehler, L. G., Danzi, L. E., Riddell, M. K., & Bardone-Cone, A. M. (2012). Explaining the relation between thin ideal internalization and body dissatisfaction among college women: The roles of social comparison and body surveillance. Body Image, 9(1), 43–49.Google Scholar
  27. Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50.Google Scholar
  28. Frederick, D. A., Sandhu, G., Scott, T., & Akbari, Y. (2016). Reducing the negative effects of media exposure on body image: Testing the effectiveness of subvertising and disclaimer labels. Body Image, 17, 171–174.Google Scholar
  29. Geuss, M. (2012). Israel requires advertisers to disclose photoshopping of models. Retrieved from on 25th October 2016.
  30. Grabe, S., Ward, L. M., & Hyde, J. S. (2008). The role of the media in body image concerns among women: A meta-analysis of experimental and correlational studies. Psychological Bulletin, 134(3), 460–476.Google Scholar
  31. Holbrook, M. B., & Batra, R. (1987). Assessing the role of emotions as mediators of consumer responses to advertising. Journal of Consumer Research, 14(3), 404–420.Google Scholar
  32. Hyman, M. (2009). Responsible ads: A workable ideal. Journal of Business Ethics, 87(2), 199–210.Google Scholar
  33. Hyman, M. R., Tansey, R., & Clark, J. W. (1994). Research on advertising ethics: Past, present, and future. Journal of Advertising, 23(3), 5–15.Google Scholar
  34. Janssens, W., De Pelsmacker, P., Wijnen, K., & Van Kenhove, P. (2008). Marketing research with SPSS. London: Pearson Education.Google Scholar
  35. Kyrousi, A. G., Panigyrakis, G. G., & Panopoulos, A. P. (2016). Attitudes toward ads portraying women in decorative roles and female competition: An evolutionary psychology perspective. International Journal of Advertising, 35(5), 1–28.Google Scholar
  36. Laros, F. J., & Steenkamp, J. E. (2005). Emotions in consumer behavior: A hierarchical approach. Journal of Business Research, 58, 1437–1445.Google Scholar
  37. Lauria, F., Preissmann, D., & Clément, F. (2016). Self-deception as affective coping. An empirical perspective on philosophical issues. Consciousness and Cognition, 41, 119–134.Google Scholar
  38. Lin, C. L., & Yeh, J. T. (2009). Comparing society’s awareness of women: Media-portrayed idealized images and physical attractiveness. Journal of Business Ethics, 90(1), 61–79.Google Scholar
  39. Lubitz (2015) France passes law requiring companies to admit when models have been Photoshopped. Retrieved from on 25th October 2016.
  40. Madden, T. J., Allen, C. T., & Twible, J. L. (1988). Attitude toward the ad: An assessment of diverse measurement indices under different processing ‘sets’. Journal of Marketing Research, 25(3), 242–252.Google Scholar
  41. Newell, S. J., Goldsmith, R. E., & Banzhaf, E. J. (1998). The effect of misleading environmental claims on consumer perceptions of advertisements. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 6(2), 48–60.Google Scholar
  42. Paraskeva, N., Lewis-Smith, H., & Diedrichs, P. C. (2015). Consumer opinion on social policy approaches to promoting positive body image: Airbrushed media images and disclaimer labels. Journal of Health Psychology. doi: 10.1177/1359105315597052.Google Scholar
  43. Paxton, S. J. (2015). Social policy and prevention. In L. Smolak & M. Levine (Eds.), The Wiley handbook of eating disorders (pp. 655–668). Chichester, UK: Wiley.Google Scholar
  44. Peterson, R. T. (1987). Bulimia and anorexia in an advertising context. Journal of Business Ethics, 6(6), 495–504.Google Scholar
  45. Posavac, H. D., Posavac, S. S., Weigel, R. G., & Simon, W. (2001). Reducing the impact of media images on women at risk for body image disturbance: Three targeted interventions. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 20(3), 324–340.Google Scholar
  46. Raghunathan, R., & Pham, M. T. (1999). All negative moods are not equal: Motivational influences of anxiety and sadness on decision making. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 79(1), 56–77.Google Scholar
  47. Riquelme, I. P., & Román, S. (2014). The influence of consumers’ cognitive and psychographic traits on perceived deception: A comparison between online and offline retailing contexts. Journal of Business Ethics, 119(3), 405–422.Google Scholar
  48. Rollero, C. (2015). “I Know You Are Not Real”: Salience of photo retouching reduces the negative effects of media exposure via internalization. Studia Psychologica, 57(3), 195.Google Scholar
  49. Romani, S. (2006). Price misleading advertising: Effects on trustworthiness toward the source of information and willingness to buy. Journal of Product and Brand Management, 15(2), 130–138.Google Scholar
  50. Selimbegovíc, L., & Chatard, A. (2015). Single exposure to disclaimers on airbrushed thin ideal images increases negative thought accessibility. Body Image, 12, 1–5.Google Scholar
  51. Shaver, P., Schwartz, J., Kirson, D., & O’Conner, C. (1987). Emotion knowledge: Further exploration of a prototype approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 1061–1086.Google Scholar
  52. Silverstein, B., Perdue, L., Peterson, L., & Kelly, E. (1986). The role of the mass media in promoting a thin standard of bodily attractiveness for women. Sex Roles, 14(9), 519–532.Google Scholar
  53. Slater, A., Tiggemann, M., Firth, B., & Hawkins, K. (2012). Reality check: An experimental investigation of the addition of warning labels to fashion magazine images on women’s mood and body dissatisfaction. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 31, 105–122.Google Scholar
  54. Spitzer, B. L., Henderson, A., & Zivian, M. T. (1999). Gender differences in population versus media body sizes: A comparison over four decades. Sex Roles, 40, 545–565.Google Scholar
  55. Spurgin, E. W. (2003). What’s wrong with computer-generated images of perfection in advertising? Journal of Business Ethics, 45(3), 257–268.Google Scholar
  56. Strahan, E. J., Wilson, A. E., Cressman, K. E., & Buote, V. M. (2006). Comparing to perfection: How cultural norms for appearance affect social comparisons and self-image. Body Image, 3(3), 211–227.Google Scholar
  57. Telegraph. (2009). French MPs want health warnings on airbrushed photographs. Retrieved from on 25th October 2016.
  58. Telegraph. (2015). French MPs pass a law making it illegal to employ unhealthily thin women or Photoshop images without stating it clearly. Retrieved from on 25th October 2016.
  59. Tiggemann, M. (2011). Sociocultural perspectives on human appearance and body image. Body Image: A Handbook of Science, Practice, and Prevention, 2, 12–501.Google Scholar
  60. Tiggemann, M., Slater, A., Bury, B., Hawkins, K., & Firth, B. (2013). Disclaimer labels on fashion magazine advertisements: Effects on social comparison and body dissatisfaction. Body Image: An International Journal of Research, 10, 45–53.Google Scholar
  61. Tiggemann, M., Slater, A., & Smyth, V. (2014). ‘Retouch free’: The effect of labelling media images as not digitally altered on women’s body dissatisfaction. Body Image, 11(1), 85–88.Google Scholar
  62. Vaillancourt, T. (2013). Do human females use indirect aggression as an intrasexual competition strategy? Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 368, 1631.Google Scholar
  63. Waller, D. S. (2015). Photoshop and deceptive advertising: An analysis of blog comments. Studies in Media and Communication, 3(1), 109–116.Google Scholar
  64. Wible, A. (2011). It’s all on sale: Marketing ethics and the perpetually fooled. Journal of Business Ethics, 99(S1), 17–21.Google Scholar
  65. Wilkins, S., Beckenuyte, C., & Butt, M. M. (2016). Consumers’ behavioural intentions after experiencing deception or cognitive dissonance caused by deceptive packaging, package downsizing or slack filling. European Journal of Marketing, 50(1/2), 213–235.Google Scholar
  66. Wilksch, S. M., & Wade, T. D. (2009). Reduction of shape and weight concern in young adolescents: A 30-month controlled evaluation of a media literacy program. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 48(6), 652–661.Google Scholar
  67. Williams, P., & Aaker, J. L. (2002). Can mixed emotions peacefully coexist? Journal of Consumer Research, 28(4), 636–649.Google Scholar
  68. Wiseman, M. A., Gray, J. J., Mosimann, J. E., & Ahrens, A. H. (1992). Cultural expectations of thinness in women: An update. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 11(1), 85–89.Google Scholar
  69. Xie, G.-X., Madrigal, R., & Boush, D. M. (2015). Disentangling the effects of perceived deception and anticipated harm on consumer responses to deceptive advertising. Journal of Business Ethics, 129(2), 281–293.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of Toulouse, Toulouse Business SchoolToulouseFrance
  2. 2.Department of MarketingHEC MontréalMontréalCanada

Personalised recommendations