Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Filtering a beauty justification: the effect of filtered selfies on preferences for hedonic versus utilitarian products

  • Published:
Marketing Letters Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Filtered selfies are prevalent on social media and are considered an effective way to project an ideal self. Built-in editing by beauty filters allows the user to easily obtain an enhanced self-image in a second, and such auto-editing filters are employed across a multitude of contexts. In the present research, we explore the effect of filtered selfies on product preference. Four studies with various real filtered selfie manipulations and an ancillary study reveal that filtered selfies promote a preference for hedonic over utilitarian products through self-worth, and this justification effect is attenuated among individuals exhibiting high levels of lay rationalism and when beauty-editing cues are salient. The studies ruled out alternative explanations of emotions and visceral state. The findings indicate the justification effect of filtered selfies for hedonic versus utilitarian products, which contributes to the literature on selfies, hedonic consumption, and practical suggestions for marketing.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aiken, L. S., West, S. G., & Reno, R. R. (1991). Multiple regression: testing and interpreting interactions. Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Appel, M., Hutmacher, F., Politt, T., & Stein, J. P. (2023). Swipe right? Using beauty filters in male Tinder profiles reduces women’s evaluations of trustworthiness but increases physical attractiveness and dating intention. Computers in Human Behavior, 148, 107871.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Argo, J. J., & White, K. (2012). When do consumers eat more? The role of appearance self-esteem and food packaging cues. Journal of Marketing, 76(2), 67–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Belmi, P., & Neale, M. (2014). Mirror, mirror on the wall, who’s the fairest of them all? Thinking that one is attractive increases the tendency to support inequality. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 124(2), 133–149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bengart, P., & Vogt, B. (2023). Effects and interactions of labels’ color scheme and the individual difference variable lay rationalism on pro-environmental choices. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 87, 101998.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cavanaugh, L. A. (2014). Because I (don’t) deserve it: how relationship reminders and deservingness influence consumer indulgence. Journal of Marketing Research, 51(2), 218–232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crocker, J., Luhtanen, R. K., Cooper, M. L., & Bouvrette, A. (2003). Contingencies of self-worth in college students: theory and measurement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85(5), 894.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crocker, J., Luhtanen, R. K., & Sommers, S. R. (2004). Contingencies of self-worth: progress and prospects. European Review of Social Psychology, 15(1), 133–181.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crocker, J., & Wolfe, C. T. (2001). Contingencies of self-worth. Psychological Review, 108(3), 593.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Witt Huberts, J. C., Evers, C., & De Ridder, D. T. (2012). License to sin: self-licensing as a mechanism underlying hedonic consumption. European Journal of Social Psychology, 42(4), 490–496.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Witt Huberts, J. C., Evers, C., & De Ridder, D. T. (2014). “Because I am worth it”: a theoretical framework and empirical review of a justification-based account of self-regulation failure. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 18(2), 119–138.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dhar, R., & Wertenbroch, K. (2000). Consumer choice between hedonic and utilitarian goods. Journal of Marketing Research, 37(1), 60–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duval, S., & Wicklund, R. A. (1973). Effects of objective self-awareness on attribution of causality. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 9(1), 17–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elias, A. S., & Gill, R. (2018). Beauty surveillance: the digital self-monitoring cultures of neoliberalism. European Journal of Cultural Studies, 21(1), 59–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fennell, P. B., & Schneider, G. (2023). The influence of visually dynamic imagery on purchase intentions: the roles of arousal and lay rationalism. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 75, 103537.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fishbach, A., & Dhar, R. (2005). Goals as excuses or guides: the liberating effect of perceived goal progress on choice. Journal of Consumer Research, 32(3), 370–377.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gable, P. A., & Harmon-Jones, E. (2011). Attentional consequences of pregoal and postgoal positive affects. Emotion, 11(6), 1358.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Hsee, C. K., Yang, Y., Zheng, X., & Wang, H. (2015). Lay rationalism: individual differences in using reason versus feelings to guide decisions. Journal of Marketing Research, 52(1), 134–146.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hu, X., He, L., & Liu, J. (2022). The power of beauty: be your ideal self in online reviews—an empirical study based on face detection. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 67, 102975.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Javornik, A., Marder, B., Barhorst, J. B., McLean, G., Rogers, Y., Marshall, P., & Warlop, L. (2022). ‘What lies behind the filter?’Uncovering the motivations for using augmented reality (AR) face filters on social media and their effect on well−being. Computers in Human Behavior, 128, 107126.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Javornik, A., Marder, B., Pizzetti, M., & Warlop, L. (2021). Augmented self-the effects of virtual face augmentation on consumers’ self-concept. Journal of Business Research, 130, 170–187.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jiang, Z., Xu, J., Gorlin, M., & Dhar, R. (2021). Beautiful and confident: how boosting self-perceived attractiveness reduces preference uncertainty in context-dependent choices. Journal of Marketing Research, 58(5), 908–924.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Khan, U., & Dhar, R. (2006). Licensing effect in consumer choice. Journal of Marketing Research, 43(2), 259–266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kivetz, R., & Simonson, I. (2002). Earning the right to indulge: effort as a determinant of customer preferences toward frequency program rewards. Journal of Marketing Research, 39(2), 155–170.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kivetz, R., & Zheng, Y. (2006). Determinants of justification and self−control. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 135(4), 572.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kivetz, R., & Zheng, Y. (2017). The effects of promotions on hedonic versus utilitarian purchases. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 27(1), 59–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kokkoris, M. D., Hoelzl, E., & Alós-Ferrer, C. (2019). True to which self? Lay rationalism and decision satisfaction in self-control conflicts. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 117(2), 417.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kouchaki, M., & Jami, A. (2018). Everything we do, you do: the licensing effect of prosocial marketing messages on consumer behavior. Management Science, 64(1), 102–111.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lamp, S. J., Cugle, A., Silverman, A. L., Thomas, M. T., Liss, M., & Erchull, M. J. (2019). Picture perfect: the relationship between selfie behaviors, self-objectification, and depressive symptoms. Sex Roles, 81, 704–712.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lavrence, C., & Cambre, C. (2020). “Do I look like my selfie?”: filters and the digital−forensic gaze. Social Media+. Society, 6(4), 2056305120955182.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loewenstein, G. (1996). Out of control: visceral influences on behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 65, 272–299.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • May, F. (2017). The effect of future event markers on intertemporal choice is moderated by the reliance on emotions versus reason to make decisions. Journal of Consumer Research, 44(2), 313–331.

    Google Scholar 

  • Okada, E. M. (2005). Justification effects on consumer choice of hedonic and utilitarian goods. Journal of Marketing Research, 42(1), 43–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ozimek, P., Lainas, S., Bierhoff, H. W., & Rohmann, E. (2023). How photo editing in social media shapes self-perceived attractiveness and self-esteem via self-objectification and physical appearance comparisons. BMC Psychology, 11(1), 99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ramanathan, S., & Williams, P. (2007). Immediate and delayed emotional consequences of indulgence: the moderating influence of personality type on mixed emotions. Journal of Consumer Research, 34(2), 212–223.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rodner, V., Goode, A., & Burns, Z. (2022). “Is it all just lip service?”: on Instagram and the normalisation of the cosmetic servicescape. Journal of Services Marketing, 36(1), 44–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rogers, T., & Bazerman, M. H. (2008). Future lock-in: future implementation increases selection of ‘should’ choices. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 106(1), 1–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schettino, G., Fabbricatore, R., & Caso, D. (2023). “To be yourself or your selfies, that is the question”: the moderation role of gender, nationality, and privacy settings in the relationship between selfie-engagement and body shame. Psychology of Popular Media, 12(3), 268.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sirgy, M. J. (1982). Self-concept in consumer behavior: a critical review. Journal of Consumer Research, 9(3), 287–300.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smallwood, J., Schooler, J. W., Turk, D. J., Cunningham, S. J., Burns, P., & Macrae, C. N. (2011). Self-reflection and the temporal focus of the wandering mind. Consciousness and Cognition, 20(4), 1120–1126.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tiggemann, M., Anderberg, I., & Brown, Z. (2020). Uploading your best self: selfie editing and body dissatisfaction. Body Image, 33, 175–182.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vendemia, M. A., & DeAndrea, D. C. (2021). The effects of engaging in digital photo modifications and receiving favorable comments on women’s selfies shared on social media. Body Image, 37, 74–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, J., & Yu, Y. (2023). Beautify the blurry self: low self-concept clarity increases appearance management. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 33(2), 377–393.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, Q., Lisjak, M., & Mandel, N. (2023). On the flexibility of self-repair: how holistic versus analytic thinking style impacts fluid compensatory consumption. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 33(1), 3–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, Y., Chu, X., Nie, J., Gu, X., & Lei, L. (2021). Selfie-editing, facial dissatisfaction, and cosmetic surgery consideration among Chinese adolescents: a longitudinal study. Current Psychology, 1–11.

  • Xu, J., & Schwarz, N. (2009). Do we really need a reason to indulge? Journal of Marketing Research, 46(1), 25–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

Funding for this research was provided by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Project No. 72072148).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Management, Xiamen University, Xiamen, 361005, China

    Rui Chen, Ting Xu & Yanghan Guo

Authors
  1. Rui Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ting Xu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Yanghan Guo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

The three authors contribute equally. All authors contributed to the study conception and study. The final manuscript was read and approved by all authors.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ting Xu.

Ethics declarations

Ethical approval

This research has not been published and is not under consideration elsewhere. The authors collected all data in compliance with IRB and APA ethical standards for the treatment of participants.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no competing interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

ESM 1

(DOCX 46 kb)

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Chen, R., Xu, T. & Guo, Y. Filtering a beauty justification: the effect of filtered selfies on preferences for hedonic versus utilitarian products. Mark Lett (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11002-024-09728-4

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11002-024-09728-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation