Psychology - Paper Answers

choose a focus for this review based on the research questions addressed by these studies;
write an introductory paragraph describing this focus and its importance and relevance;
write a paragraph for each of the three studies describing its relationship to the focus of the review, a description of the study design, and the major finding(s);
write a final paragraph summarizing what a next study could be in order to investigate a related, unanswered question, or to replicate a finding in some way related to the focus you’ve selected.

R
R
A

K
F
S
D
B
A
C

c
2
s
(
G
i
s
h
&
2
i

f
e
a

C
b

h
1

Bod

y Image 12 (2015) 82–88

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Body Image

j o u r n a l h o m e p a g e : w w w . e l s e v i e r . c o m / l o c a t e / b o d y i m a g e

egative comparisons about one’s appearance mediate the
elationship between Facebook usage and body image concerns

asmine Fardouly ∗, Lenny R. Vartanian
chool of Psychology, UNSW Australia, Sydney, New South Wales 2052, Australia

r t i c l e i n f o

rticle history:
eceived 5 June 2014
eceived in revised form 20 October 2014
ccepted 22 October 2014

eywords:
acebook

a b s t r a c t

Use of social media, such as Facebook, is pervasive among young women. Body dissatisfaction is also
highly prevalent in this demographic. The present study examined the relationship between Face-
book usage and body image concerns among female university students (N = 227), and tested whether
appearance comparisons on Facebook in general, or comparisons to specific female target groups (fam-
ily members, close friends, distant peers [women one may know but do not regularly socialize with],
celebrities) mediated this relationship. Results showed a positive relationship between Facebook usage

ocial media
rive for thinness
ody dissatisfaction
ppearance-related social comparison
omparison target group

and body image concerns, which was mediated by appearance comparisons in general, frequency of com-
parisons to close friends and distant peers, and by upward comparisons (judging one’s own appearance
to be worse) to distant peers and celebrities. Thus, young women who spend more time on Facebook
may feel more concerned about their body because they compare their appearance to others (especially
to peers) on Facebook.

Introduction

For young women in Western society, the Internet is the most
ommonly used form of media (Bair, Kelly, Serdar, & Mazzeo,
012; Bell & Dittmar, 2011), and social networking websites,
uch as Facebook, are used more often than any other websites
Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2013; Tiggemann & Slater, 2013).
iven the popularity of social media, it is important to understand

ts association with young women’s body image concerns. Body dis-
atisfaction has become normative among young women both in
igh school (Bearman, Presnell, Martinez, & Stice, 2006; Ricciardelli
McCabe, 2001) and in university settings (Berg, Frazier, & Sherr,

009; Neighbors & Sobal, 2007). The high prevalence of body dissat-
sfaction among young women is particularly concerning because
ody dissatisfaction is one of the most robust risk and maintenance
actors for eating disorders (Stice, 2002). Sociocultural models of
ating disorders highlight the role of the media in the development
nd maintenance of body image problems (Keery, van den Berg, &

hompson, 2004; van den Berg, Thompson, Obremski-Brandon, &
oovert, 2002), but research connecting the use of social media and
ody image concerns is sparse.

∗ Corresponding author. Tel.: +61 2 9385 8758.
E-mail addresses: jasmine.fardouly@unsw.edu.au (J. Fardouly),

.vartanian@unsw.edu.au (L.R. Vartanian).

ttp://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2014.10.004
740-1445/© 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

A few recent studies have found that Facebook usage in gen-
eral is associated with appearance concerns. For example, research
with Australian samples found that preadolescent and adolescent
female Facebook users reported greater appearance concerns and
dieting behavior than did non-users (Tiggemann & Slater, 2013,
2014). Similarly, research with female high school students in
the United States found that Facebook users had higher levels of
self-objectification (i.e., placed more value on their appearance
than their competence), and made more appearance comparisons
than did non-users (Meier & Gray, 2014). Beyond simply compar-
ing users and non-users, research has examined the connection
between the amount of time spent on Facebook and appear-
ance concerns. Female primary school and high school students
in Australia who reported spending more time on Facebook were
more dissatisfied with their appearance, internalized the thin ideal
to a greater extent, and had greater drive for thinness (Tiggemann
& Miller, 2010; Tiggemann & Slater, 2013, 2014). Research has also
found that it is greater exposure to photographs on Facebook, rather
than overall Facebook usage, that is associated with greater body
dissatisfaction in female high school students (Meier & Gray, 2014).
The authors of several of these studies on Facebook usage suggested
that appearance comparisons might be the mechanism responsible

for the relationship between Facebook usage and body image con-
cerns (Tiggemann & Miller, 2010; Tiggemann & Slater, 2013, 2014),
but no research has directly investigated the role of appearance
comparisons in this relationship.

dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2014.10.004

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/17401445

http://www.elsevier.com/locate/bodyimage

http://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog/?doi=10.1016/j.bodyim.2014.10.004&domain=pdf

mailto:jasmine.fardouly@unsw.edu.au

mailto:l.vartanian@unsw.edu.au

dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2014.10.004

/ Bod

h
s
(
e
i
i
t
&
m
r
t
(
t
y
M
2
t
t
r
i
T
o
t
a
2
m
p
m
G
u

i
2
d
i
w
c
o
(
i
a
v
w
b
k
w
e
c
t
w
b
f
a
p
t
&
b
c
t
&
F
g
w
g
a

J. Fardouly, L.R. Vartanian

Sociocultural models of body image and disordered eating
ighlight the role of appearance comparisons in the pos-
ible development and maintenance of body dissatisfaction
Fitzsimmons-Craft et al., 2014; Keery et al., 2004; van den Berg
t al., 2002; Vartanian & Dey, 2013). In particular, negative body
mage can result when women make upward appearance compar-
sons, comparing their appearance to someone whom they believe
o be more attractive than themselves (Myers, Ridolfi, Crowther,

Ciesla, 2012; as is the case with many celebrities and fashion
odels, for example; Leahey & Crowther, 2008). The majority of

esearch on appearance comparisons has focused on comparisons
o media images through magazines, television, or music videos
Myers & Crowther, 2009), and exposure to these traditional media
ypes has been found to lead to greater body image concerns in
oung women (Bell, Lawton, & Dittmar, 2007; Groesz, Levine, &
urnen, 2002; Halliwell & Dittmar, 2004; Hargreaves & Tiggemann,

004). Furthermore, research examining exposure to these tradi-
ional media types has found that people’s tendency to compare
heir appearance to the appearance of others accounted for the
elationship between media exposure and women’s body dissat-
sfaction (Tiggemann & McGill, 2004; Tiggemann & Slater, 2004).
hat is, media exposure is linked to body dissatisfaction because
f appearance comparison. Similar processes might be at play in
he context of social media. Given the vast number of images that
re uploaded to Facebook every day (Mayer-Schönberger & Cukier,
013), this platform provides women with regular opportunities to
ake appearance comparisons with others. Furthermore, because

eople tend to present an idealized version of the self on social
edia (Manago, Graham, Greenfield, & Salimkhan, 2008; Zhao,
rasmuck, & Martin, 2008), upward comparisons to other Facebook
sers may be particularly likely.

Another important feature of sociocultural models of body
mage, such as the tripartite influence model (van den Berg et al.,
002), is the emphasis on appearance-related pressures from
ifferent sources, including one’s family, peers, and the media. Sim-

larly, it may be that examining appearance comparisons to women
ithin these different groups (family, peers, models/celebrities)

an play an important role in understanding the development
f body image concerns. Unlike more traditional forms of media
such as magazines and television), which predominantly features
mages of models, celebrities, or other strangers, social media (such
s Facebook) contains images of a variety of different types of indi-
iduals. Facebook generally features known others (or “friends”)
ho vary in relational closeness to the user, including family mem-

ers, close friends, and distant peers (i.e., people the viewer may
now but does not regularly socialize with in person). In addition,
hen using Facebook, people are also exposed to images of mod-

ls and celebrities through advertisements, fan pages, and other
ommercial pages. Despite being exposed to a variety of different
arget groups on Facebook, people mainly use Facebook to interact
ith their peers (Hew, 2011), and having more “friends” on Face-

ook has been associated with greater body image concerns among
emale high school students (Tiggemann & Slater, 2013). There is
lso some evidence to suggest that appearance comparisons to
eers may have a stronger association with body image concerns
han does comparisons to models or celebrities (Carey, Donaghue,

Broderick, 2014), perhaps because the appearance of peers may
e seen as more personally attainable than the appearance of
elebrities. However, these effects have not been consistent in
he literature (Leahey & Crowther, 2008; Ridolfi, Myers, Crowther,

Ciesla, 2011; Schutz, Paxton, & Wertheim, 2002). Given that
acebook contains images of a variety of potential comparison tar-

ets varying in relational closeness, it is important to examine
hether the frequency and direction of comparisons to specific tar-

et groups accounts for the relationship between Facebook usage
nd women’s body image concerns.

y Image 12 (2015) 82–88 83

The Present Study

Overall, the aims of this correlational study are to: (a) investigate
the relationship between the frequency of Facebook usage and body
image concerns among female university students; and (b) exam-
ine whether appearance comparisons in general or comparisons to
different target groups on Facebook account for this relationship.
Extrapolating from previous research (Tiggemann & Miller, 2010;
Tiggemann & Slater, 2013, 2014), we predict that greater Face-
book usage would be associated with higher levels of body image
concerns. Furthermore, based on research using traditional media
types (Tiggemann & McGill, 2004; Tiggemann & Slater, 2004),
appearance comparisons to women on Facebook are expected to
mediate, or account for, the relationship between Facebook usage
and body image concerns. Finally, the frequencies and directions
(i.e., whether the target was judged to be more [upward compar-
ison] or less [downward comparison] attractive than oneself) of
appearance comparisons to different target groups on Facebook are
expected to be differentially associated with women’s body image
concerns. Given that Facebook is generally used to interact with
one’s peers (Hew, 2011), and that having more “friends” on Face-
book is associated with greater appearance concerns (Tiggemann
& Slater, 2013), appearance comparisons to peers on Facebook are
expected to have the strongest association with young women’s
body image concerns.

Method

Participants

Participants (N = 227) were female first-year psychology stu-
dents at a large public university in eastern Australia. Power
analysis indicated that this sample size was sufficient to detect
small-to-medium effects with 80% power and alpha set at .05.
The mean age of participants was 19.13 years (SD = 2.21), and
their mean Body Mass Index (BMI: kg/m2) was 21.41 (SD = 3.93).
One-hundred-and-five participants (46.3%) identified as White, 95
(41.9%) identified as Asian, and 27 (11.8%) identified as “other.”

Measures

Facebook usage. Two questions were used to measure how
much time participants usually spend on Facebook: “On a typical
day, how often do you check Facebook (even if you are logged on
all day)?” (1 = not at all, 2 = once a day, 3 = every few hours, 4 = every
hour, 5 = every 30 minutes, 6 = every 10 minutes, 7 = every 2 minutes);
and “Overall, how long do you spend on Facebook on a typical
day?” (1 = 5 minutes or less, 2 = 15 minutes, 3 = 30 minutes, 4 = 1 hour,
5 = 2 hours, 6 = 4 hours, 7 = 6 hours, 8 = 8 hours, 9 = 10 hours or more).
Because these indicators were highly correlated, r = .57, p < .001, responses on these two questions were standardized and then aver- aged to form a single measure of Facebook usage.

Facebook appearance comparisons in general. Three state-
ments taken from the Physical Appearance Comparison Scale
(PACS; Thompson, Heinberg, & Tantleff, 1991) were modified to
measure participants’ tendency to compare their appearance to
others on Facebook. These three statements were chosen because
they refer to the specific situation or place where the comparisons
take place (e.g., “at parties or social events”) and could therefore be
modified to address comparisons through Facebook. Participants
were asked to indicate their level of agreement on a 5-point scale

(1 = definitely disagree, 5 = definitely agree) with each of the following
statements: “When using Facebook, I compare my physical appear-
ance to the physical appearance of others,” “When using Facebook,
I compare how I am dressed to how other people are dressed,” and

8 / Bod

“
u
m
(

i
c
o
q
f
p
o
(
t
b
r
t
t
b
i
f
o
f
h
n
o
f
a
t
c
m
e
d

I
a
D
(
p
d
s
i
p
b

c
p
w
a
W
w
m
t
a
c
r
c
t
w
c

4 J. Fardouly, L.R. Vartanian

When using Facebook, I sometimes compare my figure to the fig-
res of other people.” Responses were averaged to form a combined
easure of Facebook appearance comparison tendency in general

Cronbach’s ˛ = .75).

Comparisons to specific target groups on Facebook. Partic-
pants reported on the frequency and direction of appearance
omparisons that they made to specific female target groups
n Facebook. In each case, participants were instructed that the
uestion “refers to people of the same sex as you.” For the
requency-of-comparison item, participants were asked on a 5-
oint scale, “When looking at photos of the following people
n Facebook, how often do you compare your body to theirs?”
1 = never, 5 = very often); for the direction-of-comparison item, par-
icipants were asked on a 6-point scale, “When comparing your
ody to each of the following people on Facebook, how do you
ate yourself?” (1 = much worse, 6 = much better). (Note that, for
he direction-of-comparison item, responses were not included for
hose participants who indicated that they never compared their
ody to a particular target group in the frequency-of-comparison

tem.) The target groups varied in relational closeness and included:
amily members, close friends (i.e., females you are friends with
n Facebook and regularly hang out with), Facebook friends (i.e.,
emales you are friends with on Facebook but do not regularly
ang out with), friends of friends (i.e., females you know but are
ot friends with on Facebook and you do not regularly hang
ut with), and celebrities (e.g., actors, musicians, models). Ratings
or Facebook friend and friend of friend were averaged to form

single measure labeled the distant peer target group for both
he frequency-of-comparison (Cronbach’s ˛ = .88) and direction-of-
omparison (Cronbach’s ˛ = .90) measures. Ratings for the family
ember, close friend, and celebrity target groups were consid-

red independently for both the frequency-of-comparison and
irection-of-comparison measures.

Body image concerns. Two subscales of the Eating Disorder
nventory (EDI; Garner, Olmstead, & Polivy, 1983) were used to
ssess individuals’ concerns with body weight and shape: the Body
issatisfaction subscale (BD) and the Drive for Thinness subscale

DFT). Using a 6-point response scale (1 = never, 6 = always), partici-
ants rated the extent to which nine statements related to body
issatisfaction (e.g., “I think my stomach is too big”) and seven
tatements related to drive for thinness (e.g., “I am terrified of gain-
ng weight”) described them. Internal consistency reliability in the
resent study was high for both the Body Dissatisfaction (Cron-
ach’s ˛ = .90) and Drive for Thinness (Cronbach’s ˛ = .91) subscales.

rocedure

This study was approved by the authors’ university ethics
ommittee. Participants were recruited via an online psychology
articipant pool. Only female students with a Facebook account
ere eligible to sign up for this study, which was described as

n online study examining the use of social networking websites.
hen participants signed up for the study, they were sent an email
ith a link to the online survey that included the aforementioned
easures as well as six filler questionnaires related to the self

hat were not part of the current investigation. Participants were
lso asked if they had a Facebook account (all participants indi-
ated that they did have a Facebook account), and were asked to
eport their age, ethnicity, and height and weight (used to cal-

ulate BMI). Participants completed the online questionnaires in
heir natural environment (e.g., at home or the library). Participants
ere debriefed in person and given introductory psychology course

redit for their participation.

y Image 12 (2015) 82–88

Data Analysis

Before conducting any analyses, missing data points were
replaced by series means for the body dissatisfaction and drive
for thinness measures (no participant missed more than two ques-
tions on each measure). Descriptive statistics were then calculated
for the two Facebook usage questions before they were combined
to form a single item. We next examined the correlations between
Facebook usage and body image concerns (body dissatisfaction and
drive for thinness) to test the hypothesis that greater Facebook
usage would be associated with higher body image concerns, and
conducted a mediation analysis using the bootstrapping procedure
described by Preacher and Hayes (2008) to test whether the rela-
tionship between Facebook usage and body dissatisfaction and/or
drive for thinness was accounted for by Facebook appearance
comparisons. This bootstrapping procedure generates confidence
intervals for the indirect effect of the predictor variable on the
criterion variable through the mediating variable by repeatedly
sampling from the data set (in this case, 5000 bootstrap resam-
ples) to create an approximation of the sampling distribution of the
indirect effect. Note that a significant direct relationship between
the predictor variable on the criterion variable is not necessary for
mediation (Hayes, 2009).

We next conducted repeated measures analyses of variance
(ANOVAs) to test whether the frequency and direction of appear-
ance comparisons varied by target group (family members, close
friends, distant peers, celebrities). For each target group, corre-
lations were also calculated between appearance comparison
frequency/direction and both Facebook usage and body image con-
cerns (body dissatisfaction and drive for thinness). Finally, if the
frequency/direction of appearance comparisons to any target group
was significantly correlated with both Facebook usage and either
of the two measures of body image concerns, mediation anal-
yses were conducted to test whether the relationship between
Facebook usage and body image concerns was mediated by the fre-
quency/direction of appearance comparisons to that specific target
group on Facebook. If appearance comparison frequency/direction
to more than one target group was correlated with both Facebook
usage and either of the two measures of body image concerns, mul-
tiple mediation analysis was also conducted in order to compare the
strength of the indirect effects.

Results

Preliminary Analyses

The pattern of results did not vary for participants with reported
Caucasian or Asian ethnicity. Therefore, all analysis was conducted
on the group as a whole. Participants’ modal frequency of check-
ing Facebook on a typical day was “every few hours” (M = 3.50,
SD = 1.08) and the modal amount of time spent on Facebook on a
typical day was “2 hours” (M = 4.40, SD = 1.47). As predicted, there
was a significant positive correlation between the combined Face-
book usage measure and body dissatisfaction, r = .14, p = .03, and
between the combined Facebook usage measure and drive for thin-
ness, r = .17, p = .01.

Mediation through General Facebook Comparisons

Both Facebook usage and the two body image concerns
measures (body dissatisfaction and drive for thinness) were sig-

nificantly and positively correlated with Facebook appearance
comparisons in general (see Table 1). Mediation analysis showed
that Facebook appearance comparisons in general mediated the
relationship between Facebook usage and body image concerns

J. Fardouly, L.R. Vartanian / Body Image 12 (2015) 82–88 85

Table 1
Correlations between Facebook usage, body image concerns, appearance comparisons, and the frequencies and directions of appearance comparisons to specific target groups.

Frequency of comparison Direction of comparison

Facebook appearance
comparisons in general

Family Close friends Distant peers Celebrities

Family Close friends Distant peers

Celebrities

Facebook usage .15* −.01 .14* .19** .11 −.05 −.06 −.22** −.17*
Body dissatisfaction .25** .16* .30** .31** .23** −.47** −.53** −.59** −.49**
Drive for thinness .35** .31** .46** .43** .32** −.30** −.37** −.44** −.34**
* p < .05.

** p < .01.

Facebook Usage Body Image Concerns

.11 (.14*)

.15* .23***

Facebook Appearance
Comparisons In

General

.12 (.17*)

.15* .33***

Fig. 1. Mediational model for Facebook appearance comparison tendency in gen-
eral. All numbers represent standardized beta weights. Numbers in parentheses
r
c
r

(
(
f

M
T

a
f
q
t
t
d
t
i
w
o
a
c
a
u

o
l
m
g
r
d
t
t
F
(
f
t
c
w

a
b
Facebook Usage Body Image Concerns

.10 (.17*)

.14* .28***

Frequency of
Comparisons to

Close Friends

.14* .44***

.10 (.14*)

Facebook Usage Body Image Concerns
.08 (.16*)

.19** .30***

.19** .42***

.08 (.13*)

Frequency of
Comparisons to

Distant Peers

Fig. 2. Mediational models for the frequency of appearance comparisons to (a) close
friends and (b) distant peers on Facebook. All numbers represent standardized beta
weights. Numbers in parentheses represent the direct, unmediated effects. Numbers

epresent the direct, unmediated effects. Numbers above the arrows represent the
oefficients for body dissatisfaction, and numbers below the arrows (in italics) rep-
esent the coefficients for drive for thinness. * p < .05. ** p < .01. *** p < .001.

see Fig. 1), as the 95% confidence interval (CI) did not include zero
body dissatisfaction: B = 0.38, SE = 0.20, 95% CI = 0.11, 0.85; drive
or thinness: B = 0.50, SE = 0.24, 95% CI = 0.15, 1.00).

ediation through Facebook Comparisons to Specific
arget Groups

As seen in Table 2, participants reported comparing their
ppearance most often to their distant peers on Facebook, just as
requently to close friends and celebrities, and significantly less fre-
uently to female family members. Furthermore, participants rated
heir body most negatively when comparing to female celebri-
ies, followed by close friends and distant peers (which did not
iffer from one another), and least negatively when comparing
o female family members. Because the direction-of-comparison
tem required participants to rate their bodies as either better or

orse than each target group (i.e., there was no midpoint or “same”
ption) any mean above 3.5 represented downward comparisons
nd any mean below 3.5 represented upward comparisons. In all
ases, except for comparisons to family members, participants on
verage rated their bodies as worse than the target group (i.e., made
pward comparisons).

Comparison frequencies. As seen in Table 1, the frequencies
f comparisons to close friends and distant peers were corre-
ated with both Facebook usage and the two body image concerns

easures. Therefore, the frequencies of comparisons to these tar-
et groups were tested as potential mediators. Mediation analysis
evealed that the frequency of comparisons to close friends (body
issatisfaction: B = 0.44, SE = 0.23, 95% CI = 0.10, 0.98; drive for
hinness: B = 0.63, SE = 0.31, 95% CI = 0.08, 1.29) mediated the rela-
ionship between Facebook usage and body image concerns (see
ig. 2a). In addition, the frequency of comparisons to distant peers
body dissatisfaction: B = 0.64, SE = 0.26, 95% CI = 0.22, 1.28; drive

or thinness: B = 0.82, SE = 0.30, 95% CI = 0.29, 1.49) also mediated
he relationship between Facebook usage and body image con-
erns (see Fig. 2b). Multiple mediation analysis revealed that there
as no difference in the strength of the indirect effect for close

above the arrows represent the coefficients for body dissatisfaction, and numbers
below the arrows (in italics) represent the coefficients for drive for thinness. * p < .05. ** p < .01. *** p < .001.

friends or distant peers (body dissatisfaction: B = −0.14, SE = 0.35,
95% CI = −0.93, 0.51; drive for thinness: B = 0.12, SE = 0.32, 95%
CI = −0.45, 0.90).

Comparison directions. As seen in Table 1, the directions of
comparisons to distant peers and celebrities were significantly
correlated with both Facebook usage and the two body image con-
cerns measures, and therefore these targets groups were tested as
potential mediators. Mediation analysis revealed that the direc-
tion of comparisons to celebrities (body dissatisfaction: B = 0.93,
SE = 0.43, 95% CI = 0.17, 1.80; drive for thinness: B = 0.58, SE = 0.29,
95% CI = 0.13, 1.21) mediated the relationship between Facebook
usage and body image concerns (see Fig. 3a). In addition, the direc-
tion of comparisons to distant peers (body dissatisfaction: B = 1.40,
SE = 0.49, 95% CI = 0.55, 2.49; drive for thinness: B = 0.90, SE = 0.34,
95% CI = 0.32, 1.70) also mediated the relationship between Face-
book usage and body image concerns (see Fig. 3b). Multiple
mediation analysis indicated that the indirect effect of distant

peers was stronger than the indirect effect of celebrities for both
measures of body image concerns (body dissatisfaction: B = 1.00,
SE = 0.49, 95% CI = 0.22, 2.24; drive for thinness: B = 0.72, SE = 0.44,
95% CI = 0.05, 1.77). Furthermore, the indirect effect of Facebook

86 J. Fardouly, L.R. Vartanian / Body Image 12 (2015) 82–88

Table 2
Mean (SD) ratings of the frequencies and directions of appearance comparisons to specific target groups on Facebook.

Family Close friends Distant peers Celebrities

Comparison frequencies 2.11 (1.09)a 2.88 (1.16)b 2.99 (1.13)c 2.85 (1.35)b

Comparison directions 3.52 (1.00)a 3.16 (1.01)b 3.01 (0.97)b 2.12 (1.06)c

Note: Comparison frequency ratings ranged from 1 = never to 5 = very often, and comparis
row with different superscripts are significantly different at p < .05.

a
b
Facebook Usage Body Image Concerns

.09 (.15)

-.17 * -.49***

Direction of
Comparisons to

Celebrities

-.17 * -.32***

.02 (.10)

Facebook Usage Body Image Concerns
.10 (.19**)

-.22 ** -.58***

-.22 ** -.42***

.04 (.17*)

Direction of
Comparisons to

Distant Peers

Fig. 3. Mediational models for the direction of appearance comparisons to (a)
celebrities and (b) distant peers on Facebook. All numbers represent standardized
beta weights. Numbers in parentheses represent the direct, unmediated effects.
N
n
n

u
n

d
f
a
s
T
i
a
a
t
c
fi
d
p
M
w
t
o

o
p

umbers above the arrows represent the coefficients for body dissatisfaction, and
umbers below the arrows (in italics) represent the coefficients for drive for thin-
ess. ∗ p < .05. ** p < .01. *** p < .001.

sage on drive for thinness through comparisons to celebrities was
o longer significant (B = 0.24, SE = 0.20, 95% CI = −0.02, 0.70).

Discussion

Consistent with previous research on female high school stu-
ents (Tiggemann & Miller, 2010; Tiggemann & Slater, 2013),
requency of Facebook usage showed a small-to-moderate positive
ssociation with body image concerns (in terms of both body dis-
atisfaction and drive for thinness) in female university students.
herefore, the present study extends previous literature by show-
ng that the association between the frequency of Facebook usage
nd female body image concerns is evident in both adolescence
nd early adulthood. Importantly, the present study further showed
hat the relationship between Facebook usage and body image con-
erns was mediated by appearance comparisons in general. These
ndings are consistent with sociocultural models of eating disor-
ers (Keery et al., 2004; van den Berg et al., 2002), and several
revious studies on more traditional forms of media (Tiggemann &
cGill, 2004; Tiggemann & Slater, 2004), and suggest that women
ho spend more time on Facebook may feel more concerned about

heir body because they compare their appearance to others more

ften on Facebook.

Given that Facebook users are presented with a wide range
f potential comparison targets, we also examined whether com-
arison frequency and direction varied by target groups, and

on direction ratings ranged from 1 = much worse to 6 = much better. Means within a

whether comparisons to these specific target groups mediated the
relationship between Facebook usage and body image concerns.
Participants reported comparing their appearance on Facebook
most frequently to distant peers, just as frequently to close friends
and celebrities, but compared their appearance less frequently to
family members. This finding is consistent with previous research
examining appearance comparisons to peers, celebrities, and fam-
ily members (Schutz et al., 2002), and could be due to the fact that
the family member target group consists of young women (such
as sisters and cousins) but also older women (such as mothers
and aunts), who might not be perceived to be relevant compari-
son targets. In addition, participants may have reported comparing
their appearance most often to distant peers on Facebook because
women are likely to have access to a higher percentage of images
of their distant peers on Facebook than the other target groups.
In regard to the direction of comparisons, participants rated their
bodies to be worse than celebrities, slightly worse than their peers
(close friends and distant peers), and the same as family members.
Thus, close friends, distant peers, and celebrities, but not family
members, appear to be a source of upward appearance comparisons
for female Facebook users.

When examining comparisons to specific target groups, it was
the frequency of comparisons to peers (both close friends and dis-
tant peers) that mediated the association between Facebook usage
and body image concerns. One possible reason for this finding is
that peers may be seen as more relevant comparison targets than
family members or celebrities. Family members may not be seen
as relevant comparison targets because this target group consists
of both older and younger women, and celebrities may be seen
as less relevant comparison targets because of the resources that
celebrities have to improve their appearance. Peers may be seen as
having similar resources and lifestyles to participants and therefore
the appearance of peers may be seen as more personally attainable
than the appearance of celebrities. With respect to the directions of
appearance comparisons, it was comparisons to distant peers and
(to a lesser extent) celebrities that accounted for the relationship
between Facebook usage and body image concerns. This finding
may be because the lack of personal contact with distant peers and
celebrities (relative to close friends and family members) makes it
difficult for people to accurately gauge how realistic (or idealized)
the appearance of distant peers and celebrities are on Facebook.
Consequently, when viewing images of distant peers and celebri-
ties on Facebook, women may judge their own appearance to be
less attractive, which in turn could lead to greater body image con-
cerns. We also found that the direction of comparisons to distant
peers had a stronger indirect effect on body image concerns than
the direction of comparisons to celebrities and models. Again, this
difference may be due to the appearance of distant peers being seen
as more attainable than the appearance of celebrities and therefore
having a greater impact on women’s body image concerns.

Limitations to the present study should be noted. First, because
the study was correlational we are unable to infer causation. It
may be that women who spend more time on Facebook are more

concerned about their appearance, or it may be that women who
are more concerned with their appearance spend more time on
Facebook. Given that one experimental study found no differ-
ence in women’s weight and shape preoccupation after spending

/ Bod

t
s
u
f
t
n
e
c

t
g
t
c
c
d
a
i
o
b
u
F
i
w
r
H
a
w
f
a
F
T
r
i
w
a
c

F
f
g
t
c
o
t
s
s
c
f
c
p

r
A
J. Fardouly, L.R. Vartanian

ime browsing Facebook or an appearance-neutral control web-
ite (Mabe, Forney, & Keel, 2014), it may be that Facebook attracts
sers who are already highly concerned about their body. However,
urther experimental research measuring women’s pre-existing
rait body image concerns or appearance comparison tendencies is
eeded to examine whether any of these pre-existing traits mod-
rate the effect of Facebook usage on women’s state body image
oncerns.

Second, in the present study participants were required to rate
heir body as either better or worse than specific comparison tar-
ets on Facebook, but it is possible that participants believe that
heir bodies are no better or worse (i.e., made lateral comparisons)
ompared to these target groups. Therefore, future research should
onsider adding a midpoint or “same” option when measuring the
irection of appearance comparisons. Third, although participants
lso completed a range of filler measures in the present study, it
s possible that some participants could have guessed the purpose
f the study and that their responses were therefore influenced
y demand characteristics. Therefore, future research on Facebook
sage should take care to further disguise the true nature of study.
inally, the present study focused on the usage of Facebook because
t is currently the most popular social media platform in the world,

ith over 1.3 billion active monthly users (Facebook, 2014), and is
egularly used by young women (Tiggemann & Slater, 2013, 2014).
owever, the usage of other popular social media platforms (such
s Instagram, Twitter, or Pinterest) may also be associated with
omen’s body image concerns. In fact, other social media plat-

orms (such as Instagram), which mainly contain images, may have
stronger association with women’s body image concerns than

acebook, which contains both images and large amounts of text.
his suggestion would be consistent with the findings of previous
esearch (Meier & Gray, 2014) indicating that photo-based activ-
ty on Facebook could be driving any effect of Facebook usage on

omen’s body image concerns. Future research could examine the
ssociation between other social media platforms and appearance
oncerns among young women.

Overall, the present study found that spending more time on
acebook was associated with greater body image concerns in
emale university students and that appearance comparisons in
eneral, frequency of comparisons to peers (close friends and dis-
ant peers), and direction of comparisons to distant peers and
elebrities accounted for this relationship. Given the popularity
f Facebook, young women are provided with ample oppor-
unity to engage in appearance comparisons. Future research
hould identify ways to minimize any possible negative con-
equences of Facebook usage for young women’s body image
oncerns, for example, by focusing women’s attention away
rom any appearance-focused material on Facebook or by edu-
ating women on the idealized nature of people’s Facebook
rofiles.

Author disclosure statement

No competing financial interests exist.

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Dr. Rebecca Pinkus for her advice on this
esearch.

References

ustralian Bureau of Statistics. (2013). Census at school Australia. Retrieved from
http://www.abs.gov.au/websitedbs/CaSHome.nsf/Home/2013+CensusAtSchool
+Summary+Data

y Image 12 (2015) 82–88 87

Bair, C. E., Kelly, N. R., Serdar, K. L., & Mazzeo, S. E. (2012). Does the Inter-
net function like magazines? An exploration of image-focused media, eating
pathology, and body dissatisfaction. Eating Behaviors, 13, 398–401. http://dx.doi.
org/10.1016/j.eatbeh.2012.06.003

Bearman, S. K., Presnell, K., Martinez, E., & Stice, E. (2006). The skinny on body dis-
satisfaction: A longitudinal study of adolescent girls and boys. Journal of Youth
and Adolescence, 35, 229–241. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10964-005-9010-9

Bell, B. T., & Dittmar, H. (2011). Does media type matter? The role of identi-
fication in adolescent girls’ media consumption and the impact of different
thin-ideal media on body image. Sex Roles, 65, 478–490. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1007/s11199-011-9964-x

Bell, B. T., Lawton, R., & Dittmar, H. (2007). The impact of thin models in music
videos on adolescent girls’ body dissatisfaction. Body Image, 4, 137–145.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2007.02.003

Berg, K. C., Frazier, P., & Sherr, L. (2009). Change in eating disorder attitudes and
behavior in college women: Prevalence and predictors. Eating Behaviors, 10,
137–142. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eatbeh.2009.03.003

Carey, R. N., Donaghue, N., & Broderick, P. (2014). Body image concern among Aus-
tralian adolescent girls: The role of body comparisons with models and peers.
Body Image, 11, 81–84. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2013.09.006

Facebook. (2014). Company information. Retrieved from https://newsroom.fb.com/
company-info/

Fitzsimmons-Craft, E. E., Bardone-Cone, A. M., Bulik, C. M., Wonderlich, S. A.,
Crosby, R. D., & Engel, S. G. (2014). Examining an elaborated sociocultural
model of disordered eating among college women: The roles of social com-
parison and body surveillance. Body Image, 11, 488–500. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1016/j.bodyim.2014.07.012

Garner, D. M., Olmstead, M. P., & Polivy, J. (1983). Development and validation
of a multidimensional eating disorder inventory for anorexia nervosa and
bulimia. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 2, 15–49. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1002/1098-108x(198321)2:2%3C15::aid-eat2260020203%3E3.0.co;2-6

Groesz, L., Levine, M., & Murnen, S. (2002). The effect of experimental presentation
of thin media images on body satisfaction: A meta-analytic review. International
Journal of Eating Disorders, 31, 1–17. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/eat.10005

Halliwell, E., & Dittmar, H. (2004). Does size matter? The impact of model’s
body size on women’s body-focused anxiety and advertising effectiveness.
Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 123, 104–122. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1521/jscp.23.1.104.26989

Hargreaves, D. A., & Tiggemann, M. (2004). Idealized media images and ado-
lescent body image: “comparing” boys and girls. Body Image, 1, 351–361.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2004.10.002

Hayes, A. F. (2009). Beyond Baron and Kenny: Statistical mediation analysis in the
new millennium. Communication Monographs, 76, 408–420. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1080/03637750903310360

Hew, K. F. (2011). Students’ and teachers’ use of Facebook. Computers in Human
Behavior, 27, 662–676. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2010.11.020

Keery, H., van den Berg, P., & Thompson, J. K. (2004). An evaluation of the Tripartite
Model of body dissatisfaction and eating disturbance with adolescent girls. Body
Image, 1, 237–251. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2004.03.001

Leahey, T., & Crowther, J. (2008). An ecological momentary assessment of compar-
ison target as a moderator of the effects of appearance-focused social compar-
isons. Body Image, 5, 307–318. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2008.03.002

Mabe, A. G., Forney, K. J., & Keel, P. K. (2014). Do you “like” my photo? Facebook
use maintains eating disorder risk. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 47,
516–523. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/eat.22254

Manago, A. M., Graham, M. B., Greenfield, P. M., & Salimkhan, G. (2008).
Self-presentation and gender on MySpace. Journal of Applied Developmental Psy-
chology, 29, 446–458. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.appdev.2008.07.001

Mayer-Schönberger, V., & Cukier, K. (2013). Big data: A revolution that will transform
how we live, work and think. New York, NY: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Publishing
Company.

Meier, E. P., & Gray, J. (2014). Facebook photo activity associated with body image
disturbance in adolescent girls. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking,
4, 199–206. http://dx.doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2013.0305

Myers, T. A., & Crowther, J. H. (2009). Social comparison as a predictor of body dissat-
isfaction: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 118, 683–698.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0016763

Myers, T. A., Ridolfi, D. R., Crowther, J. H., & Ciesla, J. A. (2012). The impact
of appearance-focused social comparisons on body image disturbance in the
naturalistic environment: The roles of thin-ideal internalization and feminist
beliefs. Body Image, 9, 342–351. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2012.03.
005

Neighbors, L. A., & Sobal, J. (2007). Prevalence and magnitude of body weight and
shape dissatisfaction among university students. Eating Behaviors, 8, 429–439.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eatbeh.2007.03.003

Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for
assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behav-
ioral Research Methods, 40, 879–891. http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/brm.40.3.879

Ricciardelli, L., & McCabe, M. (2001). Dietary restraint and negative affect as
mediators of body dissatisfaction and bulimic behavior in adolescent girls
and boys. Behavior Research and Therapy, 39, 1317–1328. http://dx.doi.org/

10.1016/s0005-7967(00)00097-8

Ridolfi, D. R., Myers, T. A., Crowther, J. H., & Ciesla, J. A. (2011). Do appearance focused
cognitive distortions moderate the relationship between social comparisons to
peers and media images and body image disturbance? Sex Roles, 65, 491–505.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11199-011-9961-0

http://www.abs.gov.au/websitedbs/CaSHome.nsf/Home/2013+CensusAtSchool+Summary+Data

dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eatbeh.2012.06.003

dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10964-005-9010-9

dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11199-011-9964-x

dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2007.02.003

dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eatbeh.2009.03.003

dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2013.09.006

https://newsroom.fb.com/company-info/

dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2014.07.012

dx.doi.org/10.1002/1098-108x(198321)2:2%3C15::aid-eat2260020203%3E3.0.co;2-6

dx.doi.org/10.1002/eat.10005

dx.doi.org/10.1521/jscp.23.1.104.26989

dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2004.10.002

dx.doi.org/10.1080/03637750903310360

dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2010.11.020

dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2004.03.001

dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2008.03.002

dx.doi.org/10.1002/eat.22254

dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.appdev.2008.07.001

dx.doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2013.0305

dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0016763

dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2012.03.005

dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eatbeh.2007.03.003

dx.doi.org/10.3758/brm.40.3.879

dx.doi.org/10.1016/s0005-7967(00)00097-8

dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11199-011-9961-0

8 / Bod
S
S
T
T
T
T

appearance-related social comparison as predictors of body dissatisfaction. Body

8 J. Fardouly, L.R. Vartanian

chutz, H., Paxton, A. S., & Wertheim, E. H. (2002). Investigation of body compari-
son among adolescent girls. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 32, 1906–1937.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2002.tb00264.x

tice, E. (2002). Risk and maintenance factors for eating pathology: A
meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 128, 825–848. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1037/0033-2909.128.5.825

hompson, J. K., Heinberg, L., & Tantleff, S. (1991). The Physical Appearance Com-
parison Scale (PACS). The Behavior Therapist, 14, 174.

iggemann, M., & McGill, B. (2004). The role of social comparison in the
effect of magazine advertisements on women’s mood and body dissatisfac-
tion. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 23, 23–44. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1521/jscp.23.1.23.26991

iggemann, M., & Miller, J. (2010). The Internet and adolescent girls’ weight

satisfaction and drive for thinness. Sex Roles, 63, 79–90. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1007/s11199-010-9789-z

iggemann, M., & Slater, A. (2004). Thin ideals in music television: A source of social
comparison and body dissatisfaction. International Journal of Eating Disorders,
35, 48–58. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/eat.10214

y Image 12 (2015) 82–88

Tiggemann, M., & Slater, A. (2013). NetGirls: The Internet, Facebook, and body image
concern in adolescent girls. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 46, 630–634.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/eat.22141

Tiggemann, M., & Slater, A. (2014). NetTweens: The Internet and body image
concerns in preteenage girls. Journal of Early Adolescence, 34, 606–620.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0272431613501083

van den Berg, P., Thompson, J. K., Obremski-Brandon, K., & Coovert, M. (2002).
The Tripartite Influence model of body image and eating disturbance: A
covariance structure modeling investigation testing the meditational role of
appearance comparison. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 53, 1007–1020.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/s0022-3999(02)00499-3

Vartanian, L. R., & Dey, S. (2013). Self-concept clarity, thin-ideal internalization, and

Image, 10, 495–500. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2013.05.004
Zhao, S., Grasmuck, S., & Martin, J. (2008). Identity construction on Facebook: Digi-

tal empowerment in anchored relationships. Computers in Human Behavior, 24,
1816–1836. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2008.02.012

dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2002.tb00264.x

dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.128.5.825

dx.doi.org/10.1521/jscp.23.1.23.26991

dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11199-010-9789-z

dx.doi.org/10.1002/eat.10214

dx.doi.org/10.1002/eat.22141

dx.doi.org/10.1177/0272431613501083

dx.doi.org/10.1016/s0022-3999(02)00499-3

dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2013.05.004

dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2008.02.012

Negative comparisons about one’s appearance mediate the relationship between Facebook usage and body image concerns

Introduction
The Present Study
Method
Participants
Measures
Facebook usage
Facebook appearance comparisons in general
Comparisons to specific target groups on Facebook
Body image concerns
Procedure
Data Analysis
Results
Preliminary Analyses
Mediation through General Facebook Comparisons
Mediation through Facebook Comparisons to Specific Target Groups
Comparison frequencies
Comparison directions

Discussion
Author disclosure statement
Acknowledgements
References

Personality and Individual Differences 86 (2015) 217–221

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Personality and Individual Differences

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/paid

Facebook and self-perception: Individual susceptibility to negative social
comparison on Facebook

Dian A. de Vries ⁎, Rinaldo Kühne 1

Amsterdam School of Communication Research, University of Amsterdam, P.O. Box 15791, 1001 NG Amsterdam, The Netherlands

⁎ Corresponding author. Tel.: +31 20 525 2171; fax: +
E-mail addresses: d.a.deVries@uva.nl (D.A. de Vries), r

1 Tel.: +31 20 525 3505; fax: +31 20 525 3681.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2015.05.029
0191-8869/

a b s t r a c t

a r t i c l e i n f o

Article history:
Received 25 February 201

Received in revised form 19 May 2015
Accepted 21 May 2015
Available online 25 June 2015

Keywords:
Well-being
Social media
Social network sites
Self-views
Individual differences
Social compariso

Happiness
Self-esteem

Social network sites such as Facebook give off the impression that others are doing better than we are. As a result,
the use of these sites may lead to negative social comparison (i.e., feeling like others are doing better than one-
self). According to social comparison theory, such negative social comparisons are detrimental to perceptions
about the self. The current study therefore investigated the indirect relationship between Facebook use and
self-perceptions through negative social comparison. Because happier people process social information differ-
ently than unhappier people, we also investigated whether the relationship between Facebook use and social
comparison and, as a result, self-perception, differs depending on the degree of happiness of the emerging
adult. A survey among 231 emerging adults (age 18–25) showed that Facebook use was related to a greater
degree of negative social comparison, which was in turn related negatively to self-perceived social competence
and physical attractiveness. The indirect relationship between Facebook use and self-perception through nega-
tive social comparison was attenuated among happier individuals, as the relationship between Facebook use
and negative social comparison was weaker among happier individuals. SNS use was thus negatively related to
self-perception through negative social comparison, especially among unhappy individuals.

1. Introduction

Social network sites (SNSs), such as Facebook, are notorious for giving
off the impression that other people are living better lives than we are
(Chou & Edge, 2012). People generally present themselves and their
lives positively on SNSs (Dorethy, Fiebert, & Warren, 2014) for example
by posting pictures in which they look their best (Manago, Graham,
Greenfield, & Salimkhan, 2008) and are having a good time with their
friends (Zhao, Grasmuck, & Martin, 2008). The vast majority of time
spent on SNSs consists of viewing these idealized SNS profiles, pictures,
and status updates of others (Pempek, Yermolayeva, & Calvert, 2009).
Such information about how others are doing may impact how people
see themselves, that is, their self-perceptions because people base their
self-perceptions at least partly on how they are doing in comparison to
others (Festinger, 1954). These potential effects of SNS use on self-
perceptions through social comparison are the focus of the current study.

Previous research on the effects of SNSs on self-perceptions has
focused predominantly on the implications of social interactions on
these websites (e.g., feedback from others) (Valkenburg, Peter, &
Schouten, 2006) or due to editing and viewing content about the self
on SNS (Gonzales & Hancock, 2011). However, the potential impact of
SNS use on self-perception resulting from passively browsing others’

31 20 525 3681.
.j.kuhne@uva.nl (R. Kühne).

profiles has received less attention. This is surprising, given that viewing
others’ profiles is the most prevalent SNS activity (Pempek et al., 2009)
and the social information encountered in this way may impact self-
perceptions through social comparison (Festinger, 1954). The current
study therefore investigates the potential effects of SNS use on self-
perception through social comparison. In addition, we test whether
and how these indirect effects of SNS use on self-perception are subject
to individual differences. More specifically, we investigate if the degree
of happiness of the individual moderates the indirect effect of SNS use
on self-perception. We focus on individual differences in happiness
because social information affects the self-perceptions of happier people
differently than the self-perceptions of unhappier people (Cummins &
Nistico, 2002).

The current study focuses on individual differences in the effects of
the use of “Facebook” on self-perceptions among emerging adults for
several reasons. Facebook is currently the most popular SNS worldwide
(Statista, 2014) among emerging adults. Emerging adulthood is of
special interest because this age group uses social media intensively
(Coyne, Padilla-Walker, & Howard, 2013) and because the formation
of self-perceptions is a central task in this developmental period
(Arnett, 2000). Furthermore, self-perceptions are related to well-being
(Diener & Diener, 1995; Orth, Robins, & Roberts, 2008; Swann,
Chang-Schneider, & Larsen McClarty, 2007). Negative self-perceptions
predict depressive symptoms (Orth et al., 2008) whereas more positive
self-perceptions are strongly and positively related to subjective well-
being (Diener & Diener, 1995). Therefore, uncovering the effects of

http://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog/?doi=10.1016/j.paid.2015.05.029&domain=pdf

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2015.05.029

mailto:d.a.deVries@uva.nl

mailto:r.j.kuhne@uva.nl

Journal logo

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2015.05.029

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/

www.elsevier.com/locate/paid

218 D.A. de Vries, R. Kühne / Personality and Individual Differences 86 (2015) 217–221

SNS use on self-perception, understanding which processes underlie
this relationship, and identifying which emerging adults are especially
vulnerable to negative effects is crucial for the prevention of negative ef-
fects of SNS use on well-being. At the same time, the study answers the
call for a stronger focus on psychological mechanisms and individual
differences in media effects research (Valkenburg & Peter, 2013) and
hence contributes to the development of our theoretical understanding
of (social) media effects.

1.1. Social network sites, social comparison, and self-perception

According to social comparison theory, we base our self-perceptions
at least partly on how we think we are doing in comparison to others
(Festinger, 1954). Perceiving the self as doing worse than others leads
to less favorable self-perceptions (Festinger, 1954). Importantly, evi-
dence has emerged that among emerging adults more intense Facebook
use is related to more frequent social comparison (Lee, 2014). This social
comparison is predominantly negative, that is, it is associated with the
feeling that other Facebook users are better off (Lee, 2014). Further-
more, people who use Facebook more intensely are more inclined to be-
lieve that others are having better lives than they are (Chou & Edge,
2012). These findings are not surprising given the idealized self-
presentation that occurs on Facebook (Manago et al., 2008).

According to social comparison theory, negative social comparison,
that is, the feeling that others are better off, will specifically impact
self-perceptions in the domains in which the individual sees other peo-
ple doing better than he or she is doing (Festinger, 1954). In line with
this notion, experimental research has shown that viewing the
Facebook profile of a peer who is physically attractive or has a successful
career can have a negative impact on self-perceived attractiveness and
self-perceived career success (Haferkamp & Krämer, 2011). Because
emerging adults’ Facebook posts and pictures frequently display the
user as popular (Zhao et al., 2008) and physically attractive (Manago
et al., 2008), negative social comparison on Facebook likely influences
self-perceptions in the domains of social competence and physical ap-
pearance. We therefore hypothesized:

H1. Among emerging adults a) more intense Facebook use is related to
a greater degree of negative social comparison on Facebook (i.e., more
frequently thinking that others are better off when looking at Facebook
posts of others), which b) is in turn related to lower self-perceived social
competence and physical attractiveness. Therefore, c) Facebook use is
negatively related to self-perceptions of social competence and physical
attractiveness through negative social comparison.

1.2. The protective role of happiness

The hypothesized threat that Facebook use poses to self-perceptions
(H1) may be attenuated among people who select and interpret the so-
cial information on Facebook in ways that are less detrimental to self-
perceptions. First, individuals who select comparison targets who are
not doing better than they are avoid negative effects on their self-
perceptions (Cummins & Nistico, 2002). On Facebook, users may thus
protect their self-perceptions by selectively diverting their attention
from updates about others’ accomplishments and positive experiences.
Second, people can interpret social information in ways that evoke more
positive self-perceptions (Suls, Martin, & Wheeler, 2002). Facebook
posts about others’ positive experiences and accomplishments can for
instance be interpreted as “I will experience/achieve similar things” in-
stead of “other people are doing better than I am” (i.e., negative social
comparison). As a result, individuals can process social information on
Facebook in ways that do not give rise to negative social comparison
and therefore do not result in more negative self-perceptions.

The way social information is processed is subject to individual
differences. One trait that predicts how individuals process social

information is their degree of happiness, also referred to as subjective
well-being (Cummins & Nistico, 2002; Lyubomirsky & Ross, 1997). For
example, being outperformed by a peer leads to decreased self-rated
abilities among unhappy people, but does not influence happy people
(Lyubomirsky & Ross, 1997). In a similar vein, the vast amounts of social
information encountered on Facebook may be processed in less nega-
tive ways by happier people. Happier people may engage in less nega-
tive social comparison on Facebook, and, as a result, be less vulnerable
to negative effects on self-perception.

Happiness consists of affective/emotional and cognitive-judgmental
components and can be domain specific or global (Pavot & Diener,
2004). How persons process social information on Facebook may be as-
sociated in particular with a global cognitive-judgmental component of
happiness: life satisfaction. Life satisfaction is one’s general satisfaction
with life (Pavot & Diener, 2004) and is a relatively stable trait
(Schimmack, Diener, & Oishi, 2002). Individuals who report greater
satisfaction with life are characterized by more positive processing of
self-relevant information including social comparison information
(Cummins & Nistico, 2002). Life satisfaction may therefore also moder-
ate the way social comparison information is processed on Facebook.
We hypothesized:

H2. a) The relationship between more intense Facebook use and more
negative social comparison on Facebook is weaker among emerging
adults who are happier (H1a). Therefore, b) the hypothesized indirect
negative relationship between Facebook use and self-perceived social
competence and self-perceived physical attractiveness through nega-
tive social comparison (H1c) is attenuated among emerging adults
who report greater satisfaction with life. All hypotheses are summarized
in Fig. 1.

2. Method

2.1. Sample and procedure

An online survey was conducted in April and May 2014. Two stu-
dents from the University of Amsterdam recruited participants through
their (online) social networks. Recruitment yielded 340 respondents,
257 of whom completed the survey (76%). Twenty participants were
excluded because they did not meet inclusion criteria for age (18–25).
Another six participants were excluded because they did not use
Facebook and could thus not complete measures regarding Facebook
use and social comparison on Facebook. The total sample thus consisted
of 231 participants (69% female) age 18–25 (M = 22.3, SD = 2.2). The
participants differed in their countries of residence and nationalities.
The most common nationalities were Bulgarian (78%) and Dutch
(16%). The remaining 6% was mostly European, but also Indian, Mexi-
can, and Chinese. Ethical approval was obtained from the University
where the study was conducted. Participants were first provided with
written information about the study and asked for their consent. After
this they completed the measures reported below and some additional
questions regarding social media use.

2.2. Measures

2.2.1. Facebook use
We assessed intensity of Facebook use with the six closed-ended

items of the Facebook Intensity Scale (Ellison, Steinfield, & Lampe,
2007). The scale goes beyond frequency and duration of use, as it incor-
porates emotional attachment to the site (e.g., “I would be sorry if
Facebook shut down”) and the role Facebook plays in users’ daily lives
(e.g., “Facebook has become part of my everyday activity”) (Ellison
et al., 2007). Participants rated the degree to which they agreed with
statements on a scale ranging from 1 (totally disagree) to 5 (totally
agree). The six items were summed to create a total score with higher

Table 1
Zero-order correlations among key variables.

FB Use NegSC SPSC SPPA LS

FB Use –
NegSC .389*** –
SPSC −.017 −.233*** –
SPPA −.082 −.329*** .283*** –
LS −.156** −.366*** .283*** .366*** –

Note. N = 231. FB Use represents the intensity with which emerging adults use the social
network site Facebook. NegSC represents the degree of negative social comparison the
emerging adult engages in on Facebook. SPSC indicates the degree of self-perceived social
competence. SPPA represents self-perceived physical attractiveness. LS indicates the
respondent’s satisfaction with life. *p b .05 **p b .01. ***p b .001 (two-tailed).

––

Facebook Use

Negative Social

Comparison

Life Satisfaction

Self-perceived
Social

Competence

Self-perceived
Physical

Appearance

+
–

Fig. 1. Hypothesized moderated mediation model.

219D.A. de Vries, R. Kühne / Personality and Individual Differences 86 (2015) 217–221

scores reflecting more intense Facebook use. Scores ranged between

and 30 (M = 18.4, SD = 5.6). A factor analysis revealed that the items
loaded on one factor that explained 54.5% of the variance. Cronbach’s
alpha was .83.

2.2.2. Negative social comparison on Facebook
To measure the degree of negative social comparison on Facebook

we adapted previous measures of social comparison on Facebook that
have been used in emerging adult samples (Lee, 2014). We were inter-
ested specifically in negative social comparison, that is, the degree to
which people experienced thinking that others are better off when
viewing others’ updates on Facebook. We measured this construct by
asking participants to what extent they agreed with the following two
statements: “When I read news feeds (or see photos of others) I often
think that 1) others have better lives than I do; 2) others are doing bet-
ter than I am.” Answer options ranged from 1 (totally disagree) to 5
(totally agree). The two items were summed to create a total score
reflecting negative social comparison. Scores ranged between 2 and 10
(M = 4.7, SD = 2.4). Pearson correlation between the two items was
.87 (p = .000).

2.2.3. Self-perception
Self-perceived social competence and physical appearance were

assessed using an adapted version (Valkenburg et al., 2006) of Harter’s
Self-Perception Profile for Adolescents (Harter, 1988). Items of both
subscales consisted of statements about the self (“in general I have the
feeling that…”) to which participants responded on a scale from 1
(totally disagree) to 5 (totally agree). Items reflecting negative self-
perceptions of social competence and physical appearance were
recoded and then items were summed to create a score per subscale.
Higher scores thus reflect more positive self-perception in that domain.

Self-perceived social competence was measured using five items
(e.g., “I have a lot of friends”). Scores ranged from 8 to 24 (M = 17.9,
SD = 3.7). Cronbach’s alpha was .71. Factor analysis revealed that the
items loaded on one factor that explained 46.9% of the variance. Self-
perceived physical attractiveness was measured using four items
(e.g., “I am satisfied with the way I look”). Scores ranged from 5 to 20
(M = 13.5, SD = 3.5). Cronbach’s alpha was .75. Factor analysis revealed
that the items loaded on one factor that explained 58.1% of the variance.

2.2.4. Life satisfaction
Life satisfaction was measured using the five-item Satisfaction with

Life Scale (Diener, Emmons, Larsen, & Griffin, 1985). This scale measures
global cognitive judgements of satisfaction with the own life, also re-
ferred to as happiness or subjective well-being, in a reliable and valid
way (Pavot & Diener, 2008). Participants are asked to indicate the de-
gree to which they agree with statements such as: “in general I have
the feeling that in most ways my life is close to my ideal” on a scale of
1 (totally disagree) to 5 (totally agree). The five items were summed to
create a total score. Higher scores indicate greater life satisfaction. Scores

ranged between 5 and 25 (M = 16.8, SD = 4.0). Cronbach’s alpha was .77.
Items loaded on one factor that explained 53.3% of variance.

2.2.5. Control variables
Because self-perception, Facebook use, and life satisfaction may de-

pend on development, culture, and gender, we controlled for age (in
years), nationality, and gender in all analyses. Age and nationality
were reported using open ended-questions. Nationality was later
recoded into two dummy variables that assessed whether participants
were Bulgarian or Dutch or had another nationality.

3. Results

We first calculated zero-order correlations among the key variables
(Table 1). All correlations were in the hypothesized directions. None
of the correlations between the variables were higher than .4, which in-
dicates the measurement of different constructs. The hypothesized
moderated mediation model (Fig. 1) was subsequently tested using
Mplus 6 and maximum likelihood estimation. In the model, Facebook
use was included as the independent variable, negative social compari-
son was included as mediator, and self-perceived social competence
and self-perceived physical attractiveness were included as dependent
variables (with correlated error terms). Life satisfaction was incorporat-
ed as a moderator of the path from Facebook use to negative social
comparison. Note that Facebook use and life satisfaction were mean-
centered before they were entered into the model to facilitate the
interpretation of the results. Finally, negative social comparison, and
self-perceived social competence and self-perceived physical attractive-
ness were regressed on age, gender, life satisfaction, and the two nation-
ality dummies to control for the effects of these covariates. Tests of the
indirect effects, which are reported below, are based on bootstrapped
and bias-corrected confidence intervals (5000 bootstrap samples). The
model has a good fit to the data: χ2(4) = 4.237, p = .375; CFI = .998;
RMSEA = .016; SRMR = .015.

H1a predicted that more intense Facebook use would be related to a
greater degree of negative social comparison on Facebook. In line with
H1a, more intense Facebook use was positively related to negative social

220 D.A. de Vries, R. Kühne / Personality and Individual Differences 86 (2015) 217–221

comparison, B = .144, SE = .024, p = .000. H1b predicted that negative
social comparison would be related to more negative self-perceptions.
In line with H1b, negative social comparison predicted lower self-
perceived social competence, B = −.244, SE = .107, p = .023, and
lower self-perceived physical attractiveness, B = −.341, SE = .095,
p = .000. Furthermore, we found that self-perceived social competence
and self-perceived physical attractiveness are positively associated, r =
.184, p = .007.

H1c predicted a negative indirect relationship between Facebook
use and self-perception through negative social comparison. The indi-
rect relationships between Facebook use and self-perceived social com-
petence, B = −.035, SE = .017 (Bt bca 95% CI: −.073/−.005), and
physical attractiveness, B = −.049, SE = .015 (Bt bca 95% CI:
−.084/−.024), were indeed negative and statistically significant.
Importantly, adding two paths between Facebook use and the depen-
dent variables to the model showed that there were no residual direct
effects of Facebook use on self-perceived social competence, B = .073,
SE = .042, p = .084, or on physical attractiveness, B = .038, SE =
.043, p = .380. This indicates that the relationship between Facebook
use and self-perception was fully mediated by negative social compari-
son. These findings support H1c.

H2a predicted that the relationship between Facebook use and neg-
ative social comparison would be attenuated among emerging adults
who reported higher life satisfaction. In line with H2a, the interaction
term between life satisfaction and Facebook use significantly and nega-
tively predicted negative social comparison, B = −.016, SE = .006, p =
.004. As hypothesized, Facebook use was less strongly related to nega-
tive social comparison at higher levels of life satisfaction (i.e., at one
standard deviation above the mean, B = .081, SE = .032, p = .012)
than at lower levels of life satisfaction (i.e., at one standard deviation
below the mean, B = .208, SE = .032, p = .000) and at average levels
of life satisfaction (i.e., at the mean, B = .144, SE = .024, p = .000).
This interaction pattern is visually depicted in Fig. 2.

H2b predicted that the negative indirect relationship between
Facebook use and self-perception would be attenuated among happier
individuals. In line with H2b, the negative indirect relationship between
Facebook use and self-perceived social competence was weaker at high
levels of life satisfaction (i.e., one standard deviation above the mean,
B = −.020, SE = .013; Bt bca 95% CI: −.053/−.002) than at low
(i.e., at one standard deviation below the mean, B = −.051,
SE = .024; Bt bca 95% CI: −.101/−.008) and at average levels (i.e., at
the mean, B = −.035, SE = .017; Bt bca 95% CI: −.073/−.005) of life
satisfaction. In a similar vein, the negative indirect relationship between
Facebook use and self-perceived physical attractiveness was weaker at
higher levels of life satisfaction (B = −.028, SE = .013; Bt bca 95% CI:
−.061/−.008) than at lower levels (B = −.071, SE = .022; Bt bca
95% CI: −.121/−.035) and at average levels (B = −.049, SE = .015;
Bt bca 95% CI: −.084/−.024) of life satisfaction.

3.5

4.5

5.5

6.5

12.8 18.4 24

N
e
g

a
ti

v
e

o
c
ia

l
C

o
m

p
a
ri

s
o

n
Facebook Use

Low LS (Mean -1SD)

Mean LS

High LS (Mean +1 SD)

Fig. 2. Relationships between Facebook use and negative social comparison at different
levels of life satisfaction (LS).

Finally, we inspected the effects of the covariates (i.e., age, gender,
life satisfaction, and the two dummy variables for nationality). We
found a significant effect of age on self-perceived social competence,
B = .287, SE = .113, p = .011. Furthermore, life satisfaction was signif-
icantly associated with self-perceived social competence, B = .213,
SE = .069, p = .002, and self-perceived physical attractiveness,
B = .251, SE = .055, p = .000. Because our sample includes participants
with different nationalities, it was particularly important to assess
whether nationality affected the results. However, participants’ nation-
ality did not influence any of the variables in the model. Including the
nationality dummies as additional moderators in the models did not
yield any significant findings either. Thus, the processes identified
above were not affected by nationality.2

4. Discussion and conclusions

Previous research has shown that SNS use is positively related to
well-being through social interactions (Valkenburg et al., 2006). With
regard to social interaction on Facebook, a poor-get-richer effect is
seen in which emerging adults who are less satisfied with their lives
benefit most from Facebook use in terms of increased social capital
(Ellison et al., 2007). The results of the current study, however, shed
light on an additional but contrasting route through which SNS use
can harm well-being in a poor-get-poorer manner. Namely, the current
study shows that SNS use is related to more negative self-perception
through negative social comparison. These negative relationships
were strongest among those emerging adults who were unhappier.
Negative self-perceptions are negatively related to well-being (Diener
& Diener, 1995; Orth et al., 2008; Swann et al., 2007). Therefore,
Facebook use may negatively impact youth’s well-being by stimulating
negative social comparison and fostering negative self-perception, es-
pecially among those emerging adults who are already unhappy.

Together, previous research and the current study thus suggest that
SNS use can impact self-perceptions and well-being in positive and neg-
ative ways through different routes. Which route is stronger likely de-
pends on the individual user and the activities engaged in on the
website. When engaging in social interaction, the positive effects
through social capital and positive feedback are more likely. In contrast,
looking at the posts of others may have negative effects on well-being
through social comparison. The current study did not distinguish be-
tween these active and passive SNS activities, as it investigated general
Facebook use. Furthermore, we do not know how the two contrasting
routes weigh up against each other, as the current study did not mea-
sure social interaction. Future research should identify which SNS activ-
ities are related to which of these (and potential additional) processes in
order to understand the net effect of SNS use on well-being resulting
from different combinations of SNS activities.

Our analyses showed that nationality of the participants did not
have any effect on negative social comparison or on self-perception. Nei-
ther did nationality function as a moderator and influence the size or di-
rection of any effect. Still, the moderate sample size, especially of the
subsamples that were not Bulgarian, and the heterogeneous nature of
our sample are limitations. We thus suggest replications of this study
in different cultural contexts and with larger samples. This would not
only help to address these limitations, but also offer an opportunity to
check whether our findings generalize to other countries and age groups.

Due to the cross-sectional nature of this study, we cannot be sure
whether SNS use impacts self-perception through social comparison,
whether the effect is in the opposite direction, or if it is explained by a

2 Because the majority of the participants were from Bulgaria, we also estimated a mod-
el with only the Bulgarian cases (n = 179). Because all cases are from the same country,
the two nationality variables were not included in this model. This alternative model
has a good fit to the data: χ2(4) = 3.589, p = .465; CFI = 1.000; RMSEA = .000;
SRMR = .019. More important, we found exactly the same results with regard to the
hypotheses.

221D.A. de Vries, R. Kühne / Personality and Individual Differences 86 (2015) 217–221

third factor. However, the current explanation of the relationships is in
line with social comparison theory (Festinger, 1954). Furthermore, ex-
perimental evidence has shown that looking at people who are doing
well on Facebook can indeed cause negative effects on self-perception
(Haferkamp & Krämer, 2011). The current correlational study builds
on this work by showing that Facebook use indeed goes hand in hand
with such negative social comparisons in real life; that SNS use is nega-
tively related to self-perceptions through this negative social compari-
son; and that these negative relationships are strongest among people
who are unhappy.

In summary, the current study advances our knowledge firstly about
the different manners in which SNS use can impact self-perception and
secondly about what groups of young people are particularly affected by
SNS use. In this way, the current study is another step in the develop-
ment of a comprehensive model that predicts and explains whose
self-perception and well-being is influenced by which social media ac-
tivities in what way. This knowledge is vital if we want to maximize
the benefits and minimize the risks of social media for the well-being
of young people.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Eva Ahmedova and Marije Mulders
for their roles in data collection.

References

Arnett, J. J. (2000). Emerging adulthood: A theory of development from the late teens
through the twenties. American Psychologist, 55(5), 469–480. http://dx.doi.org/10.
1037//0003-066X.55.5.469.

Chou, H. -T. G., & Edge, N. (2012). They are happier and having better lives than I am: The
impact of using Facebook on perceptions of others’ lives. Cyberpsychology, Behavior
and Social Networking, 15(2), 117–121. http://dx.doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2011.0324.

Coyne, S. M., Padilla-Walker, L. M., & Howard, E. (2013). Emerging in a digital world: A
decade review of media use, effects, and gratifications in emerging adulthood.
Emerging Adulthood, 1(2), 125–137. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2167696813479782.

Cummins, R. A., & Nistico, H. (2002). Maintaining life satisfaction: The role of positive cog-
nitive bias. Journal of Happiness Studies, 3(1), 37–69. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:
1015678915305.

Diener, E., & Diener, M. (1995). Cross-cultural correlates of life satisfaction and self-
esteem. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68(4), 653–663. http://dx.doi.
org/10.1037/0022-3514.68.4.653.

Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The satisfaction with life scale.
Journal of Personality Assessment, 49(1), 71–75. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15327
752jpa4901_13.

Dorethy, M. D., Fiebert, M. S., & Warren, C. R. (2014). Examining social networking site be-
haviors: Photo sharing and impression management on Facebook. International Review
of Social Sciences & Humanities, 6(2), 111–116 (Retrieved from: http://irssh.com/).

Ellison, N. B., Steinfield, C., & Lampe, C. (2007). The benefits of Facebook “friends”: Social
capital and college students’ use of online social network sites. Journal of Computer-
Mediated Communication, 12(4), 1143–1168. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.
2007.00367.x.

Festinger, L. (1954). A theory of social comparison processes. Human Relations, 7,
117–140. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/001872675400700202.

Gonzales, A. L., & Hancock, J. T. (2011). Mirror, mirror on my Facebook wall: Effects of ex-
posure to Facebook on self-esteem. Cyberpsychology, Behavior and Social Networking,
14(1-2), 79–83. http://dx.doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2009.0411.

Haferkamp, N., & Krämer, N. C. (2011). Social comparison 2.0: Examining the effects of
online profiles on social-networking sites. Cyberpsychology, Behavior and Social
Networking, 14(5), 309–314. http://dx.doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2010.0120.

Harter, S. (1988). Manual for the self-perception profile for adolescents. Denver, CO: Depart-
ment of Psychology, University of Denver.

Lee, S. Y. (2014). How do people compare themselves with others on social network
sites? The case of Facebook. Computers in Human Behavior, 32, 253–260. http://dx.
doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2013.12.009.

Lyubomirsky, S., & Ross, L. (1997). Hedonic consequences of social comparison: A contrast
of happy and unhappy people. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73(6),
1141–1157. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.73.6.1141.

Manago, A. M., Graham, M. B., Greenfield, P. M., & Salimkhan, G. (2008). Self-presentation
and gender on MySpace. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 29(6), 446–458.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.appdev.2008.07.001.

Orth, U., Robins, R. W., & Roberts, B. W. (2008). Low self-esteem prospectively predicts
depression in adolescence and young adulthood. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 95(3), 695–708. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.95.3.695.

Pavot, W., & Diener, E. (2004). The subjective evaluation of well-being in adulthood: Find-
ings and implications. Ageing International, 29(2), 113–135. http://dx.doi.org/10.
1007/s12126-004-1013-4.

Pavot, W., & Diener, E. (2008). The satisfaction with life scale and the emerging construct
of life satisfaction. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 3(2), 137–152. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1080/17439760701756946.

Pempek, T. A., Yermolayeva, Y. A., & Calvert, S. L. (2009). College students’ social network-
ing experiences on Facebook. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 30(3),
227–238. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.appdev.2008.12.010.

Schimmack, U., Diener, E., & Oishi, S. (2002). Life satisfaction is a momentary judgment and a
stable personality characteristic: The use of chronically accessible and stable sources.
Journal of Personality, 70(3), 345–384. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-6494.05008.

Statista (2014). Leading social networks worldwide as of October 2014, ranked by number
of active users (in millions). Retrieved October 21, 2014, from http://www.statista.
com/statistics/272014/global-social-networks-ranked-by-number-of-users/2014

Suls, J., Martin, R., & Wheeler, L. (2002). Social comparison: Why, with whom, and with
what effect? Current Directions in Psychological Science, 11(5), 159–163. http://dx.
doi.org/10.1111/1467-8721.00191.

Swann, W. B., Chang-Schneider, C., & Larsen McClarty, K. (2007). Do people’s self-views
matter? Self-concept and self-esteem in everyday life. American Psychologist, 62(2),
84–94. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.62.2.84.

Valkenburg, P. M., & Peter, J. (2013). Five challenges for the future of media-effects
research. International Journal of Communication, 7, 197–215 (Retrieved from:
http://ijoc.org).

Valkenburg, P. M., Peter, J., & Schouten, A. P. (2006). Friend networking sites and their re-
lationship to adolescents’ well-being and social self-esteem. CyberPsychology &
Behavior, 9(5), 584–590. http://dx.doi.org/10.1089/cpb.2006.9.584.

Zhao, S., Grasmuck, S., & Martin, J. (2008). Identity construction on Facebook: Digital em-
powerment in anchored relationships. Computers in Human Behavior, 24(5),
1816–1836. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2008.02.012.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1037//0003-066X.55.5.469

http://dx.doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2011.0324

http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2167696813479782

http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1015678915305

http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.68.4.653

http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa4901_13

http://irssh.com/

http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2007.00367.x

http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/001872675400700202

http://dx.doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2009.0411

http://dx.doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2010.0120

http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0191-8869(15)00368-2/rf0060

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2013.12.009

http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.73.6.1141

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.appdev.2008.07.001

http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.95.3.695

http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12126-004-1013-4

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17439760701756946

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.appdev.2008.12.010

http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-6494.05008

http://www.statista.com/statistics/272014/global-social-networks-ranked-by-number-of-users/2014

http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-8721.00191

http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.62.2.84

http://ijoc.org

http://dx.doi.org/10.1089/cpb.2006.9.584

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2008.02.012

Facebook and self-�perception: Individual susceptibility to negative social comparison on Facebook

1. Introduction
1.1. Social network sites, social comparison, and self-perception
1.2. The protective role of happiness
2. Method
2.1. Sample and procedure
2.2. Measures
2.2.1. Facebook use
2.2.2. Negative social comparison on Facebook
2.2.3. Self-perception
2.2.4. Life satisfaction
2.2.5. Control variables

3. Results
4. Discussion and conclusions
Acknowledgments
References

lable at ScienceDirect

Computers in Human Behavior 64 (2016) 739e746

Contents lists avai

Computers in Human Behavior

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/comphumbeh

Social comparison on Facebook: Motivation, affective consequences,
self-esteem, and

Facebook fatigue

Emily M. Cramer a, *, Hayeon Song b, *, Adam M. Drent c

a Department of Communication, North Central College, Naperville, IL, United States
b College of Business, Global Business Track, Gachon University, Sungnam-Si, Gyeonggi-Do, South Korea
c Clinical Research Coordinator, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, United States

a r t i c l e i n f o

Article history:
Received 6 August 2015
Received in revised form
19 July 2016
Accepted 22 July 2016
Available online 4 August 2016

Keywords:
Social comparison
Facebook
Self-esteem
Hyperpersonal model
Social media

* Corresponding authors.
E-mail addresses: emcramer@noctrl.edu (E.M. Cr

(H. Song), adrent@mcw.edu (A.M. Drent).

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.07.049
0747-5632/

a b s t r a c t

A growing body of research examines social comparison on Facebook, a social media environment where
users can present optimized versions of themselves. To grasp the complexity of social comparison on
Facebook, the researchers followed Helgeson and Mickelson’s (1995) functional approach, focusing on
motives (i.e., self-enhancement, self-improvement, self-evaluation, and self-destruction) rather than
fixed targets (i.e., downward, upward, and unilateral comparison) of social comparison. Social compar-
ison motivations were explored in relation to self-esteem and affective consequences of comparison. A
college-student sample (N ¼ 267) reported engaging in social comparison frequently on Facebook and
low-self-esteem (LSE) individuals were more likely than those with higher self-esteem (HSE) to compare
themselves to others on Facebook for self-evaluation, self-enhancement, self-improvement, and self-
destruction motives. Moreover, LSEs perceived increased levels of social comparison on Facebook,
although the relationship between self-esteem and actual social comparison behavior proved non-
significant. Significant moderating effects of self-esteem were observed in the relationship between
motivation and affect. A self-improvement motive produced greater positive affect among HSEs
compared to LSEs, while self-enhancement motives engendered positive affect more prominently among
LSEs compared to HSEs. The paper also begins to distill a popular phenomenon, Facebook fatigue, in
social comparison empirical work.

1. Introduction

According to the Pew Research Center, Facebook continues to be
the most prevalent social networking space for Americans, with
72% of online adults using the platform in 2015 (Duggan, 2015). As
of March 31, 2016, Facebook reported 1.65 billion monthly active
users and an average of 1.09 million daily active users (Facebook,
2016). On average, 989 million mobile users access Facebook
daily from a mobile device, while 1.65 billion users check Facebook
actively on a monthly basis. Every minute, 684,478 pieces of con-
tentdincluding photos, status updates, and commentsdare shared
on Facebook (Bennett, 2012). Of online younger adults, ages 18e29,
82% use Facebook (Duggan, 2015) and 50% of 18e24 year olds log
onto Facebook when they wake up, with 28% checking Facebook

amer), songhy@gachon.ac.kr

before they get out of bed (Pring, 2012).
Facebook provides both an interesting and unique venue to

study social comparison, the process of developing subjective as-
sessments of one’s opinion and ability by making comparisons to
other persons (Festinger, 1954). As a computer-mediated commu-
nication (CMC) environment, Facebook diverges from traditional
face-to-face contexts examined in past social comparison research;
the affordances of the social media site may thereby impact social
comparison activity and consequences. Considering the breadth of
self-relevant multimedia content that can be both displayed and
accessed on Facebook, the site may afford abundant opportunities
for social comparison (Haferkamp & Kramer, 2011; Vogel, Rose,
Roberts, & Eckles, 2014).

Social comparison on Facebook may emerge from a tendency of
individuals, particularly those highly capricious and neurotic, to
present idealized versions of themselves (Seidman, 2013), leading
several researchers to characterize communication on the social
media platform as hyperpersonal (Gonzales & Hancock, 2011;
Underwood, Kerlin, & Farrington-Flint, 2011; Wang, Moon, Kwon,

mailto:emcramer@noctrl.edu

mailto:songhy@gachon.ac.kr

mailto:adrent@mcw.edu

http://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog/?doi=10.1016/j.chb.2016.07.049&domain=pdf

www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/07475632

www.elsevier.com/locate/comphumbeh

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.07.049

E.M. Cramer et al. / Computers in Human Behavior 64 (2016) 739e746740

Evans, & Stefanone, 2010). According to the hyperpersonal model
(Walther, 1996), textual and asynchronous features of CMC afford
the user advantages over face-to-face interactions, thereby facili-
tating rich interpersonal communication surpassing traditional
face-to-face exchanges. The model argues CMC interaction be-
comes more desirable because the sender can communicate social
information in a controlled environment, thereby constructing an
optimized presentation of self in the absence of physical interaction
(Walther, 1996).

On Facebook, users can craft messages in the form of status
updates or comments considered optimal for self-presentation.
Facebook posts tend to be about positive events and good feel-
ings rather than negative events and bad feelings (Denti et al.,
2012). Although Facebook contains visual content such as photos
or videos, content can be selectively presented to feature the self in
the most favorable manner (Gonzales & Hancock, 2011). Posts
garnering unfavorable impressions can be edited or deleted. Un-
flattering photos or videos can be untagged or the user can ask the
Facebook member to remove the photo or video from the site. As a
result, Facebook functions as a hyperpersonal social environment, a
platform where everyone gets the opportunity to put his or her best
proverbial foot forward.

Moreover, Facebook may make social comparison more effi-
cient; users can access a world of optimized selves simply by log-
ging on. Forty-five percent of Facebook users check the site multiple
times a day (Duggan, Ellison, Lampe, Lenhart, & Madden, 2015),
with Smartphone users checking Facebook an average of 14 times a
day (Subbaraman, 2013). Facebook also offers various tools to
search, observe, and make comments about the profiles of others.
An individual with a certain social comparison target (i.e., an in-
dividual) in mind, for example, can conduct a simple search on
Facebook rather than seeking out an offline interaction. In sum,
Facebook not only creates an environment of optimized selves, but
also offers opportunities to access other optimized selves at a faster
rate.

Given users’ tendency to present themselves in favorable ways
on Facebook, Chou and Edge (2012) found frequent Facebook users
believed others were happier and had better lives compared their
own and agreed to a lesser extent that life was fair. Similarly,
Mehdizadeh (2010) reported Facebook activity to be significantly
and negatively correlated with self-esteem. More recent work
pointing to positive associations among Facebook use, social com-
parison frequency, and negative affect after comparison (Feinstein
et al., 2013; Lee, 2014; Locatelli, Kluwe, & Bryant, 2012) has led
researchers to take a closer look at social comparison practices on
the social networking site.

The current manuscript aims to delve further into the complex
nature of social comparison on Facebook by addressing four ob-
jectives. First, we attempt to explain inconsistent findings in social
comparison literature by following Helgeson and Mickelson’s
(1995) functional approach. We believe a possible reason for con-
flicting results is that a number of previous studies assume a
straightforward match-up between social comparison motives and
respective targets (i.e., self-evaluation motivation for similar com-
parison targets, self-improvement for upward targets, and self-
enhancement for downward targets) and thus overlook the
multiplex motives characterizing social comparison behavior. Thus,
we use Helgeson and Mickelson’s (1995) functional approach,
focusing on motives (i.e., self-enhancement, self-improvement,
self-evaluation, and self-destruction) of social comparison, rather
than the targets of social comparison (i.e., downward, upward, and
similar). To date, researchers have yet to examine the relationship
among motivation, esteem, and affect variables in the context of
social comparison on social media.

Second, we believe that social comparison motive and behaviors

can elicit differential psychological consequences depending on
individual differences. Thus, we examine the moderating effects of
self-esteem to determine if systematic differences between in-
dividuals with low and high self-esteem can impact how one feels
after comparing oneself to another on Facebook.

Third, we attempt to illuminate a ‘big picture’ of social com-
parison by investigating multiple social comparison motives
collectively rather than separately. That is, instead of focusing on
one motivation type, we test the effect of four social motivation
types (i.e. self-enhancement, self-improvement, self-evaluation,
and self-destruction) concurrently to examine each comparison
motivation in the context of the other three. Our final objective is to
begin to distill a popular phenomenon, a term we refer to as
Facebook fatigue, in empirical social comparison work. We want to
understand whether or not the interaction of an individual’s social
comparison motivation, self esteem, and affect leads to a desire to
reduce Facebook use. Each of the objectives will be developed in the
following sections.

1.1. Social comparison motives, self-esteem, and affect

1.1.1. Social comparison motives
According to social comparison theory (Festinger, 1954),

humans evaluate abilities and opinions by comparison to others
when ‘objective, non-social’ means of comparison are not available.
The central tenets of the theory hold that we compare ourselves
with those who are similar in ability or opinion for the purposes of
self-evaluation (similar comparison). Individuals also maintain a
‘unidirectional drive upward,’ a desire to boost ability, and may
seek to improve the self by comparing to superior others (upward
comparison; Festinger, 1954, Wood, 1989). Self-enhancement
prompts us to compare ourselves to those we perceive as less
fortunate in order to feel better about ourselves (downward com-
parison; Wills, 1981).

Despite what appears to be a straightforward match-up be-
tween motives (self-evaluation, self-improvement, self-enhance-
ment) and respective targets (similar, upward, downward), extant
research reveals a complex relationship between motivation for
and targets of social comparison. Wood (1989) argued each self-
comparison motive is not confined to one specific target. For
example, individuals motivated by self-improvement may compare
to superior others (upward comparison) to learn what to do, but
also to inferior others to figure out what not to do (downward
comparison). Taylor and Lobel (1989) demonstrated an individual
predilection to engage in downward comparison to enhance self-
esteem but also to affiliate with upward contacts to enhance
motivation and hope; in both directions (upward and downward
comparison), the motivation is self-enhancement.

Due to the complicated nature of social comparison, Helgeson
and Mickelson (1995) argue, the tendency of past social compari-
son research to study only one motivation type in a single study
presents problems. Contending that people engage in social com-
parison behavior for a variety of reasons, they suggest studying
social comparison based on a range of motives (e.g., self-
enhancement, self-improvement, self-evaluation) rather than tar-
gets of social comparison (i.e., downward, upward, and similar). In
other words, motivations can reveal more about social comparison
behaviors than respective targets. Helgeson and Mickelson (1995)
thereby elected to use functional analysis, offering a motivational
basis of attitudes (Katz, 1960), to better understand the complexity
of social comparison.

1.1.2. Social comparison and affect
Social comparison research also attempts to examine emotions

elicited after comparison. For example, Wheeler and Miyake (1992)

E.M. Cramer et al. / Computers in Human Behavior 64 (2016) 739e746 741

found positive affect to increase after downward comparisons,
while negative affect arose from upward comparisons. The re-
searchers were puzzled by a general tendency for individuals to
engage in upward comparison rather than downward comparison
despite the negative affect ensuing from upward comparison. They
conjectured upward comparisons may produce negative affect but
simultaneously trigger perceptions of personal control and hope-
fulness. Collins (2000) suggested individuals compare themselves
upwardly in order to find similarity with superior targets.
Concluding “they are among the better ones” (2000, p. 170) leads
individuals to experience increased positive affect. Correspond-
ingly, Lockwood and Kunda (1997) found comparison with super-
stars (upward comparison) inspired a desire to enhance the self,
but only when the superstar’s success was viewed to be attainable.

In all, research on the emotions arising from social comparison
in any direction remains inconclusive (Suls, Martin, & Wheeler,
2002). Exposure to someone who is inferior can lead to either
positive or negative evaluations because such exposure suggests
that one’s status is relatively advantaged but could decline. Relat-
edly, exposure to someone who is superior can lead to either pos-
itive or negative evaluations because such exposure communicates
one’s status is relatively disadvantaged but could improve.

1.1.3. Social comparison, affect, and self-esteem
Considerable social comparison research examines self-esteem

as a factor influencing post-comparison affect. Some studies
(Wheeler & Miyake, 1992) observe individuals with high self-
esteem (HSEs) to be more inclined to seek self-enhancement
through downward comparisons compared to those with low
self-esteem (LSEs). A dominant body of literature, however, dem-
onstrates the opposite pattern. Wills (1981) suggested LSEs engage
in more downward comparisons for the purposes of self-
enhancement: comparing oneself to a worse-off other can help
an individual feel better. Wills’ downward comparison theory re-
ceives support from the seminal work of Aspinwall and Taylor
(1993), who examined self-esteem as a variable moderating the
relationship between a social comparison target and affect
following comparison. LSEs in whom a negative mood had been
induced tended to engage in downward comparison to enhance
subjective well-being; following a downward comparison, LSEs
reported an increase in positive mood as well as more favorable
self-evaluations and expectations for success. The caveat to the
findings was that the relationship was observed only when a
negative mood had been induced; for LSEs in whom a positive
mood had been induced, exposure to downward comparison was
not uplifting.

More recent social comparison research on body image (Jones &
Buckingham, 2005) also reveals self-esteem to operate as a
moderating variable for social comparison effects. When making
comparisons to an unattractive female, LSEs reported higher body
esteem than when comparing to an attractive female, favoring
downward comparisons. Conversely, HSEs reported lower body
esteem when making comparisons to an unattractive female
compared to an attractive female, favoring upward comparisons.
Results confirm Mussweiler’s selective accessibility model (2003),
demonstrating that LSEs feel better about themselves by comparing
themselves to a dissimilar standard (contrast effect). HSEs exhibi-
ted a tendency to feel better after comparison to a similar standard
(assimilation affect). The findings compel further empirical inquiry
into the role of self-esteem as a moderating variable in social
comparison.

We postulate the target of social comparison depends on an
individual’s level of self-esteem. Given the hyperpersonal nature of
Facebook as well as users’ tendency to believe others are happier
and possess better lives (Chou & Edge, 2012), upward comparison

may occur more frequently than downward comparison. Vogel
et al. (2014) found frequent users of Facebook engaged in upward
comparison to a greater extent than downward comparison.

The nature of social comparison motivation, however, may differ
across Facebook users. Although results are mixed, social compar-
ison literature generally contends that LSEs engage in downward
comparison to feel better about themselves by comparing to worse-
off others (self-enhancement), while HSEs compare themselves with
better-off others to improve the self (self-improvement; see Wills,
1981; Aspinwall & Taylor, 1993; Jones & Buckingham, 2005).
Thus, we hypothesize LSEs will visit Facebook with a self-
enhancement motivation, while HSEs will log on to the social
media site with a self-improvement motivation. Moreover, we hy-
pothesize that social comparison motives will not produce a uni-
form affect among individuals. Instead, in accordance with the
selective accessibility model (Mussweiler, 2003), a self-
improvement motive will produce greater positive affect among
HSEs compared to LSEs, while self-enhancement will engender
positive affect more prominently among LSEs compared to HSEs.

H1: On Facebook, LSEs will be more likely to engage in social
comparison for the motive of (a) self-enhancement, while HSEs will
be more inclined to engage in social comparison for the purpose of
(b) self-improvement.

H2: On Facebook, a self-improvement motive for social com-
parison will produce greater positive affect among HSEs compared
to LSEs, while a self-enhancement motive will engender positive
affect more prominently among LSEs compared to HSEs.

Along with self-enhancement and self-improvement, the cur-
rent study probes into the relationship among self-esteem and two
additional social comparison motivations. Social comparison liter-
ature lacks clear and consistent findings describing the impact of
self-esteem on the motive of self-evaluation, considered a similar
or lateral comparison. Festinger (1954) posits the desire to evaluate
the self is innately human; therefore, in the absences of objective,
non-social criteria for evaluation, “people evaluate their opinions
and abilities by comparison respectively with the opinions and
abilities of others” (p. 118). Presumably, comparing oneself to a
similar other to assess how one ‘measures up’ would be a tendency
of both HSEs and LSEs.

Beyond self-evaluation, Helgeson and Mickelson’s (1995) study
is exceptional in its examination of a social comparison motivation
for self-destruction. Defined as a motive to confirm the expectation
that things will get worse, a self-destruction motive was found only
among LSEs. Self-destruction can be perceived as a desire to fulfill a
negative prophecy about the self through social comparison.
Regarding self-evaluation and self-destruction motives for com-
parison, the following question emerges:

RQ1: How does self-esteem influence other social comparison
motivations (i.e., self-evaluation and self-destruction) on
Facebook?

1.2. Facebook fatigue

Social comparison, affect, and self-esteem may work in concert
to diminish intentions to use Facebook, a notion known in popular
culture as Facebook fatigue. A Pew study found 61% of Facebook
users had voluntarily taken a break from the social media sited9%
attributed the break to gossip, negativity, conflict, and drama
(Rainie, Smith, & Duggan, 2013). Popular news media outlets such
as CNN (Kelly, 2013), the Financial Times (Cookson, 2013), and
Forbes (Bercovici, 2013) use the term “Facebook fatigue” in articles
reporting the study. Beyond the Pew study, Facebook fatigue has
received little empirical attentiondaccordingly, this study at-
tempts to examine the concept as a potential psychosocial outcome
of social comparison on Facebook among college students.

E.M. Cramer et al. / Computers in Human Behavior 64 (2016) 739e746742

RQ2: Do social comparison motivations influence Facebook fa-
tigue? If so, how do the effects differ depending on the level of self-
esteem?

2. Methods

2.1. Measures

2.1.1. Social comparison activity
The 11-item Iowa-Netherlands Comparison Orientation Mea-

sure (Gibbons & Buunk, 1999) was adapted to gauge social com-
parison activity on Facebook (a ¼ 0.80). While the measure was
designed to assess social comparison as a relatively stable trait
across situations and moments in time, the researchers conjectured
social comparison activity online would correlate highly with social
comparison orientation. Accordingly, the adapted measure
included the following prompt: “Please think about your experi-
ences while using Facebook. Do you compare yourself to others on
Facebook? Please indicate your level of agreement with the state-
ments below. When I am on Facebook …” Participants then re-
ported levels of agreement with 11 items comprising the original
scale. Each item used a 5-point Likert scale (1 ¼ strongly disagree,
5 ¼ strongly agree), with higher scores indicating increased social
comparison activities on Facebook.

2.1.2. Social comparison perception
The researchers were interested in obtaining participants’ per-

ceptions of the extent to which social comparison occurs on Face-
book in addition to their actual social comparison activity on the
social media site. Accordingly, a scale was developed to measure
social comparison perception on Facebook. Demonstrating good
internal consistency (a ¼ 0.78), the scale consisted of three items: “I
feel I get to compare myself to others more often while I am on
Facebook,” “I feel Facebook motivates people to compare them-
selves to others,” and “I feel Facebook makes it easier to compare
oneself to other people.” Scale items were measured with a 5-point
Likert scale (1 ¼ strongly disagree, 5 ¼ strongly agree). Higher scores
indicated perceptions of greater social comparison practices on
Facebook.

2.1.3. Motives for social comparison
To ascertain why participants engage in social comparison, the

three long-standing and well-tested social comparison motivation
types, self-improvement, self-enhancement, and self-evaluation,
were examined. Self-destruction, a motivation type emerging
from the work of Helgeson and Mickelson (1995), also was tested.
Given the current study’s emphasis on self-esteem, the self-
destruction motivation was added to the three traditional motive
types. Motivations were measured using a scale developed by
Helgeson and Mickelson (1995). Each scale item was measured
using a 5-point Likert scale (1 ¼ extremely unlikely, 5 ¼ extremely
likely), with higher scores indicating greater motivation for social
comparison. The scale indicated good internal consistency for self-
improvement (a ¼ 0.88), self-enhancement (a ¼ 0.91), self-
destruction (a ¼ 0.92), and self-evaluation (a ¼ 0.85).

2.1.4. Facebook fatigue
A three-item measure developed by the researchers examined

the extent to which individuals avoid or feel less motivated to use
Facebook due to perceptions of increased social comparison on the
social media site. Scale items included: “I feel less motivated to use
Facebook because I compare myself to others while I am on this
site,” “I feel less motivated to use Facebook to avoid comparing
myself to others,” and “Sometimes I have negative feelings about
the accomplishments others post on Facebook.” The measured

showed good internal consistency (a ¼ 0.77) and used a 5-point
Likert scale (1 ¼ strongly disagree, 5 ¼ strongly agree). Higher
scores indicated greater Facebook fatigue due to social comparison.

2.1.5. Self-esteem
The Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (Rosenberg, 1989) gauged

participants’ perception of their own self-worth and satisfaction.
The scale consists of 10 items, including “I feel that I have a number
of good qualities” and “I take a positive attitude toward myself.”
Items are measured using a 4-point Likert scale (1 ¼ strongly agree,
4 ¼ strongly disagree). The scale demonstrated good internal con-
sistency (a ¼ 0.89), with higher scores indicating higher levels of
dispositional self-esteem.

2.1.6.

Positive affect

The researchers were interested in the affective responses

associated with Facebook comparison. Accordingly, a list of affec-
tive responses adapted from Zuckerman et al. (1964) as well as
Buunk, Ybema, Gibbons, and Ipenburg (2001) was included in the
study. The list included 18 emotions associated with a positive
affect (e.g. grateful, reassured, pleasant). Participants were asked to
“check all the responses that describe how you feel after comparing
yourself to other on Facebook.” The sum of the affect checks
became the positive affect composite variable.

2.2. Procedures and sample

An electronic survey was distributed via e-mail to students in
undergraduate communication courses at a large public university
in the Midwest. A total of 267 (N ¼ 267) individuals completed the
survey, with females comprising 67% of the sample. Ages of par-
ticipants ranged from 18 to 51 (M ¼ 23.63, SD ¼ 6.06). Participants
reported the following ethnicities: White/Caucasian (78.1%), Afri-
can American (8.3%), Latino (4.5%), Asian (3.4%), and American In-
dian/Alaska Native and other (5.7%). A majority of the sample
(61.7%) reported daily Facebook use, averaging 2.92 h a day
(SD ¼ 3.41). Participants checked the social media site about ten
times a day (M ¼ 10.23, SD ¼ 11.89). When asked how often they
posted content (photos and text) to Facebook, 32.5% reported
sometimes, followed by rarely (29.6%) and often (17.9%). Partici-
pants reported reading postings (photos and text) often (30.3%),
very often (20.8%), sometimes (19.4%), and extremely frequently
(15.0%).

3. Results

First, a relationship between self-esteem and social comparison
practices (i.e. activity and motivations) on Facebook was investi-
gated (see Table 1 for complete correlation matrix). No significant
relationship between self-esteem and social comparison activity on
Facebook was detected, r (249) ¼ 0.05, ns, indicating self-esteem
level was not related with the extent to which individuals
engaged in social comparison on Facebook. Interestingly, in-
dividuals with low self-esteem were more likely to perceive
increased social comparison on Facebook (r ¼ �0.13; p ¼ 0.023)
even though differences in actual social comparison activity were
not evident. Self-esteem also did not associate with patterns of
Facebook usage, including posting, r (271) ¼ �0.05, ns, and reading
messages, r (271) ¼ �0.02, ns, as well as general activity, r
(270) ¼ �0.07, ns.

To test H1 and RQ1, the relationship between social comparison
motivation and self-esteem was tested: all social comparison mo-
tives were significantly and negatively correlated with self-esteem.
LSEs, compared to HSEs, tended to be more motivated to engage in
social comparison for the purposes of self-improvement, r

E.M. Cramer et al. / Computers in Human Behavior 64 (2016) 739e746 743

(249) ¼ �0.16, p ¼ 0.01, self-enhancement, r (249) ¼ �0.25,
p ¼ 0.000, and self-destruction, r (248) ¼ �0.46; p ¼ 0.000. Self-
evaluation was also significantly and negatively correlated with
self-esteem, r (249) ¼ �0.22; p ¼ 0.001. Thus, H1 was partially
supported.

H2 was tested with hierarchical regression analyses. No signif-
icant relationship was detected between self-esteem and positive
affect following Facebook social comparison (b ¼ 0.06; p ¼ 0.35),
suggesting social comparison activity was not connected to feeling
good among HSEs and LSEs (see Table 2). Controlling for self-
esteem, findings from Model 2 suggest most social comparison
motives relate to positive affect. Both self-enhancement (b ¼ 0.25;
p ¼ 0.002) and self-improvement motives (b ¼ 0.23; p ¼ 0.007)
showed a fairly strong positive association with positive affect,
while self-destruction demonstrated a significant negative affilia-
tion (b ¼ �0.18; p ¼ 0.007) with positive affect. Self-evaluation was
not significantly related with positive affect (b ¼ 0.13; ns). Further
analysis was conducted to test the moderating effect of self-esteem
on the relationship between affect and social comparison motiva-
tion. Results indicated a positive moderating effect of self-esteem
between self-improvement motivation and positive affect
(b ¼ 0.94; p ¼ 0.049). Conversely, a negative moderating effect of
self-esteem between self-enhancement and positive affect was
detected (b ¼ �1.12; p ¼ 0.023). Thus, H2 was supported.

Using hierarchical linear regression, RQ2 examined the rela-
tionship between social comparison motives and Facebook fatigue
due to social comparison; the influence of self-esteem on the
relationship also was explored (see Table 2). First, results indicated
individuals with social comparison motives of self-improvement
(b ¼ 0.22; p ¼ 0.006), enhancement (b ¼ 0.15; p ¼ 0.05), and
destruction (b ¼ 0.21; p ¼ 0.002) felt more Facebook fatigue as a
result of social comparison. Secondly, low self-esteem significantly
and positively associated with Facebook fatigue. Compared to HSEs,
LSEs were more likely to avoid or feel less motivated to use Face-
book due to perceptions of social comparison on the social media
site (b ¼ �0.42; p ¼ 0.000). While LSEs were generally more likely
to experience Facebook fatigue, some social comparison motiva-
tions particularly affected HSEs. That is, we found a significant,
positive moderating effect of self-esteem between self-
enhancement motive and Facebook fatigue (b ¼ 0.92; p ¼ 0.044)
and between self-destruction motive and Facebook fatigue
(b ¼ 0.94; p ¼ 0.009).

4. Discussion

4.1. Social comparison and Facebook use

The current findings offer several contributions to the literature
on social comparison and Facebook use, with particular emphasis
on how self-esteem relates to comparison practices on the social
media site. First, we found self-esteem associates with perceptions
of social comparison as well as motivations to engage in social
comparison on Facebook. Comparing oneself to others is a common
practice in Facebook; most (69%) study participants agreed they
engage in social comparison on Facebook. While no significant
correlation was observed between self-esteem and social compar-
ison activity on Facebook, LSEs were more likely to perceive
increased social comparison on Facebook. That is, LSEs, compared
to their HSE counterparts, did not necessarily use Facebook or
compare themselves to others on Facebook to a greater extent.
However, they were more likely to think social comparison occurs
frequently on the social media site.

Additionally, LSEs were consistently more motivated than HSEs
to compare themselves to others for the purposes of self-
evaluation, self-enhancement, self-improvement, and self-

destruction. This finding is quite important, as it suggests online
social comparison motivations may differ from offline motivations.
While Helgeson and Mickelson (1995)’s initial study found low self-
esteem to be significantly correlated with only one comparison
motive, self-destruction, our results suggest the use of social media
magnifies all social comparison motives for LSEs. Results support
our rationale that Facebook may promote social comparison by
creating an environment of optimized selves and by offering op-
portunities to access other optimized selves efficiently. LSEs may be
especially sensitive to the hyperpersonal nature of Facebook.

Second, the study represents a primary step in examining mo-
tives and affect in relationship to social comparison on Facebook.
We found that while LSEs possessed greater motives for social
comparison across all motivation types, they were more likely to
experience Facebook fatigue due to social comparison. Thus, we
conjecture LSEs to be more vulnerable to negative consequences of
social comparison on Facebook.

Moreover, we found self-improvement, self-enhancement, self-
evaluation, and self-destruction motives produce different affective
responses depending on the level of self-esteem. Notably, the
motivation triggering positive affect among HSEs differs from the
motivation triggering positive affect for LSEs. As self-esteem in-
creases, the effect of a self-improvement motivation on positive
affect also increases, suggesting that comparing the self to others
for the purpose of self-improvement engenders greater positive
affect among HSEs compared to LSEs. The opposite pattern was
observed for self-enhancement: as self-esteem decreases, the effect
of a self-enhancement motivation on positive affect also increases.
In other words, self-enhancement associates with a positive affect
more prominently among LSEs compared to HSEs. The results
support findings by Aspinwall and Taylor (1993), Wills (1981), and
Wood, Giordano-Beech, Taylor, Michela, and Gaus (1994) suggest-
ing that LSEs engage in the downward comparison for the purposes
of self-enhancement and such comparison produces a positive
affect.

Third, the study also acknowledges the presence of social
comparison motivated by self-destruction. Self-destruction related
to a deteriorated positive affect especially for LSEs. Additionally and
not surprisingly, the self-destruction motive was associated with
more Facebook fatigue. Curiously, however, those motivated to
make social comparisons to improve or enhance the self also felt a
decreased motivation to use Facebook. We wonder if self-
improvement and self-enhancement, while initially generating
positive affect, may eventually take a toll on the desire to use
Facebook for social comparison. In an environment of optimized
selves, the opportunities for self-enhancement and self-
improvement know no bounds. One may become frustrated by
ongoing attempts to keep up appearances and stay positive in a
world where people are presenting the most favorable versions of
themselvesdthere’s always something more than can be done.

Fourth, we believe it is noteworthy that LSEs perceived increased
levels of social comparison on Facebook. We proffer two explana-
tions for this observation. First, we conjecture LSEs may be more
sensitive and vulnerable to the hyperpersonal affordances of
Facebook, compared to HSEs. That is, because they regularly
encounter a reduced sense of self-worth, LSEs may be more
conscious of the optimized portrayals of other Facebook members.
Second, LSEs may use Facebook to compensate for reduced social
interaction offline. According to the social compensation hypoth-
esis (Valkenburg, Schouten, & Peter, 2005), individuals who are
lonely or unpopular use social media platforms to compensate
inadequate social networks. Because low self-esteem is associated
with introversion and less popularity offline (Zywica & Danowski,
2008), we propose that LSEs use Facebook to learn more about
peers and thereby engage in social comparison to a greater extent

Table 1
Zero-order correlations, means and standard deviations for study variables.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

1. SC activity 1
2. Self-improve. 0.56** 1
3. Self-enhance. 0.54** 0.64** 1
4. Self-destruct. 0.19** 0.40** 0.46** 1
5. Self-eval. 0.52** 0.69** 0.67** 0.44** 1
6. Self-esteem �0.05 �0.16* �0.25** �0.46** �0.22** 1
7. Positive affect 0.42** 0.40** 0.37** 0.04 0.36** 0.06 1
8. SC perception 0.48** 0.32** 0.35** 0.12 0.34** �0.13* 0.23** 1
9. FB fatigue 0.31** 0.40** 0.40** 0.45** 0.33** �0.41** 0.06 0.41** 1
10. FB posting 0.25** 0.15* 0.23** 0.12 0.16** �0.05 0.26** 0.19** 0.08 1
11. FB reading 0.25** 0.23** 0.23** 0.05 0.22** �0.02 0.28** 0.25** 0.12 0.55** 1
12. FB use 0.15* 0.00 0.08 0.03 0.13* �0.08 0.16** 0.14* 0.15* 0.07 0.42** 1
M 3.28 2.84 2.70 1.91 2.80 3.09 4.74 3.71 2.66 2.95 3.95 3.70
SD 0.59 1.01 1.01 0.83 1.01 0.53 4.75 0.86 0.92 1.20 1.40 0.94

Note. *p < 0.05, **p < 0 .01 ***p < 0.001 (two-tailed); SC ¼ social comparison; FB ¼ Facebook.

E.M. Cramer et al. / Computers in Human Behavior 64 (2016) 739e746744

online than offline.
Lastly, the study is the first to test a concept popularized by the

media, Facebook fatigue, in empirical research. Results indicate
LSEs feel fatigue from Facebook use more keenly. Diminished in-
tentions to use Facebook also were linked to social comparison
motives of self-improvement, enhancement, and destruction, sug-
gesting that multiple motivations lead to Facebook fatigue. Moving
forward, scholarly research should continue to define and scale the
construct of Facebook fatigue in order to grasp its connection to
social comparison and negative affect.

4.2. Theoretical contributions

The current study reveals the complex nature of social com-
parison practices on Facebook and suggests systematic differences
between LSEs and HSEs when comparing to others online. The
study offers three important theoretical contributions to social
comparison theory. First, our study is one of the first to investigate
multiple social comparison motives collectively rather than sepa-
rately. Previous work primarily has focused on targets of social
comparison (i.e., upward, downward, lateral) and mostly tested a
sole motivation type rather than several (Helgeson & Mickelson,
1995). Conversely, our study is unique in its examination of the
influence of four social motivation types (i.e. self-enhancement,
self-improvement, self-evaluation, and self-destruction) simulta-
neously. A ‘big picture’ of social comparison emerges by (a) testing
each comparison motivation in the context of the other three and

Table 2
Regression analysis: Positive affect and Facebook fatigue.

Positive affect

Predictors b

Step 1: Self-esteem 0.059
Step 2: Motivation
Self-improvement 0.23
Self-enhancement 0.25
Self-destruction �0.18
Self-evaluation 0.13

Step3: Moderation
Esteem*Improvement 0.94
Esteem*Enhancement �1.12
Esteem*Destruction 0.64
Esteem*Evaluation 0.16

R2 0.26
DR2 0.24

Note. b ¼ standardized beta from regression equation.

(b) investigating the true effect of each motivation by controlling
for the other motivations.

Second, in contrast to previous work using experiments to test
social comparison hypotheses, the current investigation contrib-
utes to the literature by surveying participants about real-life social
comparison practices. Study participants reported on actual social
comparison behaviors and motives on Facebook rather than
engaging in social comparison in a manipulated environment. As a
result, the external validity of the findings is enhanced through
increased levels of ecological isomorphism, or the degree to which
the study reflects an external reality (Treadwell, 2014).

Finally, the study is one of only a limited number examining
social comparison on Facebook using established social comparison
measures and drawing from a rich history of social comparison
research. A growing body of research examines the psychosocial
impact of Facebook use (Feinstein et al., 2013; Haferkamp &
Kramer, 2011; Vogel et al., 2014), but few studies identify social
comparison to be a significant contributing factor. Nor do studies
examine whether hyperpersonal affordances of Facebook motivate
social comparison or produce different affective responses to social
comparison. There is so much work to be done on this topic and our
research represents a solid first step.

4.3. Limitations and future directions

As the current study is one of few investigating social compar-
ison motives on Facebook, the current findings should be further

Facebook fatigue

p b p

0.353 �0.42 0.000

0.007 0.22 0.006
0.002 0.15 0.050
0.013 0.21 0.002
0.135 �0.08 0.335

0.049 �0.62 0.161
0.023 0.92 0.044
0.101 0.94 0.009
0.735 �0.43 0.310

0.37
0.34

E.M. Cramer et al. / Computers in Human Behavior 64 (2016) 739e746 745

extended and replicated. For example, our study focuses on social
comparison in the social media context, which can be largely
different from offline social comparison. We believe future study
should test multiple social comparison motives in offline settings to
further understanding the relationship between social comparison
practices and self-esteem. Our conjectures regarding self-esteem
and increased perceptions of optimized portrayals on Facebook
also must be tested to determine if LSEs truly are more aware of the
hyperpersonal affordance of the social media site.

Another limitation resides in whether the current in-
vestigation’s methodologies succeed in reconciling mixed findings
in past social comparison literature. Although our study attempts to
overcome several limitations residing in the previous studies, we
are unsure about the differential effect of including multiple mo-
tives, using a survey method, and examining social comparison in
new context on our results compared to past research. We suppose
replicating and expanding the current study in different settings
with different methods (e.g., investigating offline social comparison
motives with an experiment) may provide deeper understanding of
social comparison theory.

Future research also should examine Facebook social compari-
son practices associated with gender, culture, and age. In the United
States, women (77%) tend to use Facebook more than men (66%)
(Duggan, 2015). The Swedish Facebook study (Denti et al., 2012)
found women to experience a relationship between time spent on
Facebook and feelings of reduced happiness and contentment. The
relationship was not evident for men. Among adolescents in
Australia, Facebook use leads to a greater sense of self-concept for
males, while females using Facebook reported more depression and
lower self-esteem (Neira, Corey & Barber, 2014).

Across cultures, social comparison practices on Facebook may
reflect trends observed offline. A Canadian study examining the
relationship between cultural background and social comparison
practices indicated Asian Canadians to seek more social compari-
son, particularly upward social comparisons for self-improvement
motives (White & Lehman, 2005). Guimond et al. (2007) reported
greater between-gender social comparison in Western cultures,
leading to more self-stereotyping, compared to Eastern cultures.
More research needs to be conducted on the impact of culture on
Facebook social comparison practices, especially in light of the
increasing use of Facebook among Asian cultures (Jana, 2013) as
well as ethnic minorities in the U.S. (Duggan, 2015).

Finally, our sample consisted of college-age students and
therefore cannot be generalized to all Facebook users. For example,
since 2010, social media use has nearly tripled among adults age 65
and older (Perrin, 2015). Further investigation across age groups
would further uncover individual differences in social comparison
practices.

5. Conclusion

A popular outlet for communication and connection, Facebook is
a valuable site for research into social behavior, particularly social
comparison and psychological factors associated with interacting
with others in a world of optimized selves. The current study rep-
resents a first step in examining motives and affect in relationship
to social comparison on Facebook. The study also offers further
insight into the important role of self-esteem in social comparison,
with self-enhancement (for LSEs) and self-improvement (for HSEs)
operating as salient factors influencing positive feelings after social
comparison on Facebook. Finally, the study arrives at some tenta-
tive conclusions about why individuals might avoid Facebook due
to perceptions of social comparison on the social media platform.

References

Aspinwall, L. G., & Taylor, S. E. (1993). Effects of social comparison direction, threat,
and self-esteem on affect, self-evaluation, and expected success. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 64(5), 708e722. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/
0022-3514.64.5.708.

Bennett, S. (2012). Twitter, Facebook, Google, YouTube e What happens on the Internet
every 60 seconds? [INFOGRAPHIC]. AllTwitter. Retrieved from http://www.
mediabistro.com/alltwitter/data-never-sleeps_b24551.

Bercovici, J. (2013). Is Facebook home Facebook’s answer to Facebook fatigue? Forbes.
Retrieved from http://www.forbes.com/sites/jeffbercovici/2013/04/04/is-
facebook-home-facebooks-answer-to-facebook-fatigue/.

Buunk, B. P., Ybema, J. F., Gibbons, F. X., & Ipenburg, M. (2001). The affective con-
sequences of social comparison as related to professional burnout and social
comparison orientation. European Journal of Social Psychology, 31(4), 337e351.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.41.

Chou, H. T. G., & Edge, N. (2012). “They are happier and having better lives than I
am”: The impact of using Facebook on perceptions of others’ lives. Cyberp-
sychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 15(2), 117e121. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1089/cyber.2011.0324.

Collins, R. L. (2000). Among the better ones: Upward assimilation in social com-
parison. In J. Suls, & L. Wheeler (Eds.), Handbook of social comparison (pp.
159e172). New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum.

Cookson, R. (2013). ‘Facebook fatigue’ stirs investor concern. FT.com. Retrieved from
http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/8b7ab90e-bc91-11e2-b344-00144feab7de.
html#axzz3Hl20wMed.

Denti, L., Barbopuolos, I., Nilsson, I., Holmberg, L., Thulin, M., Wendeblad, M., et al.
(2012). Sweden’s largest Facebook study. University of Gothenberg: Gothenberg
Research Institute. Retrieved from https://gupea.ub.gu.se/bitstream/2077/
28893/1/gupea_2077_28893_1 .

Duggan, M. (2015). Mobile messaging and social media 2015. Retrieved from: http://
www.pewinternet.org/2015/08/19/mobile-messaging-and-social-media-2015/.

Duggan, M., Ellison, N. B., Lampe, C., Lenhart, A., & Madden, M. (2015). Social media
update 2014. Retrieved from: http://www.pewinternet.org/files/2015/01/PI_
SocialMediaUpdate20144 .

Facebook. (2016). Fb Newsroom: Company Info. Retrieved from http://newsroom.fb.
com/company-info/.

Feinstein, B. A., Hershenberg, R., Bhatia, V., Latack, J. A., Meuwly, N., & Davila, J.
(2013). Negative social comparison on Facebook and depressive symptoms:
Rumination as a mechanism. Psychology of Popular Media Culture, 2(3), 161e170.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0033111.

Festinger, L. (1954). A theory of social comparison processes. Human Relations, 7(2),
117e140. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/001872675400700202.

Gibbons, F. X., & Buunk, B. P. (1999). Individual differences in social comparison:
Development of a scale of social comparison orientation. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 76(1), 129e142. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-
3514.76.1.129.

Gonzales, A. L., & Hancock, J. T. (2011). Mirror, mirror on my Facebook wall: Effects
of exposure to Facebook on self-esteem. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social
Networking, 14(1e2), 79e83. http://dx.doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2009.0411.

Guimond, S., Branscombe, N. R., Brunot, S., Buunk, A. P., Chatard, A., D�esert, M., et al.
(2007). Culture, gender, and the self: Variations and impact of social compari-
son processes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92(6), 1118. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.92.6.1118.

Haferkamp, N., & Kr€amer, N. C. (2011). Social comparison 2.0: Examining the effects
of online profiles on social-networking sites. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and
Social Networking, 14(5), 309e314. http://dx.doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2010.0120.

Helgeson, V. S., & Mickelson, K. D. (1995). Motives for social comparison. Personality
and Social Psychology Bulletin, 21(11), 1200e1209. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/
01461672952111008.

Jana. (2013). Facebook in Asia [blog post]. Retrieved from http://www.jana.com/blog/
facebook-in-asia/.

Jones, A. M., & Buckingham, J. T. (2005). Selfeesteem as a moderator of the effect of
social comparison on women’s body image. Journal of Social and Clinical Psy-
chology, 24(8), 1164e1187. http://dx.doi.org/10.1521/jscp.2005.24.8.1164.

Katz, D. (1960). The functional approach to the study of attitudes. Public Opinion
Quarterly, 24, 163e204. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/266945.

Kelly, H. (2013). Survey: Most Americans take breaks from Facebook. CNN. Retrieved
from http://www.cnn.com/2013/02/05/tech/social-media/facebook-breaks-
pew/.

Lee, S. Y. (2014). How do people compare themselves with others on social network
sites?: The case of Facebook. Computers in Human Behavior, 32, 253e260. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2013.12.009.

Locatelli, S. M., Kluwe, K., & Bryant, F. B. (2012). Facebook use and the tendency to
ruminate among college students: Testing mediational hypotheses. Journal of
Educational Computing Research, 46(4), 377e394. http://dx.doi.org/10.2190/
EC.46.4.d.

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), 91e103.

Mehdizadeh, S. (2010). Self-presentation 2.0: Narcissism and self-esteem on Face-
book. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 13(4), 357e364. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2009.0257.

Mussweiler, T. (2003). Comparison processes in social judgment: Mechanisms and
consequences. Psychological Review, 110(3), 472e489. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/

http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.64.5.708

http://www.mediabistro.com/alltwitter/data-never-sleeps_b24551

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jeffbercovici/2013/04/04/is-facebook-home-facebooks-answer-to-facebook-fatigue/

http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.41

http://dx.doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2011.0324

http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0747-5632(16)30539-8/sref6

http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/8b7ab90e-bc91-11e2-b344-00144feab7de.html#axzz3Hl20wMed

https://gupea.ub.gu.se/bitstream/2077/28893/1/gupea_2077_28893_1

http://www.pewinternet.org/2015/08/19/mobile-messaging-and-social-media-2015/

http://www.pewinternet.org/files/2015/01/PI_SocialMediaUpdate20144

http://newsroom.fb.com/company-info/

http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0033111

http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/001872675400700202

http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.76.1.129

http://dx.doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2009.0411

http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.92.6.1118

http://dx.doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2010.0120

http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/01461672952111008

http://www.jana.com/blog/facebook-in-asia/

http://dx.doi.org/10.1521/jscp.2005.24.8.1164

http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/266945

http://www.cnn.com/2013/02/05/tech/social-media/facebook-breaks-pew/

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2013.12.009

http://dx.doi.org/10.2190/EC.46.4.d

http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0747-5632(16)30539-8/sref25

http://dx.doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2009.0257

http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.110.3.472

E.M. Cramer et al. / Computers in Human Behavior 64 (2016) 739e746746

0033-295X.110.3.472.
Neira, B., Corey, J., & Barber, B. L. (2014). Social networking site use: Linked to ad-

olescents’ social self-concept, self-esteem, and depressed mood. Australian
Journal of Psychology, 66(1), 56e64. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ajpy.12034.

Perrin, A. (2015). Social media usage: 2010-2015. Pew Research Center: Internet,
Science, and Tech. Retrieved from http://www.pewinternet.org/2015/10/08/
social-networking-usage-2005-2015/.

Pring, C. (2012). 100 social media statistics for 2012. The Social Skinny. http://
thesocialskinny.com/100-social-media-statistics-for-2012/.

Rainie, L., Smith, A., & Duggan, M. (2013). Coming and going on Facebook. Pew
research and Internet project. Retrieved from http://www.pewinternet.org/2013/
02/05/coming-and-going-on-facebook/.

Rosenberg, M. (1989). Society and the adolescent self-image (Rev ed.). Middleton, CT:
Wesleyan University Press.

Seidman, G. (2013). Self-presentation and belonging on Facebook: How personality
influences social media use and motivations. Personality and Individual Differ-
ences, 54(3), 402e407.

Subbaraman, N. (2013). Smartphone users check Facebook 14 times a day, study says.
NBC News. Retrieved from http://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/
smartphone-users-check-facebook-14-times-day-study-says-f1C9125315.

Suls, J., Martin, R., & Wheeler, L. (2002). Social comparison: Why, with whom, and
with what effect? Current Directions in Psychological Science, 11(5), 159e163.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-8721.00191.

Taylor, S. E., & Lobel, M. (1989). Social comparison activity under threat: Downward
evaluation and upward contacts. Psychological Review, 96(4), 569e575. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.96.4.569.

Treadwell, D. (2014). Introducing communication research: Paths of inquiry. Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.

Underwood, J. D., Kerlin, L., & Farrington-Flint, L. (2011). The lies we tell and what
they say about us: Using behavioural characteristics to explain Facebook ac-
tivity. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(5), 1621e1626. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1016/j.chb.2011.01.012.

Valkenburg, P. M., Schouten, A. P., & Peter, J. (2005). Adolescents’ identity experi-
ments on the Internet. New Media & Society, 7(3), 383e402. http://dx.doi.org/

10.1177/1461444805052282.
Vogel, E. A., Rose, J. P., Roberts, L. R., & Eckles, K. (2014). Social comparison, social

media, and self-esteem. Psychology of Popular Media Culture, 3(4), 206e222.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/ppm0000047.

Walther, J. B. (1996). Computer-mediated communication: Impersonal, interper-
sonal, and hyperpersonal interaction. Communication Research, 23(1), 3e43.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/009365096023001001.

Wang, S. S., Moon, S. I., Kwon, K. H., Evans, C. A., & Stefanone, M. A. (2010). Face off:
Implications of visual cues on initiating friendship on Facebook. Computers in
Human Behavior, 26(2), 226e234. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2009.10.001.

Wheeler, L., & Miyake, K. (1992). Social comparison in everyday life. Journal of
Personality And Social Psychology, 62(5), 760e773. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/
0022-3514.62.5.760.

White, K., & Lehman, D. R. (2005). Culture and social comparison seeking: The role
of self-motives. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31(2), 232e242.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0146167204271326.

Wills, T. A. (1981). Downward comparison. Principles in Social Psychology Psycho-
logical Bulletin, 90(2), 245e271. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.90.2.245.

Wood, J. V. (1989). Theory and research concerning social comparisons of personal
attributes. Psychological Bulletin, 106(2), 231e248. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/
0033-2909.106.2.231.

Wood, J. V., Giordano-Beech, M., Taylor, K. L., Michela, J. L., & Gaus, V. (1994).
Strategies of social comparison among people with low self-esteem: Self-pro-
tection and self-enhancement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67(4),
713. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.67.4.713.

Zuckerman, M., Lubin, B., Vogel, L., & Valerius, E. (1964). Measurement of experi-
mentally induced affects. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 28(5), 418e425.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0045367.

Zywica, J., & Danowski, J. (2008). The faces of Facebookers: Investigating social
enhancement and social compensation hypotheses, predicting Facebook™ and
offline popularity from sociability and self-esteem, and mapping the meanings
of popularity with semantic networks. Journal of Computer-Mediated Commu-
nication, 14(1), 1e34. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2008.01429.x.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.110.3.472

http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ajpy.12034

http://www.pewinternet.org/2015/10/08/social-networking-usage-2005-2015/

http://thesocialskinny.com/100-social-media-statistics-for-2012/

http://www.pewinternet.org/2013/02/05/coming-and-going-on-facebook/

http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0747-5632(16)30539-8/sref32

http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0747-5632(16)30539-8/sref33

http://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/smartphone-users-check-facebook-14-times-day-study-says-f1C9125315

http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-8721.00191

http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.96.4.569

http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0747-5632(16)30539-8/sref37

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2011.01.012

http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1461444805052282

http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/ppm0000047

http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/009365096023001001

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2009.10.001

http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.62.5.760

http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0146167204271326

http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.90.2.245

http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.106.2.231

http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.67.4.713

http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0045367

http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2008.01429.x

Social comparison on Facebook: Motivation, affective consequences, self-esteem, and Facebook fatigue

1. Introduction
1.1. Social comparison motives, self-esteem, and affect
1.1.1. Social comparison motives
1.1.2. Social comparison and affect
1.1.3. Social comparison, affect, and self-esteem
1.2. Facebook fatigue
2. Methods
2.1. Measures
2.1.1. Social comparison activity
2.1.2. Social comparison perception
2.1.3. Motives for social comparison
2.1.4. Facebook fatigue
2.1.5. Self-esteem
2.1.6. Positive affect
2.2. Procedures and sample
3. Results
4. Discussion
4.1. Social comparison and Facebook use
4.2. Theoretical contributions
4.3. Limitations and future directions
5. Conclusion
References

Turn in your highest-quality paper
Get a qualified writer to help you with

“ Psychology ”

Get high-quality paper

NEW! AI matching with writer

Order an Essay Now & Get These Features For Free:

Turnitin Report

Formatting

Title Page

Citation

Outline

Place an Order