ArticlePDF Available

What does your selfie say about you?

Authors:
Article

What does your selfie say about you?

What Does Your Selfie Say About You?
Lin Qiu* Jiahui Lu Shanshan Yang
Division of Psychology
Nanyang Technological University
Weina Qu Tingshao Zhu
Institute of Psychology
Chinese Academy of Sciences
Correspondent author*:
Lin Qiu, Division of Psychology, School of Humanities and Social Sciences, Nanyang
Technological University, 14 Nanyang drive, Singapore, 637332
Phone: +65 6513-2250
Fax: +65 6795-5797
Email: linqiu@ntu.edu.sg
Please cite this article as: Qiu, L., Lu, J., Yang, S., Qu, W., & Zhu, T. (2015). What
does your selfie say about you?. Computers in Human Behavior, 52, 443-449.
Highlights:
Selfies contain cues indicating personality traits.
A coding scheme for selfies was developed.
We found cues related to self-report and observer judgment of personality.
Observers made consistent judgment of personality traits from selfies.
Observers accurately predicted openness from selfies.
*Highlights (for review)
What Does Your Selfie Say About You?
Abstract
Selfies refer to self-portraits taken by oneself using a digital camera or a smartphone.
They become increasingly popular in social media. However, little is known about
how selfies reflect their owners' personality traits and how people judge others'
personality from selfies. In this study, we examined the association between selfies
and personality by measuring participants' Big Five personality and coding their
selfies posted on a social networking site. We found specific cues in selfies related to
agreeableness, conscientiousness, neuroticism, and openness. We also examined zero-
acquaintance personality judgment and found that observers had moderate to strong
agreement in their ratings of Big Five personality based on selfies. However, they
could only accurately predict selfie owners’ degree of openness. This study is the first
to reveal personality-related cues in selfies and provide a picture-coding scheme that
can be used to analyze selfies. We discussed the difference between personality
expression in selfies and other types of photos, and its possible relationship with
impression management of social media users.
Keywords
selfie, personality, zero-acquaintance judgment, photo, social media
*Manuscript without Author Details
Click here to view linked References
1. Introduction
"Selfie" was named the word of the year in 2013 by the Oxford English
Dictionary. It refers to a self-portrait picture taken by oneself using a digital camera or
a smartphone for posting on social networking sites. When taking a selfie, individuals
can view how they look like in the picture and decide what they want to show in the
picture. Millions of selfies have been posted on various social networking sites
(Unmetric, 2014). They have become a new medium for self-expression and self-
representation. While studies on social media have examined how personality is
related to the use of Facebook (Amichai-Hamburger & Vinitzky, 2010; Bachrach,
Kosinski, Graepel, Kohli, & Stillwell, 2012; Moore & McElroy, 2012; Gosling,
Augustine, Vazire, Holtzman, & Gaddis, 2011; Orchard, Fullwood, Galbraith, &
Morris, 2014; Ross et al., 2009; Seidman, 2013; Wilson, Gosling, & Graham, 2012)
and Twitter (Hughesa, Rowe, Batey, & Lee, 2012; Qiu, Lin, Ramsay, & Yang, 2012),
little is known about the relationship between personality and selfie. Do selfies reflect
their owners' personality traits? Can people predict others' personality based on their
selfies? Answers to these questions can improve our understanding of personality
expression and judgment in social media.
Past research has shown that traces of people’s personality can be found in their
environments and belongings. For example, extraverts offices are warm, decorated,
and inviting, conscientious individuals have neat and well-organized bedrooms, and
those who are open to experiences have a great variety of books and magazines in
their bedrooms (Gosling, Ko, Mannarelli, & Morris, 2002). Conscientious individuals
are less likely to wear high-top shoes, while emotionally stable individuals are more
likely to wear shoes with brand names (Gillath, Bahns, Ge, & Crandall, 2012).
Studies have also found cues such as facial expression and body posture in photos that
are related to personality (e.g., Borkenau, Brecke, Möttig, & Paelecke, 2009;
Naumann, Vazire, Rentfrow, & Gosling, 2009). However, these studies often use
portraits taken by others, but not participants themselves for the purpose of self-
expression. Research has shown that personality expression differs in different
contexts (Gosling et al., 2002). Therefore, personality expression in selfies is likely to
be different than those in other types of photos. Furthermore, selfies contain unique
cues that are not available in other types of photos. For example, duckface, a facial
expression made by pushing lips outward and upward to give the appearance of large
and pouty lips, is often seen in selfies but not other types of portraits. Such cues may
reveal new personality expression in photos. Therefore, we aim to identify
personality-related cues in selfies and examine how people express and judge
personality based on selfies.
2. Background research
2.1 Personality expression in photos
Past studies have shown that photos contain valid personality-related cues.
Nestler, Egloff, Küfner, and Back (2012) focused on standardized photographs and
found that extraversion is associated with attractiveness of face, openness is
associated with volume of lips, and conscientiousness is associated with femininity of
face. These cues are mainly about facial features, and cannot be changed by the user
when taking the pictures. Other studies used spontaneous photographs taken by
experimenters and found that extraversion was associated with cheerfulness and
smiling (Borkenau et al., 2009; Naumann et al., 2009) while narcissism was
associated with attractiveness, flashy clothing, and make up (Vazire, Naumann,
Rentfrow, & Gosling, 2008). In addition, extraverts stood in more energetic ways
while introverts stood in a tenser manner in full-body photos (Naumann et al., 2009).
While photos used in these studies contain cues that can be manipulated by the
participants (e.g., facial expression and body posture), they were not taken in a
naturalistic setting for the purpose of self-expression.
Several recent studies examined profile pictures in social media. Hall and
Pennington (2013) revealed that number of friends in Facebook profile picture was
associated with extraversion, and friendliness was associated with conscientiousness.
Ong et al. (2011) showed that self-rated attractiveness of profile pictures predicted
extraversion and narcissism. Krämer and Winter (2008) studied profile pictures on a
German social networking site, and found that extraverts tend to use photos with a
non-realistic style (e.g., altered color or graphically edited). The above studies
provided evidences of personality expression in photos in social media. However,
they did not focus on selfies.
Compared to other types of photos, selfies give individuals more freedom of
controlling their face visibility, emotional expression, and camera position. Therefore,
they may contain new cues, such as duckface and camera height, that are not available
in standardized photos. Furthermore, selfies are often posted on social media
platforms used for self-presentation (Mehdizadeh, 2010; Papacharissi, 2011). As the
motivation for self-expression and freedom of control have been found to result in
stronger cues for personality (Gosling et al., 2002), selfies may provide a better view
of their owners’ personality traits than other photos. However, studies have shown
that individuals are likely to be concerned about their online self-image and
manipulate their self-presentation to create socially desirable self-image (Ellison,
Heino, & Gibbs, 2006; Bazarova, Taft, Choi, & Cosley, 2013; Lin, Tov, & Qiu, 2014;
Qiu, Lin, Leung, & Tov, 2012; Strano, 2008). They have been found to promote
themselves and obtain positive feedback from their social networks via profile
pictures (Manago, Graham, Greenfield, & Salimkhan, 2008; Mehdizadeh, 2010;
Siibak, 2009; Zhao, Grasmuck, & Martin, 2008). This suggests that individuals may
create selfies that do not reflect their actual personality. Therefore, it is important to
examine which cues in selfies remain predictive of selfie owners’ true personality.
2.2 Zero-acquaintance personality judgment
An accumulating body of research indicates that personality can be judged by
unfamiliar others with reasonable accuracy. Such zero-acquaintance judgments
(Kenny & West, 2008) are made possible by the presence of personality-related cues,
such as facial expressions (Kenny, Horner, Kashy, & Chu, 1992), physical appearance
(Borkenau & Liebler, 1992; Naumann et al., 2009), choices of footwear (Gillath et al.,
2012), living environment (Gosling et al., 2002), musical preferences (Rentfrow &
Gosling, 2006), and linguistic patterns (Holleran & Mehl, 2008; Mehl, Gosling, &
Pennebaker, 2006; Qiu, Lin, Ramsay, & Yang, 2012).
Studies have shown that people can accurately judge personality traits based on
photos (Berry & Finch-Wero, 1993; Shevlin, Walker, Davies, Banyard, & Lewis,
2003). Findings demonstrated accurate judgment of extraversion from composite
facial images of extraverts or introverts (Little & Perrett, 2006), prediction of
agreeableness, extraversion, and neuroticism based on face images (Penton-Voak,
Pound, Little, & Perrett, 2006), and accurate judgments of trustworthiness,
competence, and aggressiveness after a 100-ms exposure to face portraits (Willis &
Todorov, 2006). An even shorter 50-ms exposure to a face was found to be enough
for accurate judgment of extraversion (Borkenau et al, 2009). Besides facial images,
Naumann et al. (2009) used full-body photographs as stimuli and found that
personality traits such as extraversion could be predicted.
A number of cues have been found to predict accurate judgment. For example,
attractiveness of face was used to predict IQ scores from black-and-white photos
(Zebrowitz, Hall, Murphy, & Rhodes, 2002). Clothing style was associated with the
prediction of openness, and smiling was related to the judgment of extraversion and
agreeableness in full-body photographs (Naumann et al., 2009). Fashionable and
stylish clothes, neat appearance, and attractiveness were the cues for accurate
narcissism judgment (Vazire et al., 2008). While the above studies identified cues
used in personality judgment, they were designed to examine the role of facial
expression and physical appearance. Their photographs were taken in standard
experimental settings and did not include contextual cues such as location information
and being alone. Since contextual cues can influence perception of personality and
emotion (Ito, Masuda, & Hioki, 2012; Ito, Masuda, & Li, 2013), it is important to
investigate how these cues in selfies are related to personality judgment.
2.3 The lens model of personality judgment
Brunswik’s (1956) lens model provides a useful framework for
conceptualizing and studying interpersonal judgment. It has been widely applied in
personality judgment research (e.g., Küfner, Back, Nestler, & Egloff, 2010; Nestler et
al., 2010; Rodriguez, Holleran, & Mehl, 2010). According to the model, a given
criterion variable (e.g., a personality trait such as extraversion) can be thought of as a
function of several observable cues (e.g., tendency to smile, physical attractiveness).
Meanwhile, the subjective judgment of that criterion variable (e.g., observer ratings of
extraversion) can also be considered as a function of the same cues. Cue validity is
the degree of association between a given cue and the criterion variable, with a
stronger correlation indicating higher validity. Cue utilization is the degree of
association between a given cue and the resulting judgment, with a stronger
correlation indicating greater utilization of that cue when forming personality
judgments. The lens model is particularly useful because it decomposes the notion of
accuracy how closely the judgment matches the criterion variable into two distinct
components: cue validity and cue utilization. For a personality judgment to be
accurate, a cue must be (a) related to the criterion variable, and (b) successfully
utilized. In essence, cues can be considered as mediators of the criterion-judgment
relationship.
The lens model offers an ideal platform for studying the relationships between
selfies, personality, and interpersonal perception. We adopted this model to examine
how personality is expressed in selfies and what cues people might use when making
personality judgments.
2.4 The present research
The goals of the present study are threefold. We aim to (1) examine if zero-
acquaintance personality judgments can be accurately made from selfies, (2) identify
valid cues in selfies associated with self-report personality traits, and (3) identify
potential cues observers may rely on to make personality judgments.
3. Method
3.1 Participants
Participants were recruited via two ways. We developed a software program and
crawled 1,953,485 users from Sina Weibo (a popular microbloging website similar to
Twitter in China). We then randomly selected 50,000 users and sent each user a
participation request. A total of 505 users participated in return for payment of
RMB30 (US$4.8) per person. The low response rate was likely due to the huge
amount of spam on Sina Weibo that made users frequently ignore participation
requests. Meanwhile, we recruited 107 Chinese students who were Sina Weibo users
from a large university in Singapore. Each student received S$5 (US$4.03) for their
participation.
3.2 Procedure
All participants completed a two-part online survey. The first part comprised of
the 44-item Big Five Personality Inventory (BFI; John, Donahue, & Kentle, 1991).
The second part asked participants about their Sina Weibo user names, usage
frequency, and demographic information (i.e., gender, age, country of residence, and
ethnicity).
Then, we downloaded the profile pictures of all participants. Two independent
raters identified which of these profile pictures were selfies and non-selfie portraits. A
total of 123 pictures were identified as selfies by both raters. Among their owners, 89
(72.4%) are females and 34 are males. Eleven (8.9%) are below 18 years old, 59
(48%) are between 18 and 20 years old, 44 (35.8%) are between 21 and 25 years old,
and 9 (7.3%) are above 26 years old. A total of 110 pictures were identified as non-
selfie portraits. Among their owners, 59 (53.6%) are females and 51 are males. Seven
(6.3%) are below 18 years old, 26 (23.6%) are between 18 and 20 years old, 52
(47.2%) are between 21 and 25 years old, and 25 (22.7%) are above 26 years old.
Overall, selfie owners were more likely to be females and younger than non-selfie
owners.
To code the selfies, we first selected picture-coding cues that are appropriate for
coding selfies from past research (Hall & Pennington, 2013; Krämer & Winter, 2008;
Nestler et al., 2012; Wang, 2012). Then, we added cues that are unique for selfies.
This results in a total of thirteen cues: duckface (0 = not duckface, 1 = duckface),
pressed lips (0 = not pressed lips, 1 = pressed lips), emotional positivity (0 = negative
emotion, 1 = neutral, 2 = positive emotion), eyes looking at the camera (0 = not
looking at camera, 1 = looking at the camera), camera height (0 = below head, 1 =
same level of head, 2 = above head), camera in front (0 = not in front, 1 = in front),
face visibility (0 = no face, 1 = part of face, 2 = complete face), amount of body (0 =
face only, 1 = include body from breast or shoulder up, 2 = include body from waist
up), alone (0 = not alone, 1 = alone), location information (0 = no location
information, 1 = have location information), public location (e.g., wilderness, city,
party, business setting; 0 = not public location, 1 = public location), private location
(e.g., bedroom, apartment; 0 = not private location, 1 = private location), and
photoshop editing (0 = no Photoshop editing, 1 = Photoshop editing). Two
independent raters coded these cues in the selfies. The averaged percentage agreement
of their coding was 90.81%. If an item received inconsistent coding from the two
raters, another rater re-coded the item and made the final judgment. Following Nestler
et al. (2012), good-looking of face was coded on a 5-point scale (1 = not at all, 5 =
very much) by the two raters to control for the effect of attractiveness of the selfie
owner. Its inter-rater reliability was .57, p < .001. The pair of coders ratings was
aggregated to form a composite rating for good-looking face.
Finally, eight undergraduate research assistants (1 male, 7 females; age: M = 21,
SD = 1.77) viewed each selfie and rated their impression of the selfie owner’s
personality using the same BFI that was used by the participants.
4. Results
4.1 Consensus and accuracy
Table 1 shows the Big Five personality traits of selfie owners. We found no
significant difference between selfie and non-selfie owners' personality traits after
controlling for age and gender (ps > .24). Intra-class correlations of single and
average observers were calculated to measure judgment consensus of selfie owners’
personality traits (Vazire & Mehl, 2008). Averaged observers’ ratings reached a
moderate
to strong consensus on all five personality dimensions. This suggested that observers
were consistent in predicting participants’ personality, and might utilize similar cues
for judgment. Extraversion showed the highest consensus, consistent with previous
zero-acquaintance judgment results based on pictures (Borkenau et al., 2009; Kenny,
Albright, Malloy, & Kashy, 1994; Kenny et al., 1992).
Regarding judgment accuracy, results showed significant correlation between
self-report and aggregated observers ratings on openness. This suggests that
Table 1 Self and observer rating of personality: consensus, accuracy, and vector correlation
ICC
accuracy
vector
correlation
M
SD
Cronbach's α
average
single
aggregate
single
Extraversion
3.27
.59
.69
.84***
.40***
.02
.01
.38
Agreeableness
3.59
.51
.63
.67***
.21***
.06
.03
.39
Conscientiousness
3.16
.52
.68
.69***
.22***
.10
.05
-.12
Neuroticism
3.10
.61
.67
.72***
.25***
.07
.04
.58*
Openness
3.64
.54
.71
.60***
.16***
.21*
.12
.70***
Note. Aggregated observer accuracy is the correlation between the aggregated observers rating and self-report personality.
Single observer accuracy is the average of correlations between a single observer’s rating and self-report personality. Vector
correlation is the correlations between cue-utilization correlations and cue-validity correlations after Fishers r-to-Z
transformation.
* p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001.
observers can accurately predict openness based on selfies, and this result is also
consistent with previous studies on judgment based on spontaneous pictures
(Naumann et al., 2009). However, our results showed that observers were not accurate
in predicting other four personality dimensions. In addition, when accuracy was
examined for the single observer, none of the five dimensions could be judged
accurately. This suggests that multiple observers are needed to improve judgment
accuracy.
4.2 Cue validity
We assessed cue validity by correlating participants’ self-report personality with
cues in the selfies (see Table 2). Extraversion was not related to any cue, different
from previous finding where extraversion was related to positive emotional
expression (Borkenau et al., 2009; Naumann et al., 2009). This is likely because
individuals tend to show positive emotion in their selfies due to their impression
management concerns, regardless of their degree of extraversion. Agreeableness was
Table 2 A Brunswik (1956) lens model analysis of judgments based on selfies: Cue-validity correlation
Cue-validity correlation
Extra.
Agree.
Cons.
Neur.
Open.
Gender
Age
duckface
-.07
-.12
-.03
.21*
-.16
.23**
-.22*
pressed lips
.02
.09
.13
-.09
-.06
-.17
.01
emotional positivity
.10
.18*
.00
-.06
.22*
.26**
.21*
eyes looking at the camera
-.14
-.03
.02
.06
-.08
.17
.16
camera height
-.05
-.20*
-.18
-.03
.04
.24**
.08
camera in front
.08
-.08
-.09
.15
.02
.15
-.13
face visibility
.00
-.02
.01
.00
-.03
-.03
.18*
amount of body
-.01
.02
-.08
.04
-.01
-.23*
.00
alone
-.08
-.03
-.15
.09
-.06
.19*
-.06
location information
.00
.13
-.14
-.13
-.02
-.26**
.07
public location
-.04
.13
.05
-.14
-.02
-.09
.07
private location
.03
.04
-.20*
-.04
-.01
-.22*
.03
Photoshop editing
-.07
.01
.06
.12
.10
.21*
-.13
Note. Cue-validity correlations indicate the correlations between cues and self-report personality. Extra., Extraversion;
Agree., Agreeableness; Cons., Conscientiousness; Neur., Neuroticism; Open., Openness. Gender: 0 = male, 1 = female.
* p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001.
associated with emotional positivity (.18), replicating past findings (Naumann et al.,
2009). It was also negatively associated with camera height (-.20), suggesting that
more agreeable individuals are more likely to take pictures from below.
Conscientiousness was negatively correlated to private location (-.20), suggesting that
more conscientious individuals are less likely to reveal their personal space in the
background. The avoidance of showing personal spaces reflects conscientious
individuals’ characteristics of being cautious (Costa & McCrae, 1992, 1996) and
concerned about their privacy (Junglas, Johnson, & Spitzmuller, 2008). Neuroticism
was related to duckface (.21), suggesting that neurotic individuals tend to make
duckface in their selfies. Openness was related to emotional positivity (.22), a
relationship that has not been documented in previous studies.
4.3 Cue utilization
We correlated aggregated observers’ ratings and selfie cues to identify possible
cues that observers used when judging personality (see Table 3). Past research has
Table 3 A Brunswik (1956) lens model analysis of judgments based on selfies: Cue-utilization correlation
Cue-utilization correlation
Extra.
Agree.
Cons.
Neur.
Open.
duckface
-.03
-.11
-.31**
.25**
-.14
pressed lips
-.19*
-.06
-.06
.16
-.22*
emotional positivity
.29**
.50**
.25**
-.40**
.21*
eyes looking at the camera
-.05
.24**
.06
.01
-.01
camera height
.13
.04
-.06
.00
.10
camera in front
.03
.10
-.03
.06
.06
face visibility
.14
.14
.08
-.21*
-.26**
amount of body
.14
-.03
.14
-.22*
-.03
alone
-.17
.03
-.12
.22*
.06
location information
-.07
.09
.30**
-.19*
-.06
public location
.06
-.01
.25**
-.13
.00
private location
-.12
.11
.14
-.11
-.07
Photoshop editing
-.01
-.03
-.20*
.09
.12
Note. Cue-utilization correlations indicate the correlations between cues and observer ratings. Extra.,
Extraversion; Agree., Agreeableness; Cons., Conscientiousness; Neur., Neuroticism; Open., Openness.
* p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001.
shown that extravert tend to be more sociable, talkative, and express more positive
emotion than introverts (House & Howell, 1992; McCrae & Costa, 1987; Qiu et al.,
2012). Ratings of extraversion were correlated with emotional positivity (.29). This is
consistent with the characteristics of extraversion, supporting the relationship between
smiling and judgment of extraversion in previous studies (Naumann et al., 2009).
Extraversion rating was also negatively related to the facial cue of pressed lips (-.19),
possibly because having pressed lips can be considered a sign of shyness.
Agreeable individuals are kind, cooperative and trusting, and they value social
affiliation (Bono & Judge, 2004; Nadkarni & Herrmann, 2010). Observers’ ratings of
agreeableness were associated with emotional positivity (.50), suggesting that
individuals showing more positive emotion in selfies were rated as more agreeable.
Agreeableness ratings were also associated with eyes looking at the camera (.24),
indicating that observers considered participants who had direct eye contact with them
as more agreeable than those who did not.
Conscientious individuals tend to be cautious, intolerant of ambiguity,
hardworking, and disciplined (Costa & McCrae, 1992, 1996). Ratings of
conscientiousness were associated with location information (.30) and public location
(.25), suggesting that observers rated those taking selfies in public as more
conscientious. Ratings of conscientiousness were also positively correlated with
emotional positivity (.25), and negatively correlated with Photoshop editing (-.20) and
duckface (-.31).
Neuroticism is associated with anxiety, moodiness, low self-esteem, and more
negative emotions (Judge, Bono, Ilies, & Gehardt, 2002; McCrae & Costa, 1987).
Therefore, it is reasonable for observers to negatively associate emotional positivity (-
.40) with their ratings of neuroticism. In addition, duckface (.25) and face visibility (-
.21) were related to the neuroticism ratings, suggesting that making duckface and not
showing full face were perceived as being moody. Observers also considered
participants who zoomed in on their faces as more neurotic. Therefore, their ratings of
neuroticism were negatively correlated with amount of body (-.22) and location
information (-.19), and positively correlated with being alone (.22).
Openness to experience is related to creativity, curiosity, risk-taking, and
preference for novelty and variety (Herrmann & Nadkarni, 2013; McCrae & Costa,
1987; Tetlock, 1983). Thus, it is reasonable that observers judged selfies with normal
full faces as lower degree of openness (-.26). Participants with pressed lips were rated
as less open (-.22), suggesting that making pressed lips was perceived as a facial
expression of closeness. Ratings of openness were also related to emotional positivity
(.21), supporting previous finding of smiling as a cue for openness judgment
(Naumann et al., 2009).
4.4 Sensitivity
The match between the pattern of cue utilization and cue validity indicates a
sensitivity of observers towards valid cues (Borkenau & Liebler, 1992; Funder &
Sneed, 1993). We performed vector correlations using the method proposed by
Funder and Sneed (1993). After Fishers r-to-z transformation, correlations of cue-
utilization and cue-validity were correlated across all the cues. Previous findings
suggest that traits that are accurately judged are associated with high vector
correlations (e.g., Back et al. 2010; Qiu et al, 2012). Our results reflected similar
patterns (see Table 1). Strong vector correlation was found for openness, indicating
that observers used valid cues to generate accurate judgment of openness. A moderate
vector correlation was found for neuroticism. The other three dimensions (i.e.,
extraversion, agreeableness, and conscientiousness) did not obtain significant vector
correlations.
We tested the mediating role of emotional positivity in self-other agreement for
openness, since it is the only cue correlated with both observer and self-rating.
Preacher and Hayes (2008) INDIRECT macro was used to test the mediation model.
The total effect of self-report openness on observers judgment was significant (B
=.10, SE =.04, p =.02). The indirect effect was significant (CI = [.0001, .0582],
excluding zero), while the direct effect of self-report openness on observers’
judgment was not significant (B =.08, SE =.04, p =.07). Overall, the mediation model
was significant, F (2, 120) = 4.62, p = .01, R2 = .07. Our results indicated that
emotional positivity fully mediated the accuracy for the judgment of openness.
4.5 Gender and age effect
Individuals with different gender and age varied in how they present themselves
in selfies (see Table 2). It is possible that the observed cue-validity correlations might
be contingent on these two variables. Thus, we calculated partial cue-validity
correlations by controlling gender and age. All initial significant cue-validity
correlations remained, suggesting that these cues were directly related to personality
traits.
Previous research suggested that observers might judge personality based on
stereotypes of age and gender (Gosling et al., 2002; Kenny et al., 1992). Thus, partial
correlations controlling for age and gender were calculated for cue-utilization to test
this possibility. Among the initial 18 significant correlations, three of them became
insignificant (i.e., photoshop editing and conscientiousness, face visibility and
neuroticism, and location information with neuroticism). This suggests that observers
judgment were mainly based on photo cues rather than the stereotypes of gender and
age.
4.6 Effect of good-looking face
If observers judgment did not rely on stereotypes of gender and age, would
they rely on other properties of the participants, such as good-looking faces? To test
this possibility, we calculated partial cue-utilization by controlling the rating for
good-looking face. Results showed that two of the initial eighteen significant
correlations (i.e., the correlation between face visibility and neuroticism and the
correlation between face visibility and openness) became insignificant. This is likely
because face visibility is related to the perception of good-looking face. Overall, these
results indicated that observers judged personality mainly based on cues that were not
related to the attractiveness of the participants.
5. Discussion
The current study contributes to existing research on personality and social
media use by examining personality expression and judgment in the context of selfies,
a new form of self-portraits in social media. We applied the lens model (Brunswik,
1956) and identified cues that reflected selfie owners’ personality traits, and cues
associated with observers’ judgment of personality. This is the first study that
examines the relation between personality and selfies. It has important implications.
Our study shows that selfies reflect their owners’ personality traits. We
identified a number of personality-related cues. For example, emotional positivity
predicts agreeableness and openness, duckface indicates neuroticism, and private
location in the background indicates less conscientiousness. These cues reflect the
characteristics of their corresponding personality traits. While past study has shown
the connection between personality and photo-related activities such as number of
photo uploads and albums on Facebook (Eftekhar, Fullwood, & Morris, 2014), our
study revealed specific cues in self-portraits related to personality.
Although selfies contain cues that predict personality, observers could only
accurately judge selfie owners’ degree of openness. This is different from previous
findings where observers could form accurate prediction of extraversion,
agreeableness, openness, and neuroticism (marginally) from spontaneous full-body
photo (Naumann et al., 2009), and accurately judge extraversion, agreeableness, and
neuroticism from facial images without expression (Penton-Voak et al., 2006). The
poor judgment found in our study was reflected in the asymmetry of cue-validity and
cue-utilization, suggesting that observers used invalid cues to judge personality. We
found that emotional positivity was used to judge all five personality traits, a
phenomenon that has been documented in past research (Naumann et al., 2009).
Several new cues were found to be related to personality judgment. For example,
duckface was related to the judgment of conscientiousness and neuroticism, pressed
lips were associated with the judgment of extraversion and openness, public location
in the background was related to the judgment of conscientiousness, and being alone
was related to neuroticism ratings.
Why do selfies contain limited personality-related cues and are difficult for
accurate zero-acquaintance personality judgment? There could be several reasons.
First, selfies allow individuals to have full control of their appearance. Individuals can
easily manipulate their facial expression and eye contact to appear different from how
they normally look. Second, selfies are often taken for sharing on social networking
sites. Previous research on impression management found that individuals could
accurately perceive norms, expectations, and social desirability from their social
networks (Siibak, 2009). It is possible that selfies are manipulated to present a
positive social image, so that typical associations such as the correlation between
smiling and extraversion (Naumann et al., 2009) become invalid. Thirdly, since
selfies are taken by individuals themselves, most of them only contain faces. This
prevents important cues, such as body posture and style of clothing, to appear in the
picture. Previous studies showed that standing pose provides information about
extraversion (Naumann et al., 2009) and clothing styles are indicative of extraversion
and conscientiousness (Albright, Kenny, & Thomas, 1988; Kenny et al., 1992;
Naumann et al., 2009). Thus, the lack of informative cues in selfies might result in
poor accuracy. However, it is important to note that even with possible impression
management strategies, people still inadvertently leave cues that predict their
agreeableness, conscientiousness, neuroticism, and openness.
Our research has important practical implications. With selfies becoming
extremely popular, there is great interest in understanding how they reflect personality.
By identifying valid cues related to selfie owners' personality traits, our research
provides important information for future work to improve the accuracy of human or
machine prediction of personality from selfies. For example, computer programs can
be developed to detect duckface to help predict neuroticism. One limitation of the
current study is that we used photos from a microblogging website. As different
online social networking sites have different user characteristics and usage patterns
(Wilson, Gosling, & Graham, 2012), future research needs to examine if our findings
can be generalized to other social networking sites.
6. Conclusion
The current study extends research on personality expression and judgment by
examining selfies, a new form of self-portraits in social media. We identified cues in
selfies that are related to selfie owners' degree of agreeableness, conscientiousness,
neuroticism, and openness. These cues included facial cues such as duckface and
emotion, and contexual cues such as background location. In addition, we examined
zero-acquaintance judgement and found that observers had moderate to strong
agreement on their prediction of all Big Five personality traits based on selfies.
However, they could only accurately predict selfie owners’ degree of openness. Our
study is the first to reveal personality-related cues in selfies, and suggests that the
difference between personality expression in selfies and other types of photos might
be due to impression management of social media users. We provided the first coding
scheme specific for selfies. Future studies in psychology, communication, and
humancomputer interaction can use it to process selfies and further understand how
they reflect users' characteristics and psychological processes.
Reference
Albright, L., Kenny, D. A., & Thomas, E. M. (1988). Consensus in personality
judgments at zero acquaintance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
55(3), 387395.
Amichai-Hamburger, Y., & Vinitzky, G. (2010). Social network use and personality.
Computers in Human Behavior, 26(6), 12891295.
Bachrach, Y., Kosinski, M., Graepel, T., Kohli, P., & Stillwell, D. (2012). Personality
and patterns of Facebook usage. In Proceedings of the 3rd annual ACM Web
science conference on WebSci ‘12 (pp. 2432). New York, USA: ACM Press.
Back, M. D., Stopfer, J. M., Vazire, S., Gaddis, S., Schmukle, S. C., Egloff, B., et al.
(2010). Facebook profiles reflect actual personality, not self-idealization.
Psychological Science, 21(3), 372374.
Bazarova, N. N., Taft, J. G., Choi, Y. H., & Cosley, D. (2013). Managing impressions
and relationships on Facebook: Self-presentational and relational concerns
revealed through the analysis of language style. Journal of Language and Social
Psychology, 32(2), 121-141.
Berry, D. S., Finch-Wero, J. L.(1993). Accuracy in face perception: A view from
ecological psychology. Journal of personality, 61(4), 497-520.
Bono, J. E., & Judge, T. A. (2004). Personality and transformational and transactional
leadership: a meta-analysis. Journal of applied psychology, 89(5), 901-910.
Borkenau, P., Brecke, S., Möttig, C., & Paelecke, M. (2009). Extraversion is
accurately perceived after a 50-ms exposure to a face. Journal of Research in
Personality, 43(4), 703-706.
Borkenau, P., & Liebler, A. (1992). Trait inferences: Sources of validity at zero
acquaintance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62(4), 645-657.
Brunswik, E. (1956). Perception and the representative design of psychological
experiments. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). Neo personality inventoryrevised (neo-pi-r)
and neo five-factor inventory (neo-ffi) professional manual. Odessa, FL:
Psychological Assessment Resources.
Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1996). Toward a new generation of personality
theories: Theoretical contexts for the five-factor model. The five factor model of
personality: Theoretical perspectives. Hrsg.: JS Wiggins. New York, 51-87.
Ellison, N. B., Heino, R. D., & Gibbs, J. L. (2006). Self-presentation processes in the
online dating environment. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 11(2),
415441.
Funder, D. C., & Sneed, C. D. (1993). Behavioral manifestations of personality: An
ecological approach to judgmental accuracy. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 64(3), 479490.
Gillath, O., Bahns, A. J., Ge, F., & Crandall, C. S. (2012). Shoes as a source of first
impressions. Journal of Research in Personality, 46(4), 423-430.
Gosling, S. D., Augustine, A. A., Vazire, S., Holtzman, N., & Gaddis, S. (2011).
Manifestations of personality in online social networks: Self-reported Facebook-
related behaviors and observable profile information. Cyberpsychology, Behavior,
and Social Networking, 14(9), 483488.
Gosling, S. D., Ko, S. J., Mannarelli, T., & Morris, M. E. (2002). A room with a cue:
personality judgments based on offices and bedrooms. Journal of personality and
social psychology, 82(3), 379-398.
Hall, J. A., & Pennington, N. (2013). Self-monitoring, honesty, and cue use on
Facebook: The relationship with user extraversion and conscientiousness.
Computers in Human Behavior, 29(4), 1556-1564.
Herrmann, P., & Nadkarni, S. (2013). Managing strategic change: the duality of CEO
personality. Strategic Management Journal, 35(9), 1318-1342.
Holleran, S. E., & Mehl, M. R. (2008). Let me read your mind: Personality judgments
based on a person’s natural stream of thought. Journal of Research in Personality,
42(3), 747754.
House, R. J., & Howell, J. M. (1992). Personality and charismatic leadership. The
Leadership Quarterly, 3(2), 81-108.
Hughesa, D. J., Rowe , M., Batey , M., & Lee, A. (2012). A tale of two sites: Twitter
vs. Facebook and the personality predictors of social media usage. Computers in
Human Behavior, 28(2), 561569.
Ito, K., Masuda, T., & Hioki, K. (2012). Affective information in context and
judgment of facial expression: Cultural similarities and variations in context effects
between North Americans and East Asians. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology,
43(3), 429-445.
Ito, K., Masuda, T., & Li, L. M. W. (2013). Agency and facial emotion judgment in
context. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 39(6), 763-776.
John, O. P., Donahue, E. M., & Kentle, R. L. (1991).The Big Five inventory
versions 4a and 54. Berkeley, CA: University of California, Berkeley, Institute of
Personality and Social Research.
Judge, T. A., Bono, J. E., Ilies, R., & Gerhardt, M. W. (2002). Personality and
leadership: a qualitative and quantitative review. Journal of applied
psychology, 87(4), 765-780.
Junglas, I. A., Johnson, N. A., & Spitzmüller, C. (2008). Personality traits and
concern for privacy: an empirical study in the context of location-based
services. European Journal of Information Systems, 17(4), 387-402.
Kenny, D. A., Albright, L., Malloy, T. E., & Kashy, D. A. (1994). Consensus in
interpersonal perception: acquaintance and the big five. Psychological
bulletin, 116(2), 245-258.
Kenny, D. A., Horner, C., Kashy, D. A., & Chu, L. C. (1992). Consensus at zero
acquaintance: Replication, behavioral cues, and stability. Journal of personality
and social psychology, 62(1), 88-97.
Kenny, D. A., & West, T. V. (2008). Self-perception as interpersonal perception. In J.
V. Wood, A. Tesser, & J. G. Holmes (Eds.), The self and social relationships (pp.
119137). New York: Psychology Press.
Krämer, N. C., & Winter, S. (2008). Impression management 2.0: The relationship of
self-esteem, extraversion, self-efficacy, and self-presentation within social
networking sites. Journal of Media Psychology: Theories, Methods, and
Applications, 20(3), 106-116.
Küfner, A. C. P., Back, M. D., Nestler, S., & Egloff, B. (2010). Tell me a story and I
will tell you who you are! Lens model analyses of personality and creative writing.
Journal of Research in Personality, 44(4), 427435.
Lin, H., Tov, W., & Qiu, L. (2014). Emotional disclosure on social networking sites:
The role of network structure and psychological needs. Computers in Human
Behavior, 41, 342-350.
Little, A. C., & Perrett, D. I. (2006). Using composite images to assess accuracy in
personality attribution to faces. British Journal of Psychology, 98(1), 111-126.
Mehdizadeh, S. (2010). Self-Presentation 2.0: Narcissism and Self-Esteem on
Facebook. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Socla Networking, 13(4), 357-364.
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.
McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T. (1987). Validation of the five-factor model of
personality across instruments and observers. Journal of personality and social
psychology, 52(1), 81-90.
Mehl, M. R., Gosling, S. D., & Pennebaker, J. W. (2006). Personality in its natural
habitat: Manifestations and implicit folk theories of personality in daily life.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90(5), 862877.
Moore, K., & McElroy, J. C. (2012). The influence of personality on Facebook usage,
wall postings, and regret. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(1), 267274.
Nadkarni, S., & Herrmann, P. O. L. (2010). CEO personality, strategic flexibility, and
firm performance: the case of the Indian business process outsourcing
industry. Academy of Management Journal, 53(5), 1050-1073.
Naumann, L. P., Vazire, S., Rentfrow, P. J., & Gosling, S. D. (2009). Personality
judgments based on physical appearance. Personality and Social Psychology
Bulletin, 35(12), 1661-1671.
Nestler, S., Egloff, B., Küfner, A. C., & Back, M. D. (2012). An integrative lens
model approach to bias and accuracy in human inferences: Hindsight effects and
knowledge updating in personality judgments. Journal of personality and social
psychology, 103(4), 689-717.
Ong, E. Y., Ang, R. P., Ho, J., Lim, J. C., Goh, D. H., Lee, C. S., & Chua, A. Y.
(2011). Narcissism, extraversion and adolescents’ self-presentation on
Facebook. Personality and Individual Differences, 50(2), 180-185.
Orchard, L. J., Fullwood, C., Galbraith, N., & Morris, N. (2014). Individual
differences as predictors of social networking. Journal of Computer Mediated
Communication, 19(3), 388402.
Papacharissi, Z. (2011). A networked self: Identity, community, and culture on social
netowork. New York, NY: Routledge.
Penton-Voak, I. S., Pound, N., Little, A. C., & Perrett, D. I. (2006). Personality
judgments from natural and composite facial images: More evidence for a “kernel
of truth” in social perception. Social Cognition, 24(5), 607-640.
Qiu, L., Lin, H., Leung, A. K., & Tov, W. (2012). Putting their best foot forward:
Emotional disclosure on Facebook. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social
Networking, 15(10), 569-572.
Qiu, L., Lin, H., Ramsay, J., & Yang, F. (2012). You are what you tweet: Personality
expression and perception on twitter. Journal of Research in Personality, 46(6),
710-718.
Rentfrow, P. J., & Gosling, S. D. (2006). Message in a ballad the role of music
preferences in interpersonal perception. Psychological Science, 17(3), 236242.
Rodriguez, A. J., Holleran, S. E., & Mehl, M. R. (2010). Reading between the lines:
The lay assessment of subclinical depression from written self-descriptions.
Journal of Personality, 78(2), 575598.
Ross, C., Orr, E. S., Sisic, M., Arseneault, J. M., Simmering, M. G., & Orr, R. R.
(2009). Personality and motivations associated with Facebook use. Computers in
Human Behavior, 25(2), 578586.
Seidman, G. (2013). Self-presentation and belonging on Facebook: How personality
influences social media use and motivations. Personality and Individual
Differences, 54(3), 402407.
Shevlin, M., Walker, S., Davies, M. N., Banyard, P., & Lewis, C. A. (2003). Can you
judge a book by its cover? Evidence of selfstranger agreement on personality at
zero acquaintance. Personality and Individual Differences,35(6), 1373-1383.
Siibak, A. (2009). Constructing the Self through the Photo selection Visual
Impression Management on Social Networking Websites. Cyberpsychology:
Journal of Psychosocial Research on Cyberspace, 3(1), article 1.
Strano, M. M. (2008). User descriptions and interpretations of self-presentation
through Facebook profile images. Cyberpsychology: Journal of Psychosocial
Research on Cyberspace, 2, article 5.
Tetlock, P. E. (1983). Accountability and complexity of thought. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 45(1), 74-83.
Unmetric (2014). Year of the selfie. Retrieved from
http://blog.unmetric.com/2014/02/year-of-the-selfie/.
Vazire, S., & Mehl, M. R. (2008). Knowing me, knowing you: The accuracy and
unique predictive validity of self-ratings and other-ratings of daily behavior.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95(5), 12021216.
Vazire, S., Naumann, L. P., Rentfrow, P. J., & Gosling, S. D. (2008). Portrait of a
narcissist: Manifestations of narcissism in physical appearance. Journal of
Research in Personality, 42(6), 1439-1447.
Wang, Y. H. (2012). Taiwanese girls’ self-portraiture on a social networking
site (Doctoral dissertation) Retrieved from
http://core.kmi.open.ac.uk/download/pdf/9994909.pdf.
Willis, J., & Todorov, A. (2006). First impressions making up your mind after a 100-
ms exposure to a face. Psychological science, 17(7), 592-598.
Wilson, R. E., Gosling, S. D., & Graham, L. T. (2012). A review of Facebook
research in the social sciences. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7(3), 203-
220.
Zebrowitz, L. A., Hall, J. A., Murphy, N. A., & Rhodes, G. (2002). Looking smart
and looking good: Facial cues to intelligence and their origins. Personality and
Social Psychology Bulletin, 28(2), 238-249.
Zhao, S., Grasmuck, S., & Martin, J. (2008). Identity construction on Facebook:
Digital empowerment in anchored relationships. Computers in human
behavior, 24(5), 1816-1836.
Acknowledgements
This work was supported by Singapore Ministry of Education AcRF Tier 1 Grant
RGT 37/13 awarded to the first author.
Acknowledgements
... Still, selfie-posting behavior is an emerging topic in academia. The majority of selfie research talked about selfies and individual differences (Qiu et al., 2015). Previous studies on selfies focused on the phenomenon as a personality trait (Qiu et al., 2015) or a set of self-regulatory behaviours used to satisfy narcissism (Barry et al., 2017) or seek peer recognition (Chua & Chang, 2016). ...
... The majority of selfie research talked about selfies and individual differences (Qiu et al., 2015). Previous studies on selfies focused on the phenomenon as a personality trait (Qiu et al., 2015) or a set of self-regulatory behaviours used to satisfy narcissism (Barry et al., 2017) or seek peer recognition (Chua & Chang, 2016). Scholars have shown that men post a selfie on social networking sites (SNSs) according to the conventional standard of masculinity opponent to these women expose themselves as affiliative. ...
... With the rise in popularity of the selfie, several types of research examining selfies from a sociopsychological standpoint have developed. These researches can be divided into two categories: first-studies that look at the relationship between personality traits and selfies (Chua & Chang, 2016;Sorokowski et al., 2015;Weiser, 2015), and second-research that looks into how people react to selfies in social situations (Lu et al., 2015;Mazza et al., 2014). The first category emphasizes that a selfie is a powerful tool for self-presentation, which is the foundation for the second group of studies (Shin et al., 2017). ...
Article
Full-text available
The phenomenon of taking and sharing selfies on social networking sites (SNSs) has become pervasive in everyday life. This empirical study was carried out to investigate significant predictors of selfie-posting behavior. A web-based survey was conducted on social media users geographically located in Lucknow (India). A total of 1073 social media users participated in the survey. Structural Equation Modelling (SEM), an interdependence technique, was employed for the measurement and the structural relationship among the latent factors. The study confirmed that self-esteem and narcissism are significant predictors of selfie-posting behavior. However, exhibitionism is not a significant predictor of selfie-posting behavior. Moreover, self-esteem is also a significant predictor of narcissism. The findings of the present study underline that Facebook (26.3) percent was a top platform for groupies selfie posting; similarly, WhatsApp (25.8) percent was noted as the top platform for individual selfie posting.
... First, high levels of narcissism are related with the tendency to apply attractiveness and appearance as the main criteria to post pictures [20,23,26,31,[39][40][41][42][43]. Particularly, studies have found a correlation between narcissism (self-sufficiency, vanity, leadership, admiration demand or grandiose exhibitionism) and the frequency of posting selfies based on attractiveness [40,[44][45][46] or valuing pictures for their physical attractiveness [24,26]. Siibak [47] found that the profile picture is used by youngsters between 11 and 18 to construct their ideal attractive self or the ought-self, and that girls tended to prioritize their aesthetic, emotional and self-reflecting dimensions in these images. ...
... A consistent thread of studies has reported the existence of both a cross-cultural narcissism as well as some country-based narcissism traits, lately giving more importance to individual narcissism [60], but there are very few accounts of cross-cultural similarities or differences in narcissism as related with the social media activity and usage. In general, studies have found no such significant and theoretically relevant differences in multiple comparisons of western and eastern countries [45]. In addition, the individualist-collectivist division does not successfully explain some minor cross-cultural differences in the social media usage. ...
Article
Full-text available
The use of social networking sites (SNS or social media) often comes with strong self-centered behaviors to promote self-appearance. The relationship between narcissism and social media use has intensively occupied scholars in the last decade, yet not much research has focused on, first, how the intensity of social media use (SNS use) is associated with narcissism through a self-centered appearance focused use of these SNS; and second, whether these associations are moderated or not by cultural differences of the country of origin in such a critical age of personality formation and (global) culturalization as the transition from pre-adolescence to adolescence. We performed a correlation and mediation analysis on a cross-sectional survey among Austrian, Belgian, Spanish, and South Korean adolescents ( n = 1,983; M age 14.41, 50.3% boys) examining the adolescents’ daily usage of social media, their self-centered appearance focused behavior, and the reported narcissism. Findings show that a self-centered appearance focused use of SNS (SCA) moderates the association between SNS use and narcissism, especially for males from the three European countries. We have also particularly found that the years of use, number of friends and time spent in FB are associated with narcissism. Since SCA is defined in the study as narcissistic behavior in SNS, we argue that social media are part of the socialization process as both reinforcers and catalyzers of narcissism.
... The selection and conceptualization of cues (i.e., Instagram features and content) were based on both theoretical foundations and empirical findings on personality expression and personality judgments based on Instagram and related social media platforms (Barry, McDougall, et al., 2019;Barry, Reiter, et al., 2019;Buffardi & Campbell, 2008;Christofides et al., 2009;Cooper et al., 2020;Ferwerda et al., 2016;Ferwerda & Tkalcic, 2018;Hu et al., 2014;Kim & Kim, 2018Kim et al., 2021;McCain & Campbell, 2018;Moon et al., 2016;Stopfer et al., 2014;Vander Molen et al., 2018;Wilson et al., 2012). As Instagram is image-based, and about 20% of pictures in the study by Cooper et al. (2020) were self-images, we also took into account research on the accuracy of personality judgments based on selfies (e.g., Kaurin et al., 2018;Qiu et al., 2015) and people's physical appearance in full-body photographs (e.g., Borkenau & Liebler, 1992;Naumann et al., 2009;Vazire et al., 2008). Applying lens model terminology (Nestler & Back, 2013;Osterholz et al., 2021), we use the term cue to broadly refer to information perceivable by unacquainted observers and used to form personality judgments as commonly applied in research on the accuracy of personality judgments and underlying cue processes (Back & Nestler, 2016). ...
... The selection of cues assessed in this study was based on previous work (e.g., Barry et al., 2017;Barry, McDougall, et al., 2019;Borkenau & Liebler, 1992;Buffardi & Campbell, 2008;Christofides et al., 2009;Cooper et al., 2020;Ferwerda et al., 2016;Ferwerda & Tkalcic, 2018;Hu et al., 2014;Kaurin et al., 2018;Kim & Kim, 2018Kim et al., 2021;Naumann et al., 2009;McCain & Campbell, 2018;Mehdizadeh, 2010;Moon et al., 2016;Qiu et al., 2015;Stopfer et al., 2014;Vander Molen et al., 2018;Vazire et al., 2008;Wilson et al., 2012) and discussions in the research group following initial observations of targets' Instagram profiles (see Table 1, for an overview, and Tables S3 and S4 in the online Supporting Information). ...
Article
Full-text available
Objective: This study examined personality expression, impression formation, and the consensus and accuracy of zero-acquaintance personality judgments that were based on people's Instagram accounts. Method: Self- and informant reports of the Big Five personality traits, self-esteem, and narcissism were collected for 102 Instagram users. Screenshots were taken of Instagram users' profiles, including up to the 102 latest available Instagram posts. A number of Instagram cues were objectively retrieved, counted, and rated by independent trained cue coders from the screenshots. 100 unacquainted observers then judged the Big Five traits, self-esteem, and narcissism on the basis of Instagram screenshots only. Results: We identified Instagram account characteristics that were associated with users' personality traits (measured with self-reports, informant reports, and self-informant composites) and observers' zero-acquaintance personality judgments. Personality judgments that were based on Instagram accounts demonstrated consensus and significantly converged with Instagram users' Big Five traits, self-esteem, and narcissism across all three personality criteria. Averaged-observer accuracy correlations for self-informant composite scores ranged from r = .44 (p < .001) for extraversion to r = .25 (p = .013) for conscientiousness. Conclusions: Our findings provide insight into cue processes of online self-portrayal and impression formation on Instagram and the level of zero-acquaintance accuracy.
... Facebook has become a coliseum for social interaction among adolescent and adults in all over the world. Self-presentation is an especially significant element of Researchers explore the selfie behaviour in many dimensions such as in the context of gender, race (Albury, 2015), luxury selfies (Marwick, 2015), military selfies (Dishy, 2017), and the association with some personality trait (Choi et al. 2017;Qiu et al. 2015). They concluded the logic behind people clicks and post selfies are to take attention, to boost self-esteem, to get rid of boredom (Moreau, 2014). ...
Article
Full-text available
The current research scrutinized the relationship in dark triad and selfie addiction it further investigated the moderating role of self-presentation on facebook. The sample of study comprised of 300 students (18 to 30 years) drawn from various Public universities of Punjab, Pakistan. Selfities scale by Amjad and Adil (2017), Revised Self-Disclosure Scale (to measure presentation on facebook) by Young and Brown, (2016) and Short Dark Triad scale (Jones & Paulhus, 2013) were used to measure study variables. Result indicated significant relationship in all subscale of dark triad, selfie addiction and self-presentation. Moreover, it was found that Machiavellianism significantly positively predict intimacy while psychopathy significantly positively predict obsession whereas Narcissism was significant positive predictor of self-esteem, taking and posting selfies, intimacy and obsession. Results further showed that self-presentation moderated the relationship between Machiavellianism, Psychopathy and selfie addiction.
Article
Full-text available
The paper focuses on the structure of an advertising image for a 2010s computer company in the neo-capitalist Moscow, Russia. The analysis looks back to the pioneering studies of advertising as a commercial “applied art” by Sergei Eisenstein, Leo Spitzer and Roland Barthes. The picture’s plot and composition are shown to be a consistent and sophisticated near-artistic design that uses textual puns, poetic topoi and visual stereotypes (in particular, sex appeal) for the promotion of the advertised merchandise (a smartphone). The psychological naturalization of the design is clarified with references to the insights of Sigmund Freud, Heinz Kohut and Gerard Genette into the dynamics of narcissism. In a widening circle, the contextualization of the design involves: the literary topos of using birds in love poetry (made famous by its treatment in the lyrics of the Roman poet Catullus) and in painterly variations on the theme; the narcissist discourse of a modern Russian poet (Eduard Limonov); and the grand pictorial tradition of portraying a nude (Venus) before the mirror (relevant classical canvases are considered briefly).
Article
In this study, the views of adolescents on the use of social media in the focus of self-compassion were examined. The study group of the research consists of 26 adolescents between the ages of 13-16. In this study, phenomenology design, one of the qualitative research methods, was used. The data of the study were collected with a semi-structured interview form developed by the researchers. The obtained data were analyzed through content analysis. According to the research findings, the participants; He actively uses Instagram, Youtube, Snapcat, Tiktok, Twiter applications for an hour to eight hours. It has been observed that adolescents use social media most frequently to follow accounts related to their interests, to follow peers, to follow entertainment and phenomena. In addition to being happy with the shares they follow on social media, it has been concluded that adolescents often have negative feelings when they see the posts. After following the social media posts, it was concluded that the themes of finding his external view inadequate, wanting to take part in that post with his friends, feeling embarrassing or even feeling unhappy, feeling inadequate in living conditions and financially, depressed mood, feeling angry frequently repeated. Adolescents stated that when they follow these posts, they criticize their own bodies and find themselves less successful. It has been found that some of the adolescents do not share and are only viewers on social media or share from a 'private' account. When social media posts do not receive a high rate of likes or interactions, they feel sad, embarrassed, and regretful, and some of them stated that they would delete the post in such a situation. While some of the participants stated that they would not care about their social media posts when they received interaction with a cynical attitude, some of them stated that they felt sad, angry, uneasy, resentful, and lack of self-confidence. Adolescents stated that when they watch the posts of phenomena, they can compare themselves with them, and some of them do not negatively affect their posts.
Article
This study addresses the question to which extent individual online self-presentations become more similar globally, due globalisation and digitalisation, or whether ethno-racial identity predisposes individuals’ online self-presentation. That is, we examined the degree to which individuals varying in ethno-racial identity converge or diverge in online self-presentation. A large-scale content analysis was conducted by collecting selfies on Instagram (i.e. #selfietime; N = 3881). Using facial recognition software, selfies were allotted into a specific ethno-racial identity based on race/ethnicity-related appearance features (e.g. Asian, Black, Hispanic, and White identity) as a proxy for externally imposed ethno-racial identity. Results provided some evidence for convergence in online self-construction among selfie-takers, but generally revealed that self-presentations diverge as a function of ethno-racial identity. That is, results showed more convergence between ethno-racial identity for portraying selfies with objectified elements, whereas divergence in online self-presentations occurred for portraying contextualised selves and filter usage. In all, this study examined the complexity of online self-presentation. Here, we extend earlier cross-cultural research by exploring the convergence-divergence paradigm for the role of externally imposed ethno-racial identity in online self-presentation. Findings imply that ethno-racial identity characteristics remain important in manifestations of online self-presentations.
Article
Full-text available
This article takes as a point of departure Erving Goffman's (1959) ideas and the self-discrepancy theory of Higgins (1987) in order to introduce the habits of self-presentation of young people in the online environments. The aim of my article is to examine the reasons for joining SNS and the aspects young people would hope to emphasize on their profile images in social networking sites (SNS). I also focus on the qualities that are considered to be crucial by the 11 to 18-year-olds in order to become popular among their peers in the online community. The analysis is based on the findings of a questionnaire survey carried out in comprehensive schools in Estonia among 11 to 18-year-old pupils (N= 713). The results show that motives with a distinctly social focus dominate among the reasons for creating a profile in SNS. However, visible gender differences occur in the reasons for selecting particular profile images. The findings reveal that girls creating their visual self value both the aesthetic, emotional, self-reflecting as well as aesthetic-symbolical aspects of photographing more than their male counterparts. Furthermore, visual impression management in SNS varies according to the expectations of the reference group at hand, as the profile images of the young are constructed and re-constructed based on the values associated with "the ideal self" or "the ought self".
Thesis
An increasing number of young girls produce contents in social media on a everyday basis for the opportunities to express, explore and connect. Public misunderstanding and concern are about whether girls are being narcissistic and vain. Academic works address how girls exercise agency while negotiating structure in the construction of their gendered adolescent identities. This thesis is situated in relation to our hopes and fears about girls’ self-representation through digital media production, and examines the role that photographic self-portraiture plays in girls’ social relations, personal and gender identity work. The theoretical framework combines the perspectives of gender performativity and symbolic interactionism, supplemented by analyses of personal photography. This thesis chose as its case study the popular Taiwanese social networking site Wretch, and employed a mixed method of quantitative content analysis of 2000 self-portraits of teenagers to understand how they represent themselves, and qualitative online interviews with 42 girls aged 13-20 to learn about their relationships with self-portraiture. The content analysis shows that most teenagers represent themselves in a gender stereotypical manner, while some adopt non gender-specific styles to represent themselves as friendly, suggesting that teenagers may use ideals about femininity, masculinity and sociality as shortcuts to present themselves in a positive light. Interview findings reveal how girls use camera technologies and the affordance of SNS for visual self-disclosure, which isimportant for the development of theirinterpersonal relationships. The findings also suggest that self-portraiture is not simply an act of photographing a ‘reality’ of the self, but of formulating self-image(s) and identity in the process of making self-portraits. In self-portraiture, girls are constantly confronted with the ‘who am I’ question, and construct and revise their biographies as they manage an array of audiences from different contexts all collapsing in one space. Furthermore, selfportraiture creates a distance between the ‘I’ and the ‘me’, allowing one to ‘play’ with self-image(s) and identity. It creates a space for the negotiation of ideals and anxieties, for experiments with different subject positions that may be socially or individually rewarding, and it is through these seemingly casual endeavoursthat one gradually works out their position in the social world. The thesis contributes to the scholarship on girls’ media culture, and suggests current theoretical perspective be expanded in order to better understand different ways of ‘doing girlhood’.
Article
We examine the relationships between CEO personality, strategic flexibility (ability to adapt quickly to environmental changes), and firm performance, using a sample of 195 small and medium-sized firms from the Indian business process outsourcing industry. We hypothesize that strategic flexibility mediates the relationships between CEO personality and firm performance. Our results extend previous research by not only highlighting the importance of CEO personality in driving strategic flexibility, but also indicating how each facet of CEO personality either enhances or inhibits strategic flexibility.