self presentation theories

Impression Management: Erving Goffman Theory

Charlotte Nickerson

Research Assistant at Harvard University

Undergraduate at Harvard University

Charlotte Nickerson is a student at Harvard University obsessed with the intersection of mental health, productivity, and design.

Learn about our Editorial Process

Saul McLeod, PhD

Editor-in-Chief for Simply Psychology

BSc (Hons) Psychology, MRes, PhD, University of Manchester

Saul McLeod, PhD., is a qualified psychology teacher with over 18 years of experience in further and higher education. He has been published in peer-reviewed journals, including the Journal of Clinical Psychology.

Olivia Guy-Evans, MSc

Associate Editor for Simply Psychology

BSc (Hons) Psychology, MSc Psychology of Education

Olivia Guy-Evans is a writer and associate editor for Simply Psychology. She has previously worked in healthcare and educational sectors.

On This Page:

• Impression management refers to the goal-directed conscious or unconscious attempt to influence the perceptions of other people about a person, object, or event by regulating and controlling information in social interaction.
• Generally, people undertake impression management to achieve goals that require they have a desired public image. This activity is called self-presentation.
• In sociology and social psychology, self-presentation is the conscious or unconscious process through which people try to control the impressions other people form of them.
• The goal is for one to present themselves the way in which they would like to be thought of by the individual or group they are interacting with. This form of management generally applies to the first impression.
• Erving Goffman popularized the concept of perception management in his book, The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life , where he argues that impression management not only influences how one is treated by other people but is an essential part of social interaction.

Impression Management in Sociology

Impression management, also known as self-presentation, refers to the ways that people attempt to control how they are perceived by others (Goffman, 1959).

By conveying particular impressions about their abilities, attitudes, motives, status, emotional reactions, and other characteristics, people can influence others to respond to them in desirable ways.

Impression management is a common way for people to influence one another in order to obtain various goals.

While earlier theorists (e.g., Burke, 1950; Hart & Burk, 1972) offered perspectives on the person as a performer, Goffman (1959) was the first to develop a specific theory concerning self-presentation.

In his well-known work, Goffman created the foundation and the defining principles of what is commonly referred to as impression management.

In explicitly laying out a purpose for his work, Goffman (1959) proposes to “consider the ways in which the individual in ordinary work situations presents himself and his activity to others, the ways in which he guides and controls the impression they form of him, and the kind of things he may or may not do while sustaining his performance before them.” (p. xi)

Social Interaction

Goffman viewed impression management not only as a means of influencing how one is treated by other people but also as an essential part of social interaction.

He communicates this view through the conceit of theatre. Actors give different performances in front of different audiences, and the actors and the audience cooperate in negotiating and maintaining the definition of a situation.

To Goffman, the self was not a fixed thing that resides within individuals but a social process. For social interactions to go smoothly, every interactant needs to project a public identity that guides others’ behaviors (Goffman, 1959, 1963; Leary, 2001; Tseelon, 1992).

Goffman defines that when people enter the presence of others, they communicate information by verbal intentional methods and by non-verbal unintentional methods.

According to Goffman, individuals participate in social interactions through performing a “line” or “a pattern of verbal and nonverbal acts by which he expresses his view of the situation and through this his evaluation of the participants, especially himself” (1967, p. 5).

Such lines are created and maintained by both the performer and the audience. By enacting a line effectively, a person gains positive social value or “face.”

The verbal intentional methods allow us to establish who we are and what we wish to communicate directly. We must use these methods for the majority of the actual communication of data.

Goffman is mostly interested in the non-verbal clues given off which are less easily manipulated. When these clues are manipulated the receiver generally still has the upper hand in determining how realistic the clues that are given off are.

People use these clues to determine how to treat a person and if the intentional verbal responses given off are actually honest. It is also known that most people give off clues that help to represent them in a positive light, which tends to be compensated for by the receiver.

Impression Management Techniques

• Suppressing emotions : Maintaining self-control (which we will identify with such practices as speaking briefly and modestly).
• Conforming to Situational Norms : The performer follows agreed-upon rules for behavior in the organization.
• Flattering Others : The performer compliments the perceiver. This tactic works best when flattery is not extreme and when it involves a dimension important to the perceiver.
• Being Consistent : The performer’s beliefs and behaviors are consistent. There is agreement between the performer’s verbal and nonverbal behaviors.

Self-Presentation Examples

Self-presentation can affect the emotional experience . For example, people can become socially anxious when they are motivated to make a desired impression on others but doubt that they can do so successfully (Leary, 2001).

In one paper on self-presentation and emotional experience, Schlenker and Leary (1982) argue that, in contrast to the drive models of anxiety, the cognitive state of the individual mediates both arousal and behavior.

The researchers examine the traditional inverted-U anxiety-performance curve (popularly known as the Yerkes-Dodson law) in this light.

The researchers propose that people are interpersonally secure when they do not have the goal of creating a particular impression on others.

They are not immediately concerned about others’ evaluative reactions in a social setting where they are attempting to create a particular impression and believe that they will be successful in doing so.

Meanwhile, people are anxious when they are uncertain about how to go about creating a certain impression (such as when they do not know what sort of attributes the other person is likely to be impressed with), think that they will not be able to project the types of images that will produce preferred reactions from others.

Such people think that they will not be able to project the desired image strongly enough or believe that some event will happen that will repudiate their self-presentations, causing reputational damage (Schlenker and Leary, 1982).

Psychologists have also studied impression management in the context of mental and physical health .

In one such study, Braginsky et al. (1969) showed that those hospitalized with schizophrenia modify the severity of their “disordered” behavior depending on whether making a more or less “disordered” impression would be most beneficial to them (Leary, 2001).

Additional research on university students shows that people may exaggerate or even fabricate reports of psychological distress when doing so for their social goals.

Hypochondria appears to have self-presentational features where people convey impressions of illness and injury, when doing so helps to drive desired outcomes such as eliciting support or avoiding responsibilities (Leary, 2001).

People can also engage in dangerous behaviors for self-presentation reasons such as suntanning, unsafe sex, and fast driving. People may also refuse needed medical treatment if seeking this medical treatment compromises public image (Leary et al., 1994).

Key Components

There are several determinants of impression management, and people have many reasons to monitor and regulate how others perceive them.

For example, social relationships such as friendship, group membership, romantic relationships, desirable jobs, status, and influence rely partly on other people perceiving the individual as being a particular kind of person or having certain traits.

Because people’s goals depend on them making desired impressions over undesired impressions, people are concerned with the impressions other people form of them.

Although people appear to monitor how they come across ongoingly, the degree to which they are motivated to impression manage and the types of impressions they try to foster varies by situation and individuals (Leary, 2001).

Leary and Kowalski (1990) say that there are two processes that constitute impression management, each of which operate according to different principles and are affected by different situations and dispositional aspects. The first of these processes is impression motivation, and the second is impression construction.

Impression Motivation

There are three main factors that affect how much people are motivated to impression-manage in a situation (Leary and Kowalski, 1990):

(1) How much people believe their public images are relevant to them attaining their desired goals.

When people believe that their public image is relevant to them achieving their goals, they are generally more motivated to control how others perceive them (Leary, 2001).

Conversely, when the impressions of other people have few implications on one’s outcomes, that person’s motivation to impression-manage will be lower.

This is why people are more likely to impression manage in their interactions with powerful, high-status people than those who are less powerful and have lower status (Leary, 2001).

(2) How valuable the goals are: people are also more likely to impress and manage the more valuable the goals for which their public impressions are relevant (Leary, 2001).

(3) how much of a discrepancy there is between how they want to be perceived and how they believe others perceive them..

People are more highly motivated to impression-manage when there is a difference between how they want to be perceived and how they believe others perceive them.

For example, public scandals and embarrassing events that convey undesirable impressions can cause people to make self-presentational efforts to repair what they see as their damaged reputations (Leary, 2001).

Impression Construction

Features of the social situations that people find themselves in, as well as their own personalities, determine the nature of the impressions that they try to convey.

In particular, Leary and Kowalski (1990) name five sets of factors that are especially important in impression construction (Leary, 2001).

Two of these factors include how people’s relationships with themselves (self-concept and desired identity), and three involve how people relate to others (role constraints, target value, and current or potential social image) (Leary and Kowalski, 1990).

Self-concept

The impressions that people try to create are influenced not only by social context but also by one’s own self-concept .

People usually want others to see them as “how they really are” (Leary, 2001), but this is in tension with the fact that people must deliberately manage their impressions in order to be viewed accurately by others (Goffman, 1959).

People’s self-concepts can also constrain the images they try to convey.

People often believe that it is unethical to present impressions of themselves different from how they really are and generally doubt that they would successfully be able to sustain a public image inconsistent with their actual characteristics (Leary, 2001).

This risk of failure in portraying a deceptive image and the accompanying social sanctions deter people from presenting impressions discrepant from how they see themselves (Gergen, 1968; Jones and Pittman, 1982; Schlenker, 1980).

People can differ in how congruent their self-presentations are with their self-perceptions.

People who are high in public self-consciousness have less congruency between their private and public selves than those lower in public self-consciousness (Tunnell, 1984; Leary and Kowalski, 1990).

Desired identity

People’s desired and undesired selves – how they wish to be and not be on an internal level – also influence the images that they try to project.

Schlenker (1985) defines a desirable identity image as what a person “would like to be and thinks he or she really can be, at least at his or her best.”

People have a tendency to manage their impressions so that their images coincide with their desired selves and stay away from images that coincide with their undesired selves (Ogilivie, 1987; Schlenker, 1985; Leary, 2001).

This happens when people publicly claim attributes consistent with their desired identity and openly reject identities that they do not want to be associated with.

For example, someone who abhors bigots may take every step possible to not appear bigoted, and Gergen and Taylor (1969) showed that high-status navel cadets did not conform to low-status navel cadets because they did not want to see themselves as conformists (Leary and Kowalski, 1990).

Target value

people tailor their self-presentations to the values of the individuals whose perceptions they are concerned with.

This may lead to people sometimes fabricating identities that they think others will value.

However, more commonly, people selectively present truthful aspects of themselves that they believe coincide with the values of the person they are targeting the impression to and withhold information that they think others will value negatively (Leary, 2001).

Role constraints

the content of people’s self-presentations is affected by the roles that they take on and the norms of their social context.

In general, people want to convey impressions consistent with their roles and norms .

Many roles even carry self-presentational requirements around the kinds of impressions that the people who hold the roles should and should not convey (Leary, 2001).

Current or potential social image

People’s public image choices are also influenced by how they think they are perceived by others. As in impression motivation, self-presentational behaviors can often be aimed at dispelling undesired impressions that others hold about an individual.

When people believe that others have or are likely to develop an undesirable impression of them, they will typically try to refute that negative impression by showing that they are different from how others believe them to be.

When they are not able to refute this negative impression, they may project desirable impressions in other aspects of their identity (Leary, 2001).

Implications

In the presence of others, few of the behaviors that people make are unaffected by their desire to maintain certain impressions. Even when not explicitly trying to create a particular impression of themselves, people are constrained by concerns about their public image.

Generally, this manifests with people trying not to create undesired impressions in virtually all areas of social life (Leary, 2001).

Tedeschi et al. (1971) argued that phenomena that psychologists previously attributed to peoples’ need to have cognitive consistency actually reflected efforts to maintain an impression of consistency in others’ eyes.

Studies have supported Tedeschi and their colleagues’ suggestion that phenomena previously attributed to cognitive dissonance were actually affected by self-presentational processes (Schlenker, 1980).

Psychologists have applied self-presentation to their study of phenomena as far-ranging as conformity, aggression, prosocial behavior, leadership, negotiation, social influence, gender, stigmatization, and close relationships (Baumeister, 1982; Leary, 1995; Schlenker, 1980; Tedeschi, 1981).

Each of these studies shows that people’s efforts to make impressions on others affect these phenomena, and, ultimately, that concerns self-presentation in private social life.

For example, research shows that people are more likely to be pro-socially helpful when their helpfulness is publicized and behave more prosocially when they desire to repair a damaged social image by being helpful (Leary, 2001).

In a similar vein, many instances of aggressive behavior can be explained as self-presentational efforts to show that someone is willing to hurt others in order to get their way.

This can go as far as gender roles, for which evidence shows that men and women behave differently due to the kind of impressions that are socially expected of men and women.

Baumeister, R. F. (1982). A self-presentational view of social phenomena. Psychological Bulletin, 91, 3-26.

Braginsky, B. M., Braginsky, D. D., & Ring, K. (1969). Methods of madness: The mental hospital as a last resort. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.

Buss, A. H., & Briggs, S. (1984). Drama and the self in social interaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47, 1310-1324. Gergen, K. J. (1968). Personal consistency and the presentation of self. In C. Gordon & K. J. Gergen (Eds.), The self in social interaction (Vol. 1, pp. 299-308). New York: Wiley.

Gergen, K. J., & Taylor, M. G. (1969). Social expectancy and self-presentation in a status hierarchy. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 5, 79-92.

Goffman, E. (1959). The moral career of the mental patient. Psychiatry, 22(2), 123-142.

• Goffman, E. (1963). Embarrassment and social organization.

Goffman, E. (1978). The presentation of self in everyday life (Vol. 21). London: Harmondsworth.

Goffman, E. (2002). The presentation of self in everyday life. 1959. Garden City, NY, 259.

Martey, R. M., & Consalvo, M. (2011). Performing the looking-glass self: Avatar appearance and group identity in Second Life. Popular Communication, 9 (3), 165-180.

Jones E E (1964) Ingratiation. Appleton-Century-Crofts, New York.

Jones, E. E., & Pittman, T. S. (1982). Toward a general theory of strategic self-presentation. Psychological perspectives on the self, 1(1), 231-262.

Leary M R (1995) Self-presentation: Impression Management and Interpersonal Behaior. Westview Press, Boulder, CO.

Leary, M. R.. Impression Management, Psychology of, in Smelser, N. J., & Baltes, P. B. (Eds.). (2001). International encyclopedia of the social & behavioral sciences (Vol. 11). Amsterdam: Elsevier.

Leary, M. R., & Kowalski, R. M. (1990). Impression management: A literature review and two-component model. Psychological bulletin, 107(1), 34.

Leary M R, Tchvidjian L R, Kraxberger B E 1994 Self-presentation may be hazardous to your health. Health Psychology 13: 461–70.

Ogilvie, D. M. (1987). The undesired self: A neglected variable in personality research. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 379-385.

• Schlenker, B. R. (1980). Impression management (Vol. 222). Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.

Schlenker, B. R. (1985). Identity and self-identification. In B. R. Schlenker (Ed.), The self and social life (pp. 65-99). New York: McGraw-Hill.

Schlenker, B. R., & Leary, M. R. (1982). Social anxiety and self-presentation: A conceptualization model. Psychological bulletin, 92(3), 641.

Tedeschi, J. T, Smith, R. B., Ill, & Brown, R. C., Jr. (1974). A reinterpretation of research on aggression. Psychological Bulletin, 81, 540- 563.

Tseëlon, E. (1992). Is the presented self sincere? Goffman, impression management and the postmodern self. Theory, culture & society, 9(2), 115-128.

Tunnell, G. (1984). The discrepancy between private and public selves: Public self-consciousness and its correlates. Journal of Personality Assessment, 48, 549-555.

Further Information

• Solomon, J. F., Solomon, A., Joseph, N. L., & Norton, S. D. (2013). Impression management, myth creation and fabrication in private social and environmental reporting: Insights from Erving Goffman. Accounting, organizations and society, 38(3), 195-213.
• Gardner, W. L., & Martinko, M. J. (1988). Impression management in organizations. Journal of management, 14(2), 321-338.
• Scheff, T. J. (2005). Looking‐Glass self: Goffman as symbolic interactionist. Symbolic interaction, 28(2), 147-166.

Daring Leadership Institute: a groundbreaking partnership that amplifies Brené Brown's empirically based, courage-building curriculum with BetterUp’s human transformation platform.

What is Coaching?

Types of Coaching

Discover your perfect match : Take our 5-minute assessment and let us pair you with one of our top Coaches tailored just for you.

Find your coach

We're on a mission to help everyone live with clarity, purpose, and passion.

Join us and create impactful change.

Read the buzz about BetterUp.

Meet the leadership that's passionate about empowering your workforce.

For Business

For Individuals

The self presentation theory and how to present your best self

Jump to section

What does self presentation mean?

What are self presentation goals, individual differences and self presentation.

How can you make the most of the self presentation theory at work?  

We all want others to see us as confident, competent, and likeable — even if we don’t necessarily feel that way all the time. In fact, we make dozens of decisions every day — whether consciously or unconsciously — to get people to see us as we want to be seen. But is this kind of self presentation dishonest? Shouldn’t we just be ourselves?

Success requires interacting with other people. We can’t control the other side of those interactions. But we can think about how the other person might see us and make choices about what we want to convey. 

Self presentation is any behavior or action made with the intention to influence or change how other people see you. Anytime we're trying to get people to think of us a certain way, it's an act of self presentation. Generally speaking, we work to present ourselves as favorably as possible. What that means can vary depending on the situation and the other person.

Although at first glance this may seem disingenuous, we all engage in self-presentation. We want to make sure that we show up in a way that not only makes us look good, but makes us feel good about ourselves.

Early research on self presentation focused on narcissism and sociopathy, and how people might use the impression others have of them to manipulate others for their benefit. However, self presentation and manipulation are distinct. After all, managing the way others see us works for their benefit as well as ours.

Imagine, for example, a friend was complaining to you about   a tough time they were having at work . You may want to show up as a compassionate person. However, it also benefits your friend — they feel heard and able to express what is bothering them when you appear to be present, attentive, and considerate of their feelings. In this case, you’d be conscious of projecting a caring image, even if your mind was elsewhere, because you value the relationship and your friend’s experience.

To some extent, every aspect of our lives depends on successful self-presentation. We want our families to feel that we are worthy of attention and love. We present ourselves as studious and responsible to our teachers. We want to seem fun and interesting at a party, and confident at networking events. Even landing a job depends on you convincing the interviewer that you are the best person for the role.

There are three main reasons why people engage in self presentation:

Tangible or social benefits:

In order to achieve the results we want, it often requires that we behave a certain way. In other words, certain behaviors are desirable in certain situations. Matching our behavior to the circumstances can help us connect to others,   develop a sense of belonging , and attune to the needs and feelings of others.

Example:   Michelle is   a new manager . At her first leadership meeting, someone makes a joke that she doesn’t quite get. When everyone else laughs, she smiles, even though she’s not sure why.

By laughing along with the joke, Michelle is trying to fit in and appear “in the know.” Perhaps more importantly, she avoids feeling (or at least appearing) left out, humorless, or revealing that she didn’t get it — which may hurt her confidence and how she interacts with the group in the future.

To facilitate social interaction:

As mentioned, certain circumstances and roles call for certain behaviors. Imagine a defense attorney. Do you think of them a certain way? Do you have expectations for what they do — or don’t — do? If you saw them frantically searching for their car keys, would you feel confident with them defending your case?

If the answer is no, then you have a good idea of why self presentation is critical to social functioning. We’re surprised when people don’t present themselves in a way that we feel is consistent with the demands of their role. Having an understanding of what is expected of you — whether at home, work, or in relationships — may help you succeed by inspiring confidence in others.

Example:   Christopher has always been called a “know-it-all.” He reads frequently and across a variety of topics, but gets nervous and tends to talk over people. When attending a networking event, he is uncharacteristically quiet. Even though he would love to speak up, he’s afraid of being seen as someone who “dominates” the conversation. 

Identity Construction:

It’s not enough for us to declare who we are or what we want to be — we have to take actions consistent with that identity. In many cases, we also have to get others to buy into this image of ourselves as well. Whether it’s a personality trait or a promotion, it can be said that we’re not who   we   think we are, but who others see.

Example:   Jordan is interested in moving to a client-facing role. However, in their last performance review, their manager commented that Jordan seemed “more comfortable working independently.” 

Declaring themselves a “people person” won’t make Jordan’s manager see them any differently. In order to gain their manager’s confidence, Jordan will have to show up as someone who can comfortably engage with clients and thrive in their new role.

We may also use self presentation to reinforce a desired identity for ourselves. If we want to accomplish something, make a change, or   learn a new skill , making it public is a powerful strategy. There's a reason why people who share their goals are more likely to be successful. The positive pressure can help us stay accountable to our commitments in a way that would be hard to accomplish alone.

Example:   Fatima wants to run a 5K. She’s signed up for a couple before, but her perfectionist tendencies lead her to skip race day because she feels she hasn’t trained enough. However, when her friend asks her to run a 5K with her, she shows up without a second thought.

In Fatima’s case, the positive pressure — along with the desire to serve a more important value (friendship) — makes showing up easy.

Because we spend so much time with other people (and our success largely depends on what they think of us), we all curate our appearance in one way or another. However, we don’t all desire to have people see us in the same way or to achieve the same goals. Our experiences and outcomes may vary based on a variety of factors.

One important factor is our level of self-monitoring when we interact with others. Some people are particularly concerned about creating a good impression, while others are uninterested. This can vary not only in individuals, but by circumstances.   A person may feel very confident at work , but nervous about making a good impression on a first date.

Another factor is self-consciousness — that is, how aware people are of themselves in a given circumstance. People that score high on scales of public self-consciousness are aware of how they come across socially. This tends to make it easier for them to align their behavior with the perception that they want others to have of them.

Finally, it's not enough to simply want other people to see you differently. In order to successfully change how other people perceive you, need to have three main skills: 

1. Perception and empathy

Successful self-presentation depends on being able to correctly perceive   how people are feeling , what's important to them, and which traits you need to project in order to achieve your intended outcomes.

2. Motivation

If we don’t have a compelling reason to change the perception that others have of us, we are not likely to try to change our behavior. Your desire for a particular outcome, whether it's social or material, creates a sense of urgency.

3.  A matching skill set

You’ve got to be able to walk the talk. Your actions will convince others more than anything you say. In other words, you have to provide evidence that you are the person you say you are. You may run into challenges if you're trying to portray yourself as skilled in an area where you actually lack experience.

How can you make the most of the self presentation theory at work?

At its heart, self presentation requires a high-level of self awareness and empathy. In order to make sure that we're showing up as our best in every circumstance — and with each person — we have to be aware of our own motivation as well as what would make the biggest difference to the person in front of us.

Here are 6 strategies to learn to make the most of the self-presentation theory in your career:

1. Get feedback from people around you

Ask a trusted friend or mentor to share what you can improve. Asking for feedback about specific experiences, like a recent project or presentation, will make their suggestions more relevant and easier to implement.

2. Study people who have been successful in your role

Look at how they interact with other people. How do you perceive them? Have they had to cultivate particular skills or ways of interacting with others that may not have come easily to them?

3. Be yourself

Look for areas where you naturally excel and stand out. If you feel comfortable, confident, and happy, you’ll have an easier time projecting that to others. It’s much harder to present yourself as confident when you’re uncomfortable.

4. Be aware that you may mess up

As you work to master new skills and ways of interacting with others,   keep asking for feedback . Talk to your manager, team, or a trusted friend about how you came across. If you sense that you’ve missed the mark, address it candidly. People will understand, and you’ll learn more quickly.

Try saying, “I hope that didn’t come across as _______. I want you to know that…”

5. Work with a coach

Coaches are skilled in interpersonal communication and committed to your success. Roleplay conversations to see how they land, and practice what you’ll say and do in upcoming encounters. Over time, a coach will also begin to know you well enough to notice patterns and suggest areas for improvement.

6. The identity is in the details

Don’t forget about the other aspects of your presentation. Take a moment to visualize yourself being the way that you want to be seen. Are there certain details that would make you feel more like that person? Getting organized, refreshing your wardrobe, rewriting your resume, and even cleaning your home office can all serve as powerful affirmations of your next-level self.

Self presentation is defined as the way we try to control how others see us, but it’s just as much about how we see ourselves. It is a skill to achieve a level of comfort with who we are   and   feel confident to choose how we self-present. Consciously working to make sure others get to see the very best of you is a wonderful way to develop into the person you want to be.

Understand Yourself Better:

Big 5 Personality Test

Allaya Cooks-Campbell

With over 15 years of content experience, Allaya Cooks Campbell has written for outlets such as ScaryMommy, HRzone, and HuffPost. She holds a B.A. in Psychology and is a certified yoga instructor as well as a certified Integrative Wellness & Life Coach. Allaya is passionate about whole-person wellness, yoga, and mental health.

Impression management: Developing your self-presentation skills

6 presentation skills and how to improve them, how to make a presentation interactive and exciting, how to give a good presentation that captivates any audience, what is self-preservation 5 skills for achieving it, how to not be nervous for a presentation — 13 tips that work (really), how self-knowledge builds success: self-awareness in the workplace, self-promotion: how to showcase your skills and experience, developing psychological flexibility, how self-compassion strengthens resilience, how self-efficacy can boost your personal success, what is self-awareness and how to develop it, what i didn't know before working with a coach: the power of reflection, self-advocacy: improve your life by speaking up, building resilience part 6: what is self-efficacy, why learning from failure is your key to success, stay connected with betterup, get our newsletter, event invites, plus product insights and research..

3100 E 5th Street, Suite 350 Austin, TX 78702

• Platform overview
• Integrations
• Powered by AI
• BetterUp Lead™
• BetterUp Manage™
• BetterUp Care®
• Sales Performance
• Diversity & Inclusion
• Case studies
• ROI of BetterUp
• What is coaching?
• About Coaching
• Find your Coach
• Career Coaching
• Communication Coaching
• Personal Coaching
• News and Press
• Leadership Team
• Become a BetterUp Coach
• BetterUp Briefing
• Center for Purpose & Performance
• Leadership Training
• Business Coaching
• Contact Support
• Contact Sales
• Privacy Policy
• Acceptable Use Policy
• Trust & Security
• Cookie Preferences

Self-Presentation Theory (SPT)

Self-presentation theory: a review, introduction.

Self-presentation theory explains how individuals use verbal and non-verbal cues to project a particular image in society (Goffman, 1959). The theory draws on dramaturgy metaphors, such as backstage and frontstage, as a lens to explore human behaviour in everyday life (Goffman, 1959). Using dramaturgy as an analytical tool dates back to Nicholas Evreinov’s (1927) research on theatrical instincts, as well as Kenneth Burke’s (1969) work evaluating and scrutinising dramatic action (Shulman, 2016). Continuing this discourse, Erving Goffman (1959) offered a rich vein of theoretical concepts in sociology by drawing on theatre metaphors. While sociology research at that time focused on broader societal forces and structures, self-presentation theory emphasised individual behaviours and offered a lens to evaluate how performers interact with others to achieve personal goals (Goffman, 1959). Key to self-presentation theory is the notion of impression management and the routines that individuals play to manage an audience’s perception. As a result, self-presentation is crucial in developing one’s social identity. Thus, the theory paved the way for a better understanding of identity development through the performance acts of individuals in society.

Drawing on Goffman’s (1959) theorisation, self-presentation is defined as individuals’ actions to control, shape, and modify the impressions other people have of them in a particular setting. In other words, individuals’ " performance is socialised, moulded, and modified to fit into the understanding and expectations of the society in which it is presented " (Goffman, 1959:p44). Hence, self-presentation holds a strategic value to individuals as impressions influence how others assess, treat, and reward them (Leary & Kowalski, 1990). For instance, in a workplace setting, impressions may shape personal success and career progression (Gardner & Martinko, 1988).

Self-presentation theory draws on the traditions of symbolic interactionism (Blumer, 1986). Goffman suggests six key principles of the theory (Goffman, 1959; Shulman, 2016). First, individuals are performers who express their self to society. In practice, individuals highlight a persona and project a particular image to others. Such a projection is a means to show their identity and who they are to the society. Second, individuals want to put forward a credible image. They do so by being truthful and authentic in the way they present themselves. They showcase their expertise in a particular domain. Third, individuals take special care to avoid presenting themselves " out of character ". They strive to ensure that their performance or communication aligns with their role and identity in society. Fourth, if a performance is inadequate and not up to the mark, individuals address or repair it by engaging in restorative actions. Such actions ensure that their desired image is not tarnished. Fifth, self-presentation occurs in social places, known as regions of performance. Such regions in everyday life include the workplace, social gatherings, and social media. As such, they are "platforms" for self-presentation. Sixth, individuals work in teams and manage the impression of the collective to achieve common goals.  In other words, a performance may not always occur alone, but can take place in concert with other individuals.

Individuals enact self-presentation because they are motivated to maximise rewards and minimise punishment (Leary & Kowalski, 1990;Schlenker, 1980). More specifically, motivations include the desire to (i) enhance self-esteem, (ii) develop a self-identity, and (iii) generate social and material benefits (Leary & Kowalski, 1990). In practice, people may strive to project an image that will result in praise and compliments, positively shaping one’s self-esteem (Leary & Kowalski, 1990). In contrast, individuals may avoid presenting an image that draws criticism and a lack of self-worth (Cohen, 1959). More specifically, a central motivation for self-presentation is to build an identity in society to foster a unique perception in the minds of others (Schlenker, 1980). Further, self-presentation is an adequate mechanism to foster rewards that can be social, including, trust, affection, and friendship. It can generate material benefits, such as financial gain (Leary & Kowalski, 1990).

Goffman (1959) uses the dramaturgical metaphor to explain the self-presentation theory and states that " the theatre metaphor is the ‘structure of the social encounter’ that occurs in all social life " (Adams & Sydie, 2002:p170). Drawing on dramaturgical metaphors, self-presentation comprises backstage and frontstage strategies akin to a theatre performance (Cho et al., 2018). These strategies are summarised in Table 1. Backstage relates to reflecting, practising, and taking adequate measures to prepare oneself (Goffman, 1959). Such practices occur in private and offer individuals a more comfortable atmosphere in which to prepare without the pressure from society, such as norms and expectations to behave in a certain way (Jeacle, 2014). The theory suggests the significance of rehearsal, which focuses on preparation work for the frontstage (Siegel, Tussyadiah & Scarles, 2023). For instance, individuals can practise and adjust their presentation at home before a formal client meeting.

Table 1: Self-presentation strategies

In contrast, frontstage comprises the " setting ", which includes the layout and objects in a particular room that set the scene for expression and action (Goffman, 1959). The setting is a place that is usually stable and unmovable, but at times can be relocated such as a circus (Goffman, 1959). Another key aspect of the frontstage is the " personal front ", which relates to personal characteristics such as sex, age, and facial expressions (Goffman, 1959). These characteristics are signals that are either fixed or vary over time (Goffman, 1959). Fixed characteristics are, for instance, one’s ethnic background, whereas characteristics that change include gestures based on one’s mood. The theory suggests that the personal front can be better understood through the lens of appearance and manner. The former relates to one’s temporal state such as work or leisure. The latter expresses the interaction role that one is likely to pursue in a given situation, like being professional and sincere (Goffman, 1959). Usually, there exists a coherence between the appearance and manner, although, at times, they may be misaligned (Goffman, 1959). For instance, a person of high status may behave in a way considered down to earth (Goffman, 1959).

Individuals can enact certain routines as part of their self-expression on the frontstage. At times, these routines can become institutionalised when an individual takes on specific roles in society (Goffman, 1959). The theory highlights the following routines: idealisation, mystification, self-promotion, exemplification, supplication, ingratiation, identification, basking in reflected glory, downward comparison, upward comparison, remaining silent, apology, and corrective action (Schütz, 1998).

Idealisation relates to individuals performing an ideal accredited impression in society (Goffman, 1959). Idealisation is common in social stratification research: individuals strive to go higher up the ladder in the social strata and adjust their self-presentations to reflect that ideal state and value system. In practice, individuals gain insight into the sign equipment required to showcase idealisation, and subsequently use it to project the accredited social class. Mystification is pursued by reducing contact and increasing social distance with the audience to create a sense of awe (Goffman, 1959). It is a means of limiting familiarity with others. For instance, mystification was used by Kings and Queens to foster an impression of power. The audience responded in a way that respected their mystic and sacred identity.

Self-promotion is pursued to create a credible image of oneself in the minds of others (Giacalone & Rosenfeld, 1986; Schau & Gilly, 2003). Such a form of persuasion is relevant in various circumstances, such as job interviews, influencer marketing, and presidential speeches. For instance, a candidate applying for a digital marketing role may share reflections on their expertise in search engine optimisation. An influencer focusing on health and fitness may share online videos of their exercise regimes. A presidential candidate may talk about their vast political experience to project their leadership qualities. Therefore, self-promotion focuses on projecting oneself as an expert and capable person in a particular domain (Bande et al., 2019). However, the theory suggests the issue of misrepresentation: behaviours that represent a false front (Goffman, 1959). Individuals may use credible vehicle signs for the wrong reasons, such as deception and fraud (Goffman, 1959).

Exemplification strategy focuses on creating an impression of oneself as virtuous and honourable (Bonner, Greenbaum & Quade, 2017; Gardner, 2003; Schütz, 1997). In other words, exemplification relates to creating an identity that rests on the notion of morality and ethics. For instance, Chief Executive Officers (CEOs) may publish posts on social media supporting charities, which projects a righteous image. Further, individuals regularly take a stand against harmful organisational behaviours, such as those engaging in child labour.  While sharing their views on social media, those individuals exemplify a high moral ground and justify why organisations engaging in transgressions need to be held accountable. However, an exemplification strategy has its potential dangers. The society may question the motive behind such actions and consider it a means to cover up previous unethical deeds (Stone et al., 1997).  

Supplication is based on showing oneself as vulnerable and frail to draw adequate support and help from others (Christopher et al., 2005; Korzynski, Haenlein & Rautiainen, 2021) . The ingratiation strategy relates to creating a likable and attractive impression in a particular place offline, such as one’s workplace, and online on social media (Bolino, Long & Turnley, 2016; Gross et al., 2021). For instance, an individual can project themselves to be professional and collegial in the workplace to foster goodwill and social approval.

The identification strategy puts emphasis on associating oneself with a particular community to create a specific image in society (Brewer & Gardner, 1996). For instance, some consumers may link themselves to the Harley-Davidson community to create a rebellious and adventurous image (Schembri, 2009). Tattoos, leather jackets, and riding on Harley motorcycles in packs reinforce their identification (Schembri, 2009). A strategy that slightly overlaps with identification work is " basking in reflected glor y" (Cialdini et al., 1976). In this case, an individual associates themselves with another person who has a positive impression in society and thus leverages those associations (Schütz, 1998).

Downward comparison focuses on projecting oneself as superior and in a positive light to the detriment of others (Wills, 1981). One may witness downward comparison in politics as one presidential candidate expresses how their vision and proposed policies are superior compared to another candidate. Upward comparison, however, is the practice of comparing oneself with someone better to improve one’s self-evaluations and perceptions (Collins, 1996).

Remaining silent may be a particular practice for individuals to be neutral and not face any criticism or backlash (Premeaux & Bedeian, 2003). Finally, particularly when one is responsible for an adverse event or has engaged in a wrong action, they may share an apology, defined as " repenting and promising moral behaviour in the future " (Hart, Tortoriello & Richardson, 2020:p2).  They may suggest putting corrective measures in place so that it does not happen again in the future (Schütz, 1998).

Figure 1 offers a generic framework of self-presentation theory, comprising frontstage and backstage strategies that help attain specific outcomes (Goffman, 1959; Leary & Kowalski, 1990). The backstage and frontstage are inter-related. Backstage strategies often involve preparation, desk research, and due diligence to gain insight into a particular performance (Jacobs, 1992). As such, backstage is an unofficial channel for individuals to gain the necessary skills, attributes, and contextual understanding to perform certain routines (Tiilikainen et al., 2024). Subsequently, individuals enact frontstage strategies involving those practised routines and impressions in a social context (Schütz, 1997).

To ensure adequate self-presentation, the theory suggests various means by which impression management can be pursued in the right way and includes defensive and protective practices (Goffman, 1959) as well as maintaining the definition of the situation (Tiilikainen et al., 2024). Defensive practices pursued by performers are a means for individuals and teams to safeguard their own performance. It requires discipline, whereby individuals have " presence of mind ". Disciplined individuals are resilient to unexpected circumstances and are sufficiently agile to ensure the performance attains its goal. In addition, individuals can enact circumspection by adequately preparing to offer a high-quality performance (Goffman, 1959). This involves taking time to design the performance and enacting foresight and prudence. Individuals may even show loyalty and devotion to other team members to ensure the overall impression does not fail (Goffman, 1959). When individuals reveal secrets or problems to outsiders, it damages the image of the team.

Protective practices, however, are pursued by audience members to help the performers manage their impressions (Goffman, 1959). They do so by not intruding on the back or frontstage. In practice, etiquette is maintained by not involving oneself in others' personal matters. Permission and consent are exercised to gain access. For instance, salespersons usually introduce themselves first and ask permission to discuss a product or service. However, the audience can exercise extra understanding and empathy when performance is not up to the mark for a person learning their trade (Goffman, 1959).

Finally, by maintaining a definition of the situation, individuals can develop an " agreed upon, subjective understanding of what will happen in a given situation or setting, and who will play which roles in the action " (Crossman, 2019). As a result, the concept defines the social order and gives symbolic meaning to human interactions that occur in everyday life (Tiilikainen et al., 2024). When the definition of the situation is not maintained or broken, the performance becomes ineffective and may even collapse (Tiilikainen et al., 2024).

Institutions shape how performers present themselves in everyday life. Goffman (1983:p1) used the terminology - interaction order – to explain the " loose coupling between interaction practices and social structure " and how " the workings of the interaction order can easily be viewed as the consequence of systems of enabling conventions, in the sense of ground rules for a game, the provisions of a traffic code or the rules of syntax of a language ". As such, the interaction order offers rules and norms that shape one’s behaviour in society. At an extreme level, institutions can have high levels of dominance and control, which Goffman (1961) defines as total institutions, which are often applied in prisons, military organisations, and even hospitals. Total institutions exert control over individuals’ daily routines, movements, and even identities (Goffman, 1961). The theoretical properties of total institutions include role dispossession i.e., " the process through which new recruits are prevented from being who they were in the world they inhabited prior to entry" (Shulman, 2016:p103). This involves trimming or programming, which relates to individuals being " shaped and coded into an object that can be fed into the administrative machinery of the establishment, to be worked on smoothly by routine operations " (Goffman, 1986:p16). Individuals in a total institution are forced to give up their identity kit i.e., personal belongings that give meaning to who they are in society (Shulman, 2016).

Theoretical developments

Since Goffman’s original work, scholars have advanced the theoretical properties of self-presentation. Specifically, in sharp contrast to total institutions, Scott (2011:p3) suggested the notion of reinventive institutions, defined as "a material, discursive or symbolic structure in which voluntary members actively seek to cultivate a new social identity, role or status. This is interpreted positively as a process of reinvention, self-improvement or transformation. It is achieved not only through formal instruction in an institutional rhetoric, but also through the mechanisms of performative regulation in the interaction context of an inmate culture" . Reinventive institutions are much more relevant in modern life, whereby individuals want to go through a transformation of their self and create a new identity (Scott, 2011). In other words, they want to let go of their previous self in pursuit of a reinvigorated new persona. Illustrative cases of reinventive institutions include spiritual communities and lifestyle groups (Shulman, 2016). Individuals are not forced to enter these communities; rather, they do so entirely voluntarily (Scott, 2010). These institutions are self-organising, i.e., the community members keep a check on each other to maintain the collective norms (Huber et al., 2020).

In contrast to Goffman’s original theorisation of self-presentation in face-to-face, offline interactions, research work has extended the theory to evaluate online impression management (Bareket-Bojmel, Moran & Shahar, 2016; Ranzini & Hoek, 2017; Rui & Stefanone, 2013). In practice, individuals use technology features such as text, images or videos to signal and manage their online image. This contrasts with non-verbal signals, such as body language, which are often common in offline interactions.  Online impression management can be managed more conveniently as individuals can develop, change, or edit informational cues in a way that suits their purpose (Sun, Fang & Zhang, 2021). However, individuals’ digital footprint may remain over time online, and it can be viewed and accessed by others anytime (Hogan, 2010). This relates to the problem of " stage breach ", where data about individuals’ private lives are retrievable on search engines and social media platforms (Shulman, 2016). As such, the internet has caused the blurring of boundaries between back and frontstage, a phenomenon dubbed as " collapsed contexts " (Davis & Jurgenson, 2014), defined as " a flattening of the spatial, temporal, and social boundaries that otherwise separate audiences on social networking sites " (Duguay, 2016:p892).  In response, individuals may use privacy filters or even delete content posted in the past that may negatively influence their image in society (DeAndrea, Tong & Lim, 2018).

Due to the advent of social media, Hogan (2010) extended Goffman’s theorisation by differentiating between "performances" and "exhibitions" that occur online. Performances, similar to Goffman’s dramaturgy metaphor, occur in real-time, such as in chat rooms, online meetings, and live streams. In this case, the situation is synchronous, and performances are time-bound (Hogan, 2010). However, exhibitions do not occur in real time, and individuals use technology artifacts afforded by social media to curate content (Hogan, 2010). These include posting a status update, uploading a photo album, or sharing a pre-recorded, edited video. As a result, exhibitions occur in asynchronous situations.

Overall, self-presentation theory provides a dramaturgy analytical lens for researchers to evaluate human behaviour in face-to-face and online interactions that involve synchronous and/or asynchronous situations. It offers a range of back and frontstage strategies that individuals and teams enact to manage their impressions in society, also suggesting that the broader institutional environment shapes how they behave in everyday life. Table 2 summarises the key conceptual definitions of self-presentation theory.

Table 2: Key concepts and definitions

Applications

Self-presentation theory is primarily anchored in sociology. However, other disciplines, such as management, marketing, and information systems, have extended the application of the theory in their respective contexts, such as work, social media, and branding. As such, the sociology discipline sheds light on the theoretical aspects of self-presentation, including its strategies, motivations, and application of the theory in everyday life (Goffman, 1959; Lewis & Neighbors, 2005; Schütz, 1998; Vohs, Baumeister & Ciarocco, 2005). Based on the theory, management scholars have investigated the application of self-presentation at work at two levels: individual and organisational (Bolino et al., 2008; Bolino & Turnley, 1999; Cook et al., 2024; Windscheid et al., 2018). At an individual level, self-presentation theory has been extensively applied to evaluate job interviews and performance appraisals (Kim et al., 2023; Moon et al., 2024). The theory is highly appropriate when determining individuals’ success or failure in securing work in organisations, as well as their job performance and career success (Gioaba & Krings, 2017; Bolino et al., 2008). For instance, leaders and managers who engage in appropriate self-presentation are more likely to generate " buy-in " and support from colleagues about their suggestions and action plans (Gardner & Martinko, 1988) . Research has even investigated how employees manage their impressions when interacting with colleagues on social media (Sun, Fang & Zhang, 2021; Ollier-Malaterre, Rothbard & Berg, 2013). This is crucial yet challenging because employees simultaneously have to manage their work and personal identities on social media (Ollier-Malaterre, Rothbard & Berg, 2013). In addition, research looked into how entrepreneurs managed their impression after the failure of their business (Kibler et al., 2021; Shepherd & Haynie, 2011). They do so to retain their credibility for future entrepreneurial ventures (Kibler et al., 2021). 

At an organisational level, empirical work has examined organisational impression management (Benthaus, Risius & Beck, 2016; Carter, 2006; Schniederjans, Cao & Schniederjans, 2013). This is defined as " any action that is intentionally designed and carried out to influence an audience’s perceptions of the organisation " (Bolino et al., 2008:p1095). Studies have explored how organizational impression management strategies focus on assertive strategies to create a positive public image, such as sharing recent achievements (Mohamed, Gardner & Paolillo, 1999). In contrast, reactive strategies are used to manage crisis situations that tarnish the reputation of an organisation (Jin, Li & Hoskisson, 2022; Rim & Ferguson, 2020). Studies have also investigated how impression management of particular individuals (such as CEOs) shapes organisational image and performance (Cowen & Montgomery, 2020; Im, Kim & Miao, 2021). In contrast, research examined how organisational factors (e.g., culture) shape employee conduct in the workplace in a way that aligns with the values and norms expected in the organisation (Ashford et al., 1998).

In contemporary marketing, the metaphor of dramaturgy, which is central to impression management, has been used in retail and service research to investigate how to enhance customer experience (Bitner, 1992). In practice, the front and backstage have been effectively used to offer guidelines and implications to improve retail and service environments (Grove, Fisk & John, 2000). The marketing field even provides insight into how brands play a role in self-presentation (Ferraro, Kirmani & Matherly, 2013; Lee, Ko & Megehee, 2015). In particular, consumers often use and purchase brands that relate to a specific self-concept they strive to build and maintain (Jiménez-Barreto et al., 2022; Clark, Slama & Wolfe, 1999). In other words, brands offer consumers identity artifacts or props to express themselves. For instance, research by Jiménez-Barreto et al. (2022) finds that consumers find cool brands (original, iconic, and popular brands) valuable to construct their cool identity. This phenomenon is pertinent to luxury brands, which enable consumers to project a classy, high-status image in society (Kim & Oh, 2022). However, such consumer practices may backfire. Other people (or observers) may have negative perceptions of consumers using brands in a conspicuous or attention-seeking way (Ferraro, Kirmani & Matherly, 2013) and perceive them as having dark personalities, including narcissism, machiavellianism, and psychopathy (Razmus, Czarna & Fortuna, 2023). Observers even perceive consumers who use luxury brands to have lower levels of warmth (Cannon & Rucker, 2019). Managing impressions in marketing applies to buyer-seller relationships (Fisk & Grove, 1996). For example, sales professionals are often required to project an expert image. Impression management is also core to business-to-business marketing management, for instance, to remain resilient in crises (Alo et al., 2023; Lan & Sheng, 2023).

Information systems researchers have effectively investigated how technology can be used in the self-presentation process (Kim, Chan & Kankanhalli, 2012; Ma & Agarwal, 2007; Shi, Lai & Chen, 2023). The theoretical integration of self-presentation and technology is particularly relevant due to the advent of the internet, social media, metaverse, and artificial intelligence. For instance, Ma and Agarwal (2007) examined how technology artifacts afforded by virtual communities, such as avatars, nicknames, digital photographs and personal pages, enable users to enact self-presentation to create their identity. They find that when people have perceived verified identities, defined as " perceived confirmation from other community members of a focal person’s belief about (their) identities " (p. 46), it encourages the person to share knowledge with others in the virtual community. It even increases their satisfaction level with the community. Another study study found that the desire for online self-presentation, defined as the " extent to which an individual wants to present his or her preferred image in a virtual community of interest, " encourages individuals to purchase digital items, such as avatars and image files (Kim, Chan & Kankanhalli, 2012:p1235). These digital items are artifacts for self-expression and communication (Kim, Chan & Kankanhalli, 2012). The authors argue that the desire for online self-presentation in virtual communities is influenced by three factors: self-efficacy, norms, and involvement. They suggest that individuals who believe in their own capability to adequately develop a desired perception of themselves in the virtual community are more likely to engage in self-presentation work. Also, if the virtual community norms (rules and expectations) are conducive to self-presentation, the desire for self-presentation is stimulated. Further, if individuals are involved with the virtual community, i.e., they can relate to the community members, feel a strong affinity with them, and invest time and resources in the community, then it increases one’s desire for self-presentation. Chen and Chen (2020) suggest that the perceived value of those digital items encourages users to make a purchase. Yet in another study, Oh, Goh and Phan (2023) offer interesting insights and show that social media users are more inclined to share positive news to their network as part of their image-building process, as opposed to negative or controversial news. The reason is that sharing positive news reinforces one’s positive self-identity. In fact, such sharing behaviours are particularly relevant for users with a broader social network as they have a higher disposition to maintain a positive self-image (Oh, Goh & Phan, 2023).

Self-presentation theory has been applied to effectively explore human deception (DeAndrea et al., 2012; Toma, Hancock & Ellison, 2008). Individuals may apply impression management strategies to falsely show themselves favourably to achieve their desired goals (Petrescu, Ajjan & Harrison, 2023). Research shows that individuals whose motivation to produce a positive impression in a group is low are likely to present themselves in an authentic way (Wooten & Reed, 2000). Similarly, if individuals are highly motivated to create a favourable image, they are not likely to use deception in a group unless they possess the self-efficacy to engage in deceptive work (Wooten & Reed, 2000). Meanwhile, those with low self-efficacy will probably pursue evasive self-presentation practices, such as stalling or repressing information (Wooten & Reed, 2000). Self-efficacy in the context of impression management means the extent to which an individual can control and manage their impression. It is subject to the requirements or demands of self-presentation in a particular social context, and the capabilities one possesses to achieve those demands (Schlenker & Leary, 1982). Figure 2 offers a framework that highlights deceptive self-presentation work in groups.

Importantly, with the advancements in digital technologies, such as artificial intelligence and deepfakes, individuals can develop content that may look real even though it is not (Mustak et al., 2023; Vasist & Krishnan, 2023). As a result, it has become extremely challenging to differentiate between authentic and fabricated content. This is further exacerbated as individuals can use digital tools, such as video filters, to project a misleading identity (Herring et al., 2024).

Limitations

Sociologists suggest that self-presentation theory, rooted in symbolic interactionism, focuses on micro-level interpretations of signs and meanings but offers a limited understanding of the broader societal factors and powers that influence individuals’ lives (Shulman, 2016). Moreover, management studies criticise the analytical ability of a theatre metaphor to explore impression management within organisations (Shulman, 2016). While self-presentation theory may be a useful framework, the extent to which a theatre’s characteristics relate to an organisation has been questioned (Shulman, 2016). This limitation is acknowledged by Goffman, who states in his book that " the perspective employed in this report is that of the theatrical performance; the principles derived are dramaturgical ones ... In using this model I will attempt not to make light of its obvious inadequacies. The stage presents things that are make-believe; presumably life presents things that are real ." (Goffman, 1959). Ongoing management research is attending to this limitation by investigating how employees manage their impression towards their co-workers and supervisors in organisations (Huang, Paterson & Wang, 2024).

Along the same lines, scholars have questioned the validity of a " performance " in self-presentation and whether such rituals are relevant in today’s society (Williams, 1986). The theory focuses on face-to-face interactions to manage impressions (Williams, 1986). Blumer (1972) suggests that the theory " stems from the narrowly constructed area of human group life ….limited the area of face-to-face association with a corresponding exclusion of the vast sum of human activity falling outside such association ." However, ongoing scholarly work is addressing this limitation by evaluating self-presentation in online environments, such as social media (Klostermann et al., 2023; Seidman, 2013). Self-presentation theory focuses heavily on the individual, and its applications to teams have received comparatively limited attention and extension (Blumer, 1972). As a result, recent research has looked into impression management on teamwork and team satisfaction (Schiller et al., 2024).

Scholars suggest that although Goffman’s conceptualisation of the interaction order offers a unique yet descriptive theoretical property, it provides limited knowledge of how the interaction order evolves over time and the explanatory variables that could suggest how and why the change occurred (Colomy & Brown, 1996). Importantly, Goffman’s conceptualisation of total institutions has received criticism in terms of its theoretical scope and generalisability, as not all organisations, such as mental hospitals, exert extreme control (Lemert, 1981). The total institution does not consider differences in " organisational goal, professional ideology, staff personality " (Weinstein, 1982:p269). Thus, research has looked into the application of impression management under different institutional environments, uncertainties in the business environment, and organisational motives (Ahmed, Elsayed & Xu, 2024; Busenbark, Lange & Certo, 2017).

Click to subscribe to our YouTube Channel.

Varqa Shamsi Bahar (Business School, Newcastle University)

How to Cite

Bahar, V.S. (2024) Self-Presentation Theory: A review . In S. Papagiannidis (Ed), TheoryHub Book . Available at https://open.ncl.ac.uk / ISBN: 9781739604400

Theory Profile

Discipline Psychology Unit of Analysis Individual, teams

Operationalised Qualitatively / Quantitatively Level Micro-level

Theory Tags

ISBN: 978-1-7396044-0-0

Published under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License .

• About TheoryHub
• Submissions
• YouTube Channel

TheoryHub © 2020-2024 All rights reserved

Self-Presentation Theory: Self-Construction and Audience Pleasing

Cite this chapter.

• Roy F. Baumeister &
• Debra G. Hutton  

Part of the book series: Springer Series in Social Psychology ((SSSOC))

2592 Accesses

59 Citations

66 Altmetric

Self-presentation is behavior that attempts to convey some information about oneself or some image of oneself to other people. It denotes a class of motivations in human behavior. These motivations are in part stable dispositions of individuals but they depend on situational factors to elicit them. Specifically, self-presentational motivations are activated by the evaluative presence of other people and by others’ (even potential) knowledge of one’s behavior.

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

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save.

• Get 10 units per month
• Download Article/Chapter or eBook
• 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
• Cancel anytime
• Available as PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Compact, lightweight edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Unable to display preview.  Download preview PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Self-Determination Theory

Psychologically Flexible Self-Acceptance

Introduction to the self-determination construct.

Adler, A (1921). The neurotic constitution: Outlines of a comparative individualistic psychology and psychotherapy . New York: Moffat Yard.

Google Scholar  

Aries, P. (1981). The hour of our death . New York: Knopf.

Baumeister, R. F. (1982a). A self-presentational view of social phenomena. Psychological Bulletin, 91 , 3–26.

Article   Google Scholar  

Baumeister, R. F. (1982b). Self-esteem, self-presentation, and future interaction: A dilemma of reputation. Journal of Personality, 50 , 29–45.

Baumeister, R. F. (1984). Choking under pressure: Self-consciousness and paradoxical effects of incentives on skillful performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46 , 610–620.

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Baumeister, R. F. (1985). The championship choke. Psychology Today, 19 (4:April), 48–52.

Baumeister, R. F. (1986). Identity . New York: Oxford University Press.

Baumeister, R F, Hamilton, J. C., & Tice, D. M. (1985). Public versus private expectancy of success: Confidence booster or performance pressure? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48 , 1447–1457.

Baumeister, R. F., & Jones, E. E. (1978). When self-presentation is constrained by the target’s prior knowledge: Consistency and compensation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36 , 608–618.

Baumeister, R. F., & Steinhilber, A (1984). Paradoxical effects of supportive audiences on performance under pressure: The home field disadvantage in sports championships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47 , 85–93.

Baumeister, R. F., & Tice, D. M. (1984). Role of self-presentation and choice in cognitive dissonance under forced compliance: Necessary or sufficient causes? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46 , 5–13.

Baumeister, R. F., & Tice, D. M. (1985). Self-esteem and responses to success and failure: Subsequent performance and intrinsic motivation. Journal of Personality, 53 , 450–467.

Bond, C. F. (1982). Social facilitation: A self-presentational view. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42 , 1042–1050.

Bond, C. F., & Titus, L. J. (1983). Social facilitation: A meta-analysis of 241 studies. Psychological Bulletin, 94 , 265–292.

Braginsky, B. M., Braginsky, D. D., & Ring, K. (1969). Methods of madness: The mental hospital as a last resort . New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.

Castaneda, C. (1972). Journey to Ixtlan: The lessons of Don Juan . New York: Simon & Schuster.

Deaux, K, & Major, B. (1977). Sex-related patterns in the unit of perception. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 3 , 297–300.

Emmler, N. (1984). Differential involvement in delinquency: Toward an interpretation in terms of reputation management. Progress in Experimental Personality Research, 13 , 174–239.

Festinger, L., & Carlsmith, J. M. (1959). Cognitive consequences of forced compliance. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 58 , 203–210.

Felson, R (1978). Aggression as impression management. Social Psychology Quarterly, 41 , 205–213.

Gollwitzer, P. M. (1986). Striving for specific identities: The social reality of self-symbolizing. In R. Baumeister (Ed.), Public self and private self . New York: Springer-Verlag.

Greenberg, J. (1983). Self-image versus impression management in adherence to distributive justice standards: The influence of self-awareness and self-consciousness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44 , 5–19.

Hinkle, L. (1957). [Untitled.] In Methods of forceful indoctrination: Observations and interviews . New York.

Hogan, R (1982). A socioanalytic theory of personality. In M. Page (Ed.), Nebraska symposium on motivation (pp. 55–89). Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press.

Hogan, R, Mankin, D., Conway, J., & Fox, S. (1970). Personality correlates of undergraduate marijuana use. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 35 , 58–63.

Houghton, W. E. (1957). The Victorian frame of mind: 1830–1870 . New Haven: Yale University Press.

Jones, E. E., & Berglas, S. C. (1978). Control of attributions about the self through self-handicapping strategies: The appeal of alcohol and the role of underachievement. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 4 , 200–206.

Jones, E. E., & Pittman, T. S. (1982). Toward a general theory of strategic self-presentation. In J. Suls (Ed.), Psychological perspectives on the self (Vol. 1, pp. 231–262). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Kassin, S. M. (1984) T. V. Cameras, public self-consciousness and mock juror performance. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 20 , 336–349.

Kett, J. F. (1977). Rites of passage: Adolescence in America 1790 to the present . New York: Basic.

Kidder, L. H., Bellettirie, G., & Cohn, E. S. (1977). Secret ambitions and public performances: The effects of anonymity on reward allocations made by men and women. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 13 , 70–80.

Kolditz, T. A, & Arkin, R. M. (1982). An impression management interpretation of the self-handicapping strategy. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 43 , 492–502.

Latané, B., Williams, K, & Harkins, S. (1979). Many hands make light the work: The causes and consequences of social loafing. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37 , 822–832.

Lifton, R. J. (1957). [Untitled.] In Methods of forceful indoctrination: Observations and interviews . New York.

Major, B., & Adams, J. B. (1983). Role of gender, interpersonal orientation, and self-presentation in distributive-justice behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45 , 598–608.

Major, B., McFarlin, D. B., & Gagnon, D. (1984). Overworked and underpaid: On the nature of gender differences in personal entitlement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47 , 1399–1412.

McFarlin, D. B., Baumeister, R. F., & Blascovich, J. (1984). On knowing when to quit: Task failure, self-esteem, advice, and nonproductive persistence. Journal of Personality, 52 , 138–155.

Morris, C. (1972). The discovery of the individual: 1050–1200 . New York: Harper & Row.

Paulhus, D. (1982). Individual differences, self-presentation, and cognitive dissonance: Their concurrent operation in forced compliance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 43 , 838–852.

Pennebaker, J. W. (1984). Confiding, ruminating, and psychosomatic disease. In J. W. Pennebaker (Chair), New paradigms in psychology . Symposium conducted at the annual convention of the American Psychological Association, Toronto, Canada, August 1984.

Pennebaker, J. W. (in press). Traumatic experience and psychosomatic disease: Exploring the roles of behavioral inhibition, obsession, and confiding. Canadian Psychology .

Sacco, W. P., & Hokanson, J. E. (1982). Depression and self-reinforcement in a public and private setting. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42 , 377–385.

Schlenker, B. R. (1980). Impression management: The self-concept, social identity, and interpersonal relations . Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.

Schlenker, B. R. (1982). Translating actions into attitudes: An identity-analytic approach to the explanation of social conduct. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 15 pp. 194–247). New York: Academic Press.

Scott, M. B., & Lyman, S. M. (1968). Accounts. American Sociological Review, 33 , 46–62.

Silverman, I. (1964). Self-esteem and differential responsiveness to success and failure. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 69 , 115–119.

Smith, T. W, Snyder, C. R, & Perkins, S. C. (1983). The self-serving function of hypochondriacal complaints: Physical symptoms as self-handicapping strategies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44 , 787–797.

Sweeney, J. (1973). An experimental investigation of the free rider problem. Social Science Research, 2 , 277–292.

Tang, T. L. P., & Baumeister, R. F. (1984). Effects of personal values, perceived surveillance, and task labels on task preference: The ideology of turning play into work. Journal of Applied Psychology, 69 , 99–105.

Tedeschi, J. T., Schlenker, B. R, & Bonoma, T. V. (1971). Cognitive dissonance: Private ratiocination or public spectacle? American Psychologist, 26 , 685–695.

Tice, D. M., & Baumeister, R F. (1985). Self-esteem, self-handicapping, and self-presentation: The benefits of not practicing. Unpublished manuscript, Case Western Reserve University.

Toch, H. (1969). Violent men . Chicago: Aldine.

Wicklund, R. A, & Gollwitzer, P. M. (1982). Symbolic self-completion . Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Zajonc, R (1965). Social facilitation. Science, 149 , 269–274.

Download references

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

Department of Psychology, Syracuse University, 13210, Syracuse, New York, USA

Brian Mullen

Department of Psychology, Williams College, 01267, Williamstown, Massachusetts, USA

George R. Goethals

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1987 Springer-Verlag New York Inc.

About this chapter

Baumeister, R.F., Hutton, D.G. (1987). Self-Presentation Theory: Self-Construction and Audience Pleasing. In: Mullen, B., Goethals, G.R. (eds) Theories of Group Behavior. Springer Series in Social Psychology. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-4634-3_4

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-4634-3_4

Publisher Name : Springer, New York, NY

Print ISBN : 978-1-4612-9092-6

Online ISBN : 978-1-4612-4634-3

eBook Packages : Springer Book Archive

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

Our systems are now restored following recent technical disruption, and we’re working hard to catch up on publishing. We apologise for the inconvenience caused. Find out more: https://www.cambridge.org/universitypress/about-us/news-and-blogs/cambridge-university-press-publishing-update-following-technical-disruption

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings .

Login Alert

• > Social Signal Processing
• > Self-presentation: Signaling Personal and Social Characteristics

Book contents

• Frontmatter
• Contributors
• 1 Introduction: Social Signal Processing
• Part I Conceptual Models of Social Signals
• 2 Biological and Social Signaling Systems
• 3 Universal Dimensions of Social Signals: Warmth and Competence
• 4 The Vertical Dimension of Social Signaling
• 5 Measuring Responses to Nonverbal Social Signals: Research on Affect Receiving Ability
• 6 Computational Analysis of Vocal Expression of Affect: Trends and Challenges
• 7 Self-presentation: Signaling Personal and Social Characteristics
• 8 Interaction Coordination and Adaptation
• 9 Social Signals and Persuasion
• 10 Social Presence in CMC and VR
• Part II Machine Analysis of Social Signals
• Part III Machine Synthesis of Social Signals
• Part IV Applications of Social Signal Processing

7 - Self-presentation: Signaling Personal and Social Characteristics

from Part I - Conceptual Models of Social Signals

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 July 2017

When people interact, their behaviors are greatly influenced by the impressions they have of one another's personalities, abilities, attitudes, intentions, identities, roles, and other characteristics. In fact, many important outcomes in life – outcomes as diverse as friendships, professional success, income, romantic relationships, influence over others, and social support – depend to a significant extent on the impressions that people make on others. Knowing that others respond to them on the basis of their public impressions, people devote considerable thought and energy to conveying impressions that will lead others to treat them in desired ways. In many instances, the impressions people project of themselves are reasonably accurate attempts to let other people know who they are and what they are like (Murphy, 2007). At other times, people may convey impressions of themselves that they know are not entirely accurate, if not blatantly deceptive, when they believe that fostering such images will result in desired outcomes (Hancock & Toma, 2009).

Social and behavioral scientists refer to people's efforts to manage their public images as self-presentation or impression management (Goffman, 1959; Schlenker, 2012). Some researchers use different terms for the process of controlling one's public image depending on whether the efforts are honest or deceitful and whether they involve impressions of one's personal characteristics or information about one's social roles and identity. But we will use the terms interchangeably to refer to any intentional effort to convey a particular impression of oneself to another person without respect to the accuracy or content of the effort.

Tactics of Self-presentation

Nearly every aspect of people's behavior provides information from which others can draw inferences about them, but actions are considered self-presentational only if they are enacted, at least in part, with the goal of leading other people to perceive the individual in a particular way. People convey information about their personal and social characteristics using a wide array of tactics.

Verbal Claims

The most direct self-presentational tactics involve verbal statements that make a particular claim regarding one's personal or social characteristics.

Access options

Save book to kindle.

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle .

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service .

• Self-presentation: Signaling Personal and Social Characteristics
• By Mark R. Leary , Duke University, Katrina P. Jongman-Sereno , Duke University
• Edited by Judee K. Burgoon , University of Arizona , Nadia Magnenat-Thalmann , Université de Genève , Maja Pantic , Imperial College London , Alessandro Vinciarelli , University of Glasgow
• Book: Social Signal Processing
• Online publication: 13 July 2017
• Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316676202.007

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox .

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive .

• Skip to main content
• Skip to primary sidebar

IResearchNet

Self-Presentation

Self-presentation definition.

Self-presentation refers to how people attempt to present themselves to control or shape how others (called the audience) view them. It involves expressing oneself and behaving in ways that create a desired impression. Self-presentation is part of a broader set of behaviors called impression management. Impression management refers to the controlled presentation of information about all sorts of things, including information about other people or events. Self-presentation refers specifically to information about the self.

Self-Presentation History and Modern Usage

Early work on impression management focused on its manipulative, inauthentic uses that might typify a used car salesperson who lies to sell a car, or someone at a job interview who embellishes accomplishments to get a job. However, researchers now think of self-presentation more broadly as a pervasive aspect of life. Although some aspects of self-presentation are deliberate and effortful (and at times deceitful), other aspects are automatic and done with little or no conscious thought. For example, a woman may interact with many people during the day and may make different impressions on each person. When she starts her day at her apartment, she chats with her roommates and cleans up after breakfast, thereby presenting the image of being a good friend and responsible roommate. During classes, she responds to her professor’s questions and carefully takes notes, presenting the image of being a good student. Later that day, she calls her parents and tells them about her classes and other activities (although likely leaving out information about some activities), presenting the image of being a loving and responsible daughter. That night, she might go to a party or dancing with friends, presenting the image of being fun and easygoing. Although some aspects of these self-presentations may be deliberate and conscious, other aspects are not. For example, chatting with her roommates and cleaning up after breakfast may be habitual behaviors that are done with little conscious thought. Likewise, she may automatically hold the door open for an acquaintance or buy a cup of coffee for a friend. These behaviors, although perhaps not done consciously or with self-presentation in mind, nevertheless convey an image of the self to others.

Although people have the ability to present images that are false, self-presentations are often genuine; they reflect an attempt by the person to have others perceive him or her accurately, or at least consistent with how the person perceives himself or herself. Self-presentations can vary as a function of the audience; people present different aspects of themselves to different audiences or under different conditions. A man likely presents different aspects of himself to his close friends than he does to his elderly grandmother, and a woman may present a different image to her spouse than she does to her employer. This is not to say that these different images are false. Rather, they represent different aspects of the self. The self is much like a gem with multiple facets. The gem likely appears differently depending on the angle at which it is viewed. However, the various appearances are all genuine. Even if people present a self-image that they know to be false, they may begin to internalize the self-image and thereby eventually come to believe the self-pres

entation. For example, a man may initially present an image of being a good student without believing it to be genuine, but after attending all his classes for several weeks, visiting the professor during office hours, and asking questions during class, he may come to see himself as truly being a good student. This internalization process is most likely to occur when people make a public commitment to the self-image, when the behavior is at least somewhat consistent with their self-image, and when they receive positive feedback or other rewards for presenting the self-image.

Self-presentation is often directed to external audiences such as friends, lovers, employers, teachers, children, and even strangers. Self-presentation is more likely to be conscious when the presenter depends on the audience for some reward, expects to interact with the audience in the future, wants something from the audience, or values the audience’s approval. Yet self-presentation extends beyond audiences that are physically present to imagined audiences, and these imagined audiences can have distinct effects on behavior. A young man at a party might suddenly think about his parents and change his behavior from rambunctious to reserved. People sometimes even make self-presentations only for themselves. For instance, people want to claim certain identities, such as being fun, intelligent, kind, moral, and they may behave in line with these identities even in private.

Self-Presentation Goals

Self-presentation is inherently goal-directed; people present certain images because they benefit from the images in some way. The most obvious benefits are interpersonal, arising from getting others to do what one wants. A job candidate may convey an image of being hardworking and dependable to get a job; a salesperson may convey an image of being trustworthy and honest to achieve a sale. People may also benefit from their self-presentations by gaining respect, power, liking, or other desirable social rewards. Finally, people make certain impressions on others to maintain a sense of who they are, or their self-concept. For example, a man who wants to think of himself as a voracious reader might join a book club or volunteer at a library, or a woman who wishes to perceive herself as generous may contribute lavishly to a charitable cause. Even when there are few or no obvious benefits of a particular self-presentation, people may simply present an image that is consistent with the way they like to think about themselves, or at least the way they are accustomed to thinking about themselves.

Much of self-presentation is directed toward achieving one of two desirable images. First, people want to appear likeable. People like others who are attractive, interesting, and fun to be with. Thus, a sizable proportion of self-presentation revolves around developing, maintaining, and enhancing appearance and conveying and emphasizing characteristics that others desire, admire, and enjoy. Second, people want to appear competent. People like others who are skilled and able, and thus another sizable proportion of self-presentation revolves around conveying an image of competence. Yet, self-presentation is not so much about presenting desirable images as it is about presenting desired images, and some desired images are not necessarily desirable. For example, schoolyard bullies may present an image of being dangerous or intimidating to gain or maintain power over others. Some people present themselves as weak or infirmed (or exaggerate their weaknesses) to gain help from others. For instance, a member of a group project may display incompetence in the hope that other members will do more of the work, or a child may exaggerate illness to avoid going to school.

Self-Presentation Avenues

People self-present in a variety of ways. Perhaps most obviously, people self-present in what they say. These verbalizations can be direct claims of a particular image, such as when a person claims to be altruistic. They also can be indirect, such as when a person discloses personal behaviors or standards (e.g., “I volunteer at a hospital”). Other verbal presentations emerge when people express attitudes or beliefs. Divulging that one enjoys backpacking through Europe conveys the image that one is a world-traveler. Second, people self-present nonverbally in their physical appearance, body language, and other behavior. Smiling, eye contact, and nods of agreement can convey a wealth of information. Third, people self-present through the props they surround themselves with and through their associations. Driving an expensive car or flying first class conveys an image of having wealth, whereas an array of diplomas and certificates on one’s office walls conveys an image of education and expertise. Likewise, people judge others based on their associations. For example, being in the company of politicians or movie stars conveys an image of importance, and not surprisingly, many people display photographs of themselves with famous people. In a similar vein, high school students concerned with their status are often careful about which classmates they are seen and not seen with publicly. Being seen by others in the company of someone from a member of a disreputable group can raise questions about one’s own social standing.

Self-Presentation Pitfalls

Self-presentation is most successful when the image presented is consistent with what the audience thinks or knows to be true. The more the image presented differs from the image believed or anticipated by the audience, the less willing the audience will be to accept the image. For example, the lower a student’s grade is on the first exam, the more difficulty he or she will have in convincing a professor that he or she will earn an A on the next exam. Self-presentations are constrained by audience knowledge. The more the audience knows about a person, the less freedom the person has in claiming a particular identity. An audience that knows very little about a person will be more accepting of whatever identity the person conveys, whereas an audience that knows a great deal about a person will be less accepting.

People engaging in self-presentation sometimes encounter difficulties that undermine their ability to convey a desired image. First, people occasionally encounter the multiple audience problem, in which they must simultaneously present two conflicting images. For example, a student while walking with friends who know only her rebellious, impetuous side may run into her professor who knows only her serious, conscientious side. The student faces the dilemma of conveying the conflicting images of rebellious friend and serious student. When both audiences are present, the student must try to behave in a way that is consistent with how her friends view her, but also in a way that is consistent with how her professor views her. Second, people occasionally encounter challenges to their self-presentations. The audience may not believe the image the person presents. Challenges are most likely to arise when people are managing impressions through self-descriptions and the self-descriptions are inconsistent with other evidence. For example, a man who claims to be good driver faces a self-presentational dilemma if he is ticketed or gets in an automobile accident. Third, self-presentations can fail when people lack the cognitive resources to present effectively because, for example, they are tired, anxious, or distracted. For instance, a woman may yawn uncontrollably or reflexively check her watch while talking to a boring classmate, unintentionally conveying an image of disinterest.

Some of the most important images for people to convey are also the hardest. As noted earlier, among the most important images people want to communicate are likeability and competence. Perhaps because these images are so important and are often rewarded, audiences may be skeptical of accepting direct claims of likeability and competence from presenters, thinking that the person is seeking personal gain. Thus, people must resort to indirect routes to create these images, and the indirect routes can be misinterpreted. For example, the student who sits in the front row of the class and asks a lot of questions may be trying to project an image of being a competent student but may be perceived negatively as a teacher’s pet by fellow students.

Finally, there is a dark side to self-presentation. In some instances, the priority people place on their appearances or images can threaten their health. People who excessively tan are putting a higher priority on their appearance (e.g., being tan) than on their health (e.g., taking precautions to avoid skin cancer). Similarly, although condoms help protect against sexually transmitted diseases and unwanted pregnancy, self-presentational concerns may dissuade partners or potential partners from discussing, carrying, or using condoms. Women may fear that carrying condoms makes them seem promiscuous or easy, whereas men may fear that carrying condoms makes them seem presumptuous, as if they are expecting to have sex. Self-presentational concerns may also influence interactions with health care providers and may lead people to delay or avoid embarrassing medical tests and procedures or treatments for conditions that are embarrassing. For example, people may be reluctant to seek tests or treatment for sexually transmitted diseases, loss of bladder control, mental disorders, mental decline, or other conditions associated with weakness or incompetence. Finally, concerns with social acceptance may prompt young people to engage in risky behaviors such as excessive alcohol consumption, sexual promiscuity, or juvenile delinquency.

References:

• Jones, E. E., Pittman, T. S. (1982). Toward a general theory of strategic self-presentation. In J. Suls (Ed.), Psychological perspectives on the self (Vol. 1, pp. 231-260). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
• Leary, M. R. (1996). Self-presentation: Impression management and interpersonal behavior. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
• Leary, M. R., Tchividjian, L. R., & Kraxberger, B. E. (1994). Self-presentation can be hazardous to your health: Impression management and health risk. Health Psychology, 13, 461-470.
• Schlenker, B. R. (1980). Impression management: The self-concept, social identity, and interpersonal relations. Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.

The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life

Theo Wargo / Getty Images

• Recommended Reading
• Key Concepts
• Major Sociologists
• News & Issues
• Research, Samples, and Statistics
• Archaeology

The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life is a book published in the U.S. in 1959, by sociologist Erving Goffman. In it, Goffman uses the imagery of theater in order to portray the nuances and significance of face-to-face social interaction. Goffman puts forth a theory of social interaction that he refers to as the dramaturgical model of social life.

According to Goffman, social interaction may be likened to a theater, and people in everyday life to actors on a stage, each playing a variety of roles. The audience consists of other individuals who observe the role-playing and react to the performances. In social interaction, like in theatrical performances, there is a 'front stage' region where the actors are on stage  before an audience, and their consciousness of that audience and the audience's expectations for the role they should play influence the actor's behavior. There is also a back region, or backstage, where individuals can relax, and be themselves in front of others.

Central to the book and Goffman 's theory is the idea that people, as they interact in social settings, are constantly engaged in the process of "impression management," wherein each tries to present themselves and behave in a way that will prevent embarrassment of themselves or others. This is primarily done by each person who is part of the interaction working to ensure that all parties have the same "definition of the situation," meaning that all understand what is meant to happen in that situation, what to expect from the others involved, and thus how they should behave.

Though written over half a century ago,  The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life  remains one of the most famous and widely taught sociology books, listed as the 10th most important sociology book of the 20th century by the International Sociological Association in 1998.

Performance

Goffman uses the term performance to refer to all activity of an individual in front of a particular set of observers, or audience. Through this performance, the individual, or actor, gives meaning to themselves, to others, and to their situation. These performances deliver impressions to others, communicating information that confirms the actor's identity in that situation. The actor may or may not be aware of their performance or have an objective for their performance, however, the audience is constantly attributing meaning to it and the actor.

The setting for the performance includes the scenery, props, and location where the interaction takes place. Different settings will have different audiences and will thus require the actor to alter his performance for each setting.

Appearance functions to portray the performer’s social status to the audience. Appearance also tells us of the individual’s temporary social state or role, for example, whether he is engaging in work (by wearing a uniform), informal recreation, or a formal social activity. Here, dress and props communicate things that have socially ascribed meaning, like gender , status, occupation, age, and personal commitments.

Manner refers to how the individual plays the role and functions to warn the audience of how the performer will act or seek to act in a role (for example, dominant, aggressive, receptive, etc.). Inconsistency and contradiction between appearance and manner may occur and will confuse and upset an audience. This can happen, for example, when one does not present himself or behave by his perceived social status or position.

The actor’s front, as labeled by Goffman, is the part of the individual’s performance that defines the situation for the audience. It is the image or impression he or she gives to the audience. A social front can also be thought of as a script. Certain social scripts tend to become institutionalized in terms of the stereotyped expectations they contain. Certain situations or scenarios have social scripts that suggest how the actor should behave or interact. If the individual takes on a task or role that is new to him or her, he or she may find there are already several well-established fronts among which he or she must choose. According to Goffman, when a task is given a new front or script, we rarely find the script is completely new. Individuals commonly use pre-established scripts to follow for new situations, even if it is not completely appropriate or desired.

Front Stage, Back Stage, and Off Stage

In stage drama , as in everyday interactions, according to Goffman, there are three regions, each with different effects on an individual’s performance: front stage, backstage, and off-stage. The front stage is where the actor formally performs and adheres to conventions that have particular meaning for the audience. The actor knows he or she is being watched and acts accordingly.

When in the backstage region , the actor may behave differently than when in front of the audience on the front stage. This is where the individual truly gets to be herself and get rid of the roles she plays when in front of other people.

Finally, the off-stage region is where individual actors meet the audience members independently of the team performance on the front stage. Specific performances may be given when the audience is segmented as such.

• Stigma: Notes on the Management of Spoiled Identity
• Émile Durkheim: "Suicide: A Study in Sociology"
• Definition of the Sociological Imagination and Overview of the Book
• McDonaldization: Definition and Overview of the Concept
• Overview of The History of Sexuality
• An Overview of the Book Democracy in America
• Malcolm Gladwell's "The Tipping Point"
• The Main Points of "The Communist Manifesto"
• Understanding Durkheim's Division of Labor
• Savage Inequalities: Children in America’s Schools
• A Book Overview: "The Protestant Ethic and The Spirit Of Capitalism"
• The Social Transformation of American Medicine
• The Asch Conformity Experiments
• Famous Sociologists
• A Biography of Erving Goffman
• Goffman's Front-Stage and Backstage Behavior

• Personality

Self-Presentation in the Digital World

Do traditional personality theories predict digital behaviour.

Posted August 31, 2021 | Reviewed by Chloe Williams

• What Is Personality?
• Take our Agreeableness Test
• Find a therapist near me
• Personality theories can help explain real-world differences in self-presentation behaviours but they may not apply to online behaviours.
• In the real world, women have higher levels of behavioural inhibition tendencies than men and are more likely to avoid displeasing others.
• Based on this assumption, one would expect women to present themselves less on social media, but women tend to use social media more than men.

Digital technology allows people to construct and vary their self-identity more easily than they can in the real world. This novel digital- personality construction may, or may not, be helpful to that person in the long run, but it is certainly more possible than it is in the real world. Yet how this relates to "personality," as described by traditional personality theories, is not really known. Who will tend to manipulate their personality online, and would traditional personality theories predict these effects? A look at what we do know about gender differences in the real and digital worlds suggests that many aspects of digital behaviour may not conform to the expectations of personality theories developed for the real world.

Half a century ago, Goffman suggested that individuals establish social identities by employing self-presentation tactics and impression management . Self-presentational tactics are techniques for constructing or manipulating others’ impressions of the individual and ultimately help to develop that person’s identity in the eyes of the world. The ways other people react are altered by choosing how to present oneself – that is, self-presentation strategies are used for impression management . Others then uphold, shape, or alter that self-image , depending on how they react to the tactics employed. This implies that self-presentation is a form of social communication, by which people establish, maintain, and alter their social identity.

These self-presentational strategies can be " assertive " or "defensive." 1 Assertive strategies are associated with active control of the person’s self-image; and defensive strategies are associated with protecting a desired identity that is under threat. In the real world, the use of self-presentational tactics has been widely studied and has been found to relate to many behaviours and personalities 2 . Yet, despite the enormous amounts of time spent on social media , the types of self-presentational tactics employed on these platforms have not received a huge amount of study. In fact, social media appears to provide an ideal opportunity for the use of self-presentational tactics, especially assertive strategies aimed at creating an identity in the eyes of others.

Seeking to Experience Different Types of Reward

Social media allows individuals to present themselves in ways that are entirely reliant on their own behaviours – and not on factors largely beyond their ability to instantly control, such as their appearance, gender, etc. That is, the impression that the viewer of the social media post receives is dependent, almost entirely, on how or what another person posts 3,4 . Thus, the digital medium does not present the difficulties for individuals who wish to divorce the newly-presented self from the established self. New personalities or "images" may be difficult to establish in real-world interactions, as others may have known the person beforehand, and their established patterns of interaction. Alternatively, others may not let people get away with "out of character" behaviours, or they may react to their stereotype of the person in front of them, not to their actual behaviours. All of which makes real-life identity construction harder.

Engaging in such impression management may stem from motivations to experience different types of reward 5 . In terms of one personality theory, individuals displaying behavioural approach tendencies (the Behavioural Activation System; BAS) and behavioural inhibition tendencies (the Behavioural Inhibition System; BIS) will differ in terms of self-presentation behaviours. Those with strong BAS seek opportunities to receive or experience reward (approach motivation ); whereas, those with strong BIS attempt to avoid punishment (avoidance motivation). People who need to receive a lot of external praise may actively seek out social interactions and develop a lot of social goals in their lives. Those who are more concerned about not incurring other people’s displeasure may seek to defend against this possibility and tend to withdraw from people. Although this is a well-established view of personality in the real world, it has not received strong attention in terms of digital behaviours.

Real-World Personality Theories May Not Apply Online

One test bed for the application of this theory in the digital domain is predicted gender differences in social media behaviour in relation to self-presentation. Both self-presentation 1 , and BAS and BIS 6 , have been noted to show gender differences. In the real world, women have shown higher levels of BIS than men (at least, to this point in time), although levels of BAS are less clearly differentiated between genders. This view would suggest that, in order to avoid disapproval, women will present themselves less often on social media; and, where they do have a presence, adopt defensive self-presentational strategies.

The first of these hypotheses is demonstrably false – where there are any differences in usage (and there are not that many), women tend to use social media more often than men. What we don’t really know, with any certainty, is how women use social media for self-presentation, and whether this differs from men’s usage. In contrast to the BAS/BIS view of personality, developed for the real world, several studies have suggested that selfie posting can be an assertive, or even aggressive, behaviour for females – used in forming a new personality 3 . In contrast, sometimes selfie posting by males is related to less aggressive, and more defensive, aspects of personality 7 . It may be that women take the opportunity to present very different images of themselves online from their real-world personalities. All of this suggests that theories developed for personality in the real world may not apply online – certainly not in terms of putative gender-related behaviours.

We know that social media allows a new personality to be presented easily, which is not usually seen in real-world interactions, and it may be that real-world gender differences are not repeated in digital contexts. Alternatively, it may suggest that these personality theories are now simply hopelessly anachronistic – based on assumptions that no longer apply. If that were the case, it would certainly rule out any suggestion that such personalities are genetically determined – as we know that structure hasn’t changed dramatically in the last 20 years.

1. Lee, S.J., Quigley, B.M., Nesler, M.S., Corbett, A.B., & Tedeschi, J.T. (1999). Development of a self-presentation tactics scale. Personality and Individual Differences, 26(4), 701-722.

2. Laghi, F., Pallini, S., & Baiocco, R. (2015). Autopresentazione efficace, tattiche difensive e assertive e caratteristiche di personalità in Adolescenza. Rassegna di Psicologia, 32(3), 65-82.

3. Chua, T.H.H., & Chang, L. (2016). Follow me and like my beautiful selfies: Singapore teenage girls’ engagement in self-presentation and peer comparison on social media. Computers in Human Behavior, 55, 190-197.

4. Fox, J., & Rooney, M.C. (2015). The Dark Triad and trait self-objectification as predictors of men’s use and self-presentation behaviors on social networking sites. Personality and Individual Differences, 76, 161-165.

5. Hermann, A.D., Teutemacher, A.M., & Lehtman, M.J. (2015). Revisiting the unmitigated approach model of narcissism: Replication and extension. Journal of Research in Personality, 55, 41-45.

6. Carver, C.S., & White, T.L. (1994). Behavioral inhibition, behavioral activation, and affective responses to impending reward and punishment: the BIS/BAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67(2), 319.

7. Sorokowski, P., Sorokowska, A., Frackowiak, T., Karwowski, M., Rusicka, I., & Oleszkiewicz, A. (2016). Sex differences in online selfie posting behaviors predict histrionic personality scores among men but not women. Computers in Human Behavior, 59, 368-373.

Phil Reed, Ph.D., is a professor of psychology at Swansea University.

• Find a Therapist
• Find a Treatment Center
• Find a Psychiatrist
• Find a Support Group
• Find Online Therapy
• United States
• Brooklyn, NY
• Chicago, IL
• Houston, TX
• Los Angeles, CA
• New York, NY
• Portland, OR
• San Diego, CA
• San Francisco, CA
• Seattle, WA
• Washington, DC
• Asperger's
• Bipolar Disorder
• Chronic Pain
• Eating Disorders
• Passive Aggression
• Goal Setting
• Positive Psychology
• Stopping Smoking
• Low Sexual Desire
• Relationships
• Child Development
• Self Tests NEW
• Therapy Center
• Diagnosis Dictionary
• Types of Therapy

It’s increasingly common for someone to be diagnosed with a condition such as ADHD or autism as an adult. A diagnosis often brings relief, but it can also come with as many questions as answers.

• Emotional Intelligence
• Gaslighting
• Affective Forecasting
• Neuroscience

• Open access
• Published: 10 September 2024

Mirror, mirror on my screen: Focus on self-presentation on social media is associated with perfectionism and disordered eating among adolescents. Results from the “LifeOnSoMe”-study

• Hilde Einarsdatter Danielsen 1 , 2 ,
• Turi Reiten Finserås 1 ,
• Amanda Iselin Olesen Andersen 1 ,
• Gunnhild Johnsen Hjetland 1 , 3 ,
• Vivian Woodfin 2 , 4 &
• Jens Christoffer Skogen 1 , 3 , 5  

BMC Public Health volume  24 , Article number:  2466 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

135 Accesses

Metrics details

Social media use, perfectionism, and disordered eating have all increased over the last decades. Some studies indicate that there is a relationship between self-presentation behaviors and being exposed to others’ self-presentation on social media, and disordered eating. Studies also show that the relationship between focus on self-presentation and highly visual social media is stronger than for non-visual social media, hence facilitating upward social comparison. Nevertheless, no previous studies have investigated the link between adolescents’ focus on self-presentation and upward social comparison on social media, and perfectionism and disordered eating, which is the aim of the present study.

The present study is based on a cross-sectional survey from the “LifeOnSoMe”-study ( N  = 3424), conducted in 2020 and 2021. Respondents were high school students (mean age 17.3 years, 56% females) in Bergen, Norway. Multiple regression analysis was performed, where SPAUSCIS, a measure of self-presentation and upward social comparison, was the independent variable. Perfectionism and disordered eating were dependent variables. Self-reported age, gender, and subjective socioeconomic status were used as covariates, as well as frequency and duration of social media use. Regression models were performed to compare proportions across the median split of SPAUSCIS.

The multiple regression analysis showed that increased focus on self-presentation and upward social comparison on social media were positively associated with both perfectionism (standardized coefficient 0.28) and disordered eating. A stronger association for girls than boys was found for disordered eating (standardized coefficient 0.39 for girls and 0.29 for boys). There was no gender moderation for perfectionism.

Conclusions

Findings suggest that focus on self-presentation and upward social comparison on social media is associated with perfectionism and disordered eating. We recommend promoting a healthy use of social media. This could be established by increasing adolescents’ ability to reflect on and think critically about self-presentation and upward social comparison on social media.

Peer Review reports

Introduction

Growing up today means growing up in a highly digitalized world where social media and online communication plays an important role in adolescents’ lives. Social media can be defined as “highly interactive platforms via which individuals and communities share, co-create, discuss, and modify user-generated content” [ 1 , pp. 241]. Previous studies have largely focused on the temporal aspects of social media use, and some studies indicate that social media use is associated with more mental health problems and decreased well-being [ 2 ]. For example, there are reports that more time spent on social media is associated with symptoms of depression and anxiety [ 3 , 4 ], sleep issues [ 3 , 5 ], and body dissatisfaction [ 6 ]. However, not all research confirms these associations [ 7 , 8 ], and recent studies have indicated that the observed link between time spent on social media and mental health is too small to be of practical importance [ 9 ]. A recent longitudinal study found time spent on social media to be the least important factor in relation to adolescent mental health [ 10 ]. Nevertheless, there is an ongoing and almost ubiquitous concern regarding social media’s potential negative effect on mental health. Considering this, it is increasingly recognized that it is important to investigate more than adolescents’ time spent on social media, such as their usage patterns. After all, social media offers a range of opportunities, such as seeking out like-minded others or specific topics and inspiration, for example, for food, fitness, and a healthy lifestyle. Although inspirational hashtags and pictures may be positive to many adolescents, they also frequently present a “perfect” lifestyle and some of them could even be considered unhealthy inspirations.

• Self-presentation

Self-presentation on social media has been highlighted as potentially important in connection with mental health and well-being among adolescents [e.g. 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 ]. Baumeister & Hutton [ 15 ] defined self-presentation as an individual practice related to how one presents oneself to others, motivated by a wish to make a socially desirable impression on others, and simultaneously, stay true to one’s beliefs and ideals. On social media, self-presentation may include presenting and sharing self-made content, posting of personal opinions, sharing online content of interest, and “selfies” and pictures [ 14 , 16 ]. An American report noted that adolescents are more engaged in self-presentation activities on social media than any other age group [ 17 ]. As increased independence from parents is an important developmental milestone for adolescents, external validation from others may be particularly important for this age group [ 18 ]. Feedback on social media posts through likes and comments, may therefore be an important source of external validation from peers. Considering this, it is likely that many adolescents put great importance on how they present themselves on social media. In addition, social media is a suitable arena for self-presenting activities, as it gives the adolescent control over what, when and how to present themselves on the platform of their choosing [ 12 ]. Functions such as likes, comments, followers [ 19 ], and other measures of engagement, which are implemented on many social media platforms in one form or another, give ample opportunity for immediate feedback on posted content. Hence, this provides cues of social desirability and direction to align future social media posts with how the adolescents prefer to present themselves on these platforms [ 12 ]. These features of social media, in addition to the ability to reach a large and varied audience, may serve to facilitate self-presentation [ 20 ].

Self-presentation behaviors [e.g. 13 , 14 ] on social media are closely connected to focus on self-presentatio n [ 12 , 21 , 22 ]. Focus on self-presentation consist of caring about how you present yourself on social media, e.g., retouching pictures before posting them, caring about having a nice social media feed or striving for positive feedback on your social media posts, and can be independent of how much or how often a person post something [ 12 , 21 ]. As such, focus on self-presentation differs from self-presentation behaviors, which have been more extensively researched [e.g. 13 , 14 ]. A study showed that many adolescents have a desire to focus less on their self-presentation on social media, but that they think it is hard to resist the pressure of having a good feed and receiving positive feedback such as likes, comments, and followers [ 23 ]. A higher focus on self-presentation has been linked to the use of highly visual social media platforms like Instagram, TikTok and Facebook, rather than less visual platforms [ 12 ].

Likewise, use of social media has been linked to more social comparison, and in particular upward social comparison [ 24 , 25 ]. Social comparison is the propensity to compare one’s characteristics to other people to obtain information about how we are doing relative to others [ 26 ]. Upward social comparison occurs when one compares oneself to someone perceived as better or with higher status than oneself, which may be especially prevailing on social media. One study found that social media users mostly presume that other users have better lives than themselves [ 27 ]. Moreover, following a large number of people on social media increases the reference group to which adolescents compare themselves, and may include high-status people like “influencers” and celebrities [ 28 ]. Upward social comparison has been reported to be associated with more negative feelings such as depression and lower life satisfaction [ 11 , 29 ], and more body dissatisfaction [ 30 ]. Hawes et al. [ 31 ] also found that preoccupation with appearance comparison on social media was linked to symptoms of anxiety and depression among adolescents. Thus, while self-presentation on social media may not be harmful, feedback-seeking and upward social comparison may be damaging to mental health.

• Perfectionism

In addition to being a central period for self-presentation activities, adolescence seems to be a particularly susceptible period for the development of perfectionism. Perfectionism is a personality disposition that may be defined as the tendency to set unrealistically high performance standards and striving for flawlessness [ 32 ]. Perfectionism is thought to be a disposition largely consolidated in adolescence as a part of a general identity formation [ 18 ].

Over the last 30 years, there has been an increase in perfectionistic personality traits among young adults [ 33 ]. Curran & Hill [ 33 ] hypothesize that this might be a consequence of the rise of a competitive cultural trend, and also the advent of social media in young peoples’ lives. As social media gives adolescents control over how they self-present, social media also allows them to create a (highly) specific and “ideal” image of themselves. Considering these perspectives, Curran & Hill [ 33 ] suggest that young people perceive their social context as more demanding and subsequently believe others will evaluate them more harshly. An experimental study investigating the effect of selfie taking and posting on social media on women’s mood and body image, concluded that the psychological states subsequent of posting the selfies, was related to self-consciousness and/or fear of being negatively evaluated [ 14 ]. Thus, adolescents of today may to a larger extent strive for perfectionistic self-presentation in order to secure acceptance among peers than older generations. Hewitt et al. [ 34 ] suggested the concept of perfectionistic self-presentation and argued that this is a maladaptive self-presentation style. One facet of perfectionistic self-presentation is perfectionistic self-promotion, which includes proclaiming and displaying one’s perfection [ 34 ]. Through features such as likes, comments and followers, social media may be a key arena for perfectionistic self-presentation and self-promotion, and hence a way of seeking external validation and approval in a socially acceptable way among adolescents.

A study found that perfectionistic concerns predicted longitudinal change in self-presentation and that perfectionistic self-presentation was linked to decreased well-being [ 35 ]. Hence, perfectionistic concerns indirectly affected subjective well-being through self-presentation [ 35 ]. Perfectionistic self-presentation also predicted changes in both positive and negative affect [ 35 ]. In a meta-analysis, perfectionism was found to be positively associated to different psychological disorders and symptoms, including body dissatisfaction, and eating disorders [ 36 ].

• Disordered eating

Previous research has linked disordered eating to self-presentation [ 25 ] and to perfectionism [ 36 , 37 , 38 ]. A person with disordered eating will be obsessed with food and have constant thoughts about eating, body shape, weight, and food. Symptoms of disordered eating above a certain level may constitute an eating disorder according to the criteria in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM 5th Ed.) [ 39 ] and the International Classification of Mental and Behavioral Disorders (ICD-10) [ 40 ]. A meta-analysis reported that over the last 20 years, there has been an increase in the weighted means of point eating disorder prevalence from 3.5% for the years 2000–2006 to 7.5% for the years 2013–2018 [ 41 ]. The prevalence for eating disorder was consistently higher among women compared to men regardless of timeframe (lifetime, 12-months, point prevalence). In the same meta-analysis, the authors also stressed the finding that eating disorders are highly prevalent in adolescence, with an estimated point prevalence between 6% and 8% [ 41 ].

As a great deal of content on social media promotes pictures of healthy food, diets, exercise, and appearance-focused images and idealized bodies, concerns have been raised that social media may contribute to body image concerns and disordered eating, especially among adolescents [ 42 , 43 ]. A systematic review, conducted by Holland & Tiggemann [ 43 ] showed that exposure to content on Facebook, in particular photo-based activity, was positively associated with negative body image and disordered eating behaviours in children, adolescents, and young adults. Another study found similar results; more exposure to appearance-related pictures on Facebook was associated with self-objectification, weight dissatisfaction, thin ideal internalization, and drive for thinness among girls [ 44 ].

Similarly, research indicates that exposure to others’ “perfect” self-presentations on social media may reinforce one’s own body image concerns and disordered eating [ 24 , 25 ]. Fardouly et al. [ 24 ] investigated young adult women’s appearance comparisons in different contexts in everyday life. They found that most of the appearance comparisons were made in person and on social media, and that the participants made relatively more upward appearance comparisons on social media than in person. They also found that upward appearance comparisons made on social media were associated with more body dissatisfaction than in person. In addition, upward appearance comparisons on social media yielded more thoughts about dieting than in person comparisons, but no difference in the likelihood of dieting-behaviours [ 24 ].

Furthermore, Rodgers et al. [ 25 ] found that social media use was positively correlated with higher internalization of appearance ideals, including a higher tendency to engage in appearance comparison, body dissatisfaction, muscle change behaviours and dietary restraints among both boys and girls. In addition, the internalization of social media ideals, the muscular ideals and appearance comparisons, were positively associated with body dissatisfaction, muscle change behaviours and dietary restraints. Other research has reported similar results [ 6 , 45 ]. Mclean et al. [ 45 ] found for instance, that self-presentation on social media was associated with internalization of social media ideals, and that the internalization mediated the effect of social media on appearance upward comparison and body dissatisfaction. A scoping review conducted by Dane & Bhatia [ 46 ] also reported that in cases where social media use led to eating disorder, the thin/fit body ideal internalization and social comparison often functioned as mediating pathways.

Theoretical framework, summary and the current study

The Tripartite Influence Model (TIM) may serve as a theoretical framework linking the concept of focus on self-presentation and upward social comparison on social media, with perfectionism and disordered eating [ 47 ]. The Tripartite Influence Model is a framework that can be used when exploring the relationship between social media use and body dissatisfaction. It proposes that pressures from peers, family and media makes one conform to certain appearance ideals, which can lead to internalization of body ideals, followed by physical appearance comparison with others [ 48 ]. This study’s focus on self-presentation and upward social comparison on social media, aligns with the Tripartite Influence Model’s emphasis on how media and peers (e.g. to what content that receives positive feedback from peers), may contribute to adolescents’ perception of ideal body standards. Findings indicate that higher focus on self-presentation is more strongly linked to visual social media platforms than less visual platforms [ 12 ]. This support the Tripartite Influence Model theory that media pressure, especially through highly visual social media, leads to increased body ideal internalization an upward comparison with others. Additionally, the association between social media use and disordered eating can be understood through pressure to conform to societal ideals, such as body ideals, as proposed in the Tripartite Influence Model. Perfectionism, which is linked to disordered eating [ 36 , 37 , 38 ], may be driven by similar societal pressures.

Research on adolescents’ use of social media is increasingly shifting focus away from looking merely at time spent to include potential consequences of specific aspects of adolescents’ social media usage patterns [ 2 ]. The use of social media, perfectionism, and disordered eating have all increased over the last decades [ 33 , 41 , 49 ]. Studies indicate a relationship between being exposed to how others present themselves on social media and body dissatisfaction and disordered eating [ 24 , 25 , 43 ], and some studies have also investigated the relationship between self-presentation behaviors and body dissatisfaction [ 13 , 14 , 30 ]. Moving beyond self-presentation behaviors, such as the frequency or content of social media posts, one study showed that being preoccupied with appearance on social media, was associated with increased risk for problems like appearance related anxiety and disordered eating [ 22 ]. In two previous studies, we showed that preoccupation with likes and comments, retouching photos of oneself, deleting photos with too few likes, and upward social comparison, collectively referred to as “focus on self-presentation”, was associated with more symptoms of anxiety and depression [ 12 ] and that focus on self-presentation varied significantly between adolescents [ 21 ].

Hence, the aim of the present study is to investigated the link between focus on self-presentation on social media, and perfectionism and disordered eating. Based on previous studies we hypothesize that focus on self-presentation and upward social comparison is positively associated with (i) perfectionism and (ii) disordered eating, and (iii) self-reported diagnosis of an eating disorder.

Materials and methods

Study sample.

This study is based on data from the “LifeOnSoMe” study carried out at public senior high schools in Bergen, Norway. Pupils aged 16 or older were invited to participate, giving an age range from 16 to 21 years old. Information about the survey was conveyed both by the teacher and digitally. The online web survey was conducted digitally. One school hour was set aside for carrying out the survey. The total number of eligible participants was 3,424 (mean age was 17.3 years (standard deviation 1.0)), and 56% ( n  = 1916) of the participants were girls. This study included data from two survey waves conducted in September-October 2020 and June-September 2021. For participants who responded in both waves, only their 2020 responses were used in this analysis. The response rate was 53% in 2020 and 35% in 2021. The research data was stored on secure storage facilities located at the Norwegian Institute of Public Health, which prevent the authors from providing the data as supplementary information, according to the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). Only researchers with approval from the Regional Ethical Committee had access. The study was approved by the Regional Ethical Committee, and is in accordance with the General Data Protection Regulation. Additional information about the study is available elsewhere [ 23 , 50 ].

Self-reported sociodemographics

The participants reported their age, gender, and subjective socioeconomic status. A small proportion of the participants did not state their age ( n  = 157). For gender, participants could choose between three options: “girl”, “boy”, and “other/non-binary”. Because too few participants (< 50) answered “other/non-binary”, these were excluded from the data set due to privacy concerns. Relative socioeconomic status was assessed by asking the participants to estimate how economically well off their families are compared to others, ranging from «very poor» (scored 0) to «very well off» (scored 10).

Amount of social media use

Two questions were included related to social media use in general: “How often do you use social media?” and “On the days that you use social media, approximately how much time do you spend on social media?”, giving an estimate of the frequency and duration of their usage, respectively. For frequency, the response alternatives were “almost never”, “several times a month, but rarer than once a week”, “1–2 times per week”, “3–4 times per week”, “5–6 times per week”, “every day”, “several times each day”, and “almost constantly”. In the present study, we differentiated between “daily or less”, “many times a day”, and “almost constantly”. For duration, seven response alternatives ranging from “less than 30 min” to “more than 5 h” were available. In the present study, we differentiate between “<2 h”, “2–4 h”, “>4–5 h”, and “>5 h”.

Independent variable: Self-Presentation and Upward Social Comparison Inclination Scale (SPAUSCIS)

The items used to assess upward social comparison and aspects of self-presentation were developed based on focus group interviews with senior high school pupils [ 23 ], and have been shown to have adequate psychometric properties in both this sample [ 21 ] and elsewhere [ 12 ]. Cronbach’s \(\alpha\) was 0.87, indicating a very good internal consistency. The results of an exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) for the SPAUSCIS have been reported in a previous publication based on the “LifeOnSoMe”-data [ 21 ]. Also, EFA and CFA was investigated in another, smaller sample of senior high school students [ 12 ]. The results from both studies strongly suggested a unidimensional scale and the fit indices from CFA were all considered good. Examples of items included in SPAUSCIS are “I retouch images of myself to look better before I post them on social media”, “I use a lot of time and energy on the content I post on social media”, and “The response I get for what I post (images/status updates/stories) impacts how I feel”. The response categories were “not at all”, “very little”, “sometimes/partly true”, “a lot”, and “very much”, coded 1–5. The mean summed score thus ranges from 1 to 5, with higher scores indicating a higher focus on self-presentation and upward social comparison on social media.

Dependent variables: Perfectionism and disordered eating

Perfectionism (edi-p).

Perfectionism was assessed by the 6-item perfectionism scale in the Eating Disorders Inventory (EDI) for children and adolescents [ 51 ]. The perfectionism items (EDI-P) are usually rated on a 6-point Likert scale. In the present study, however, the response options were “not true” (scored 0) “sometimes true” (scored 1), and “true” (scored 2) in accordance with the version employed in the youth@hordaland survey [ 52 ]. This yields a potential score of 0–12 when the items are summed. Previous research has found that the EDI [ 53 ] and EDI-P [ 54 ] have satisfactory psychometric properties in similar populations. Cronbach’s \(\alpha\) was 0.72 in the present study, indicating acceptable internal consistency.

Eating Disturbance Scale (EDS-5)

Symptoms of disordered eating was assessed using the Eating Disturbance Scale (EDS-5) [ 55 ]. EDS-5 consists of five questions specifically related to eating, such as comfort eating (item 2) and strict dieting in order to control ones eating habits (item 4). The response options are “not true” (scored 0) “sometimes true” (scored 1), and “true” (scored 2), and the summed scored ranges between 0 and 10. The questionnaire have shown adequate psychometric properties and convergent validity in previous research [ 55 , 56 ]. Cronbach’s \(\alpha\) was 0.78 in the present study, indicating an acceptable internal consistency.

Operationalization of EDI-P and EDS-5

For the purposes of the present study, both EDI-P and EDS-5 were used as continuous measures, as well as dichotomous variables, differentiating between low and high scores based on the 90th percentile. The chosen cut-off point is informed by previous research which suggest this to be an adequate delineation for mental health problems [ 52 , 57 ].

Diagnosis of eating disorder

For the participants participating in the study in 2020, self-reported psychiatric diagnoses were available ( n  = 1978) using a pre-defined list adapted to fit this age-group. Initially, the participants had to answer “yes” or “no” to the question “Have you ever received a diagnosis for a mental health problem?”, followed up by a list of 11 possible different diagnoses for those who endorsed the initial question. The list was based on a similar operationalization used in a large population-based studies [ 58 , 59 ]. The list contained no definition of the included disorders or conditions. For this study, the participants who chose “Eating disorder” ( n  = 36; 1.8%) from the list were identified as having been diagnosed with the condition, and all others were designated as not having received the diagnosis.

Statistical procedure

First, summary statistics of the included variables for the whole sample were estimated across the median-split of SPAUSCIS and presented in Table  1 . For categorical variables, the number and proportions were estimated, and the mean and standard deviation (SD) was estimated for continuous variables. Comparisons across the median-split of SPAUSCIS was done using Pearson’s chi-squared tests for categorical variables, and Wilcoxon rank sum tests were used for continuous variables. Then, two simple linear regression models were estimated using SPAUSCIS as an independent variable and (a) score on perfectionism (EDI-P) and (b) score on disordered eating (EDS-5) as dependent variables, respectively. The scores of the dependent variables were standardized (Z-scored) to ease interpretation of the resulting coefficients. Potential gender-moderation was investigated by entering genderxSPAUSCIS in both models as an interaction term into the model. The interaction term was considered statistically significant with a p-value of < 0.05, and if significant, results from the linear regression model were then presented separately for girls and boys. Linearity of the association between SPAUSCIS and the dependent variables were investigated using restricted cubic splines with four knots. Next, two gender-specific multiple logistic regression models were estimated using the median-split of SPAUSCIS as the main independent variable, and the 90th percentile score on (a) perfectionism (EDI-P) and (b) disordered eating (EDS-5) as dependent variables, respectively. Both models were adjusted for usual amount of social media use and socioeconomic status, and the results are presented as odds ratios with corresponding 95% confidence intervals. The median-split of SPAUSCIS were used in these models for simplicity and ease of interpretability. In post-hoc analyses, we did however, investigate the association between SPAUSCIS as a continuous measure and the 90th percentile score (a) perfectionism (EDI-P) and (b) disordered eating (EDS-5) as dependent variables, respectively. This was done using logistic regression analyses with restricted cubic splines to test for non-linearity. Both these models were adjusted for usual amount of social media use and socioeconomic status, and the results are presented in-text as odds ratios for trends with corresponding 95% confidence intervals. Finally, we investigated the association between the median-split of SPAUSCIS and self-reported eating disorder using simple logistic regression. No adjustments or investigation of potential gender-moderation was included for the latter analyses as the number reporting eating disorder ( n  = 36) limited the statistical precision. Missing data ranged from n  = 2 (0.1%) to n  = 55 (1.6%) across analyses, and pairwise deletion was applied to ensure the highest number of observations in each analysis.

Descriptive statistics of the included variables are presented across the median split of score on SPAUSCIS in Table  1 . For all of the included variables, there were significant differences between the SPAUSCIS-groups (all p-values < 0.001). The group with median or above scores on SPAUSCIS were more likely to be girls, more likely to use social media more often and for a longer duration but reported a slightly lower subjective socioeconomic status. Furthermore, they were more likely to report higher scores on perfectionism (EDI-P) and disordered eating (EDS-5).

Results from gender-specific multiple logistic regression models with median-split of SPAUSCIS as dependent variable, and the 90th percentile score on (a) perfectionism (EDI-P) and (b) disordered eating (EDS-5) as dependent variables is presented in Table  2 . For boys and girls, scoring on or above the median on SPAUSCIS was associated with increased odds for both dependent variables. For both perfectionism and disordered eating, the models are adjusted for social media use and socioeconomic status. In the post-hoc analyses using SPAUSCIS as continuous variable, the odds ratios (OR) in relation to perfectionism were 1.88 (95% CI 1.43–2.47, p  < 0.001) and 1.77 (95% CI 1.44–2.17, p  < 0.001) for boys and girls, respectively. For disordered eating, the corresponding ORs were 1.94 (95% CI 1.40–2.68, p  < 0.001) for boys and 2.00 (95% CI 1.72–2.32, p  < 0.001) for girls. Using restricted cubic splines, we did not find evidence for non-linearity in the post-hoc analyses.

There was a significantly higher odds of reporting being diagnosed with an eating disorder among those scoring median or above on SPAUSCIS (crude OR 3.32; 95% CI 1.58–7.84; p  = 0.003).

Association between focus on self-presentation and perfectionism and disordered eating. Linear regressions with restricted cubic splines. Note: Figure 1: SPAUSCIS: Self-Presentation and Upward Social Comparison Inclination Scale; EDI-P: Eating Disorders Inventory-Perfectionism; EDS-5: Eating Disturbance Scale-5

Figure 1 presents findings from linear regression models with mean score on SPAUSCIS as the independent variable and the standardized (Z-scored) score on (a) perfectionism (EDI-P) and (b) disordered eating (EDS-5) as dependent variables. For both dependent variables, a potential gender moderation of the association with SPAUSCIS was investigated, and potential non-linearity was investigated using restricted cubic splines with four knots. For disordered eating, a significant gender moderation was found, and the association was stronger for girls than boys. For perfectionism, no evidence for a gender moderation was found. For both dependent variables there was a significant linear association with self-presentation equal to a low-to-moderate effect size.

Overall findings

In the present study we investigated the potential association between focus on self-presentation and upward social comparison on social media, and perfectionism and disordered eating. As hypothesized, we found evidence for consistent positive associations. Increased focus on self-presentation and upward social comparison was associated with increased levels of both perfectionism and disordered eating with a small-to-medium effect size. For perfectionism, the associations were similar for both boys and girls, while we found evidence of a gender moderation for disordered eating. Specifically, the association with disordered eating was somewhat stronger for girls compared to boys. For self-reported eating disorder, we also found a positive association with focus on self-presentation and upward social comparison. Focusing on how the adolescents relate to self-presentation on social media, the study gives new insight into important aspects of usage patterns of social media. It also provides new insight into potential gender differences in focus on self-presentation and upward social comparison on social media, and social media´s potential role in development of disordered eating. These findings are pertinent in a public health perspective and may help to inform efforts to mitigate these potential negative effects.

Relation to previous perspectives and findings

Our findings are consistent with the Tripartite Influence Model, as our study revealed positive associations between focus on self-presentation and upward social comparison on social media, and both perfectionism and disordered eating. Individuals who focus on self-presentation and upward social comparison may be more susceptible to sociocultural pressures which may lead to a strive for perfection and conforming to unhealthy body ideals. Our findings underscore the potential role of sociocultural pressures in shaping body image dissatisfaction and disordered eating behaviors. Specifically, the positive association between focus on self-presentation on social media and perfectionism may have several explanations. Curran & Hill [ 33 ] argue that the increase in perfectionistic traits among young adults may be due to a response to cultural changes towards a more individualistic and competitive culture in Western societies. As social media is an important part of adolescents’ and young peoples’ lives, it is likely that the perfectionistic tendencies will affect self-presentation on these platforms as well. Curran & Hill [ 33 ] also suggest that the increase in perfectionism among young adults may be due to their perception of increased demands from the social environment. Self-presenting in a socially desirable way in general, and on social media specifically, may be a way to ensure social acceptance from peers. They further hypothesize that the fear of losing acceptance may increase perfectionistic traits [ 33 ]. Hence, increased perfectionism may be the reason for stronger focus on self-presentation on social media. However, since we cannot interpret the direction of the association from this study, focus on self-presentation may also increase adolescents’ perfectionistic tendency. As perfectionism is a personality trait that largely establishes during adolescence, it may be that the increased opportunity to self-present on social media, and thus focus on self-presentation, makes adolescents more susceptible for developing perfectionistic traits.

There is a lack of research on the relationship between focus on self-presentation on social media and disordered eating. Most of the research investigating this relationship have looked at being exposed to appearance-related self-presentation on social media and body dissatisfaction and disordered eating [ 24 , 25 , 43 ], in addition to self-presentation behavior [ 13 , 14 , 45 ], not the relationship between a person’s focus on self-presentation on social media and disordered eating. Our results indicate a positive relationship between focus on self-presentation on social media and disordered eating. Highly visual social media platforms that expose adolescents to “perfect” bodies through others’ self-presentation may constitute an important source of such exposure. Previous findings support that being exposed to body ideals, may lead to internalization of these ideals among adolescents [ 25 , 45 , 46 ]. Other findings also report that upward social comparison may be a potential consequence of the exposure to others’ “perfect” appearance related self-presentation [ 24 , 31 , 60 ], leading to body dissatisfaction [ 30 ]. Subsequently, some adolescents may be more preoccupied with eating, weight, body shape, and muscularity. This preoccupation could serve as a mitigation strategy to reduce the discrepancy between the adolescent’s perceived appearance and the ideal body and appearance of the reference person. Thereby reducing the negative body image and negative feelings produced from the upward social comparison.

Another explanation may be that adolescents with disordered eating already are more preoccupied than other adolescents with how they appear to others. Social media is an apt arena to self-present in an appearance-related and desired way, and could elicit wanted feedback from others through likes and comments. This may further reinforce the focus on self-presentation. A third potential explanation for this relationship is perfectionism as a conceivable mediating factor. As perfectionistic self-presentation can be understood as a maladaptive self-presentation style [ 34 ], perfectionism may lead to a strict view of what constitute a good-enough self-presentation. This may as well include the adolescent’s expectations and demands to their own body as thin or muscular, hence increasing the standards of flawlessness in their own appearance-related self-presentation on social media. If these expectations are too rigid, it might for some adolescents be a contributing cause in the development of disordered eating.

In relation to the association between focus on self-presentation on social media and disordered eating we found a stronger association for girls than boys. Hjetland et al. [ 61 ] found significant gender differences in how adolescents related to self-presentation on social media. Girls reported that they invested more time and energy on the content of their own social media posts. They used more filters to look better at least sometimes and reported feeling less satisfied with themselves because of other peoples’ social media posts. Girls also tended to ascribe more importance to the feedback they got on social media than boys. In general, the report showed that social media played a bigger part in the girls’ lives than the boys’, and that the girls placed more importance on what is happening on social media [ 61 ]. Hence, more importance placed on self-presentation on social media among girls, and social media playing a more important role in girls’ lives, may increase the focus on self-presenting in an ideal way, in addition to being stronger underlying causes in development of eating disorders for girls than for boys.

There may as well be other explanations for the gender difference we found. The objectification theory [ 62 ], suggests that women’s bodies are more often looked at, evaluated and potentially sexually objectified. Fredrickson & Roberts [ 62 ] further argue that these views make women internalize the observer’s perspective of themselves, and to some degree also socialize women to treat themselves as objects for the pleasure of others. The emphasis put on girls’ and women’s physical appearance, in particular, is well established in our culture [ 60 ]. Through social media’s feedback mechanisms, girls may be more encouraged than boys to self-present in an objectifying way.

Social comparison theory [ 26 ], and especially upward social comparison, is another possible explanation for the gender difference between focus on self-presentation on social media and disordered eating. Strahan et al. [ 60 ] found that when describing their physical appearance, women used significantly more upward social comparisons than downward social comparisons. Men, on the other hand, made more downward comparisons than upward. This tendency was not seen when women and men described other personal characteristics like social skills. For women, they also found that the more upward social comparison they made, the more negative statements they made about their body [ 60 ]. They proposed that ubiquitous appearance norms, mostly applying to women, disrupted strong self-enhancement behaviors [ 60 ]. Fardouly et al. [ 24 ] also found that women relied on upward social comparisons when comparing their appearances, and that doing this on social media was associated with more body dissatisfaction than in person. A proposed explanation for this is that women may experience a stronger discrepancy between themselves and women they see on social media compared to women they see in person [ 24 ].

Previous research on self-presentation behaviors has primarily focused on appearance-related self-presentation and upward social comparison [e.g. 24 ] and associated risk among girls, such as body dissatisfaction [ 13 , 14 , 30 ], thin ideal internalization and disordered eating behavior [ 25 , 44 ]. However, it is important to recognize that boys may also be affected by these issues, and a study showed that body dissatisfaction affected boys’ risk of engaging in disordered eating behaviors [ 63 ]. The current body ideals for boys emphasize muscularity [ 64 ], and Eisenberg et al. [ 65 ] found that muscle-enhancing behaviors are common among American adolescents, including both boys and girls. This were behaviors like dieting, exercising, and taking protein supplements or steroids, with the aim of increasing muscle size or tone. However, most of the behaviors measured were significantly more common among boys [ 65 ], and Compte et al.’s [ 64 ] investigation of muscle dysmorphia among young adult men indicated a prevalence of almost 7%. Hence, another explanation for the gender difference we found, may be that the EDS-5-questionnaire does not identify symptoms of drive for muscularity or muscle dysmorphia. In fact, muscle dysmorphia seems to be more of a concern than thinness and weight loss among boys [ 64 ]. The EDS-5 measures of symptoms of disordered eating are linked to preoccupation about weight loss, body shape and drive for thinness [ 55 ], and may therefore not fully capture the range of body image concerns among boys.

Implications

The present results demonstrate the need to address focus on self-presentation and upward social comparison on social media as potentially important factors for adolescents’ mental health. As such, promoting a healthy use of social media could be established through a focus on increasing adolescents’ ability to reflect on and think critically about self-presentation and upward social comparison on social media. Our results indicate a need for targeted interventions to promote healthy social media use and enhance adolescents’ critical thinking about self-presentation and underscores the urgency of public health initiatives. One public health approach would be to equip adolescents with critical thinking skills to navigate social media mindfully. In relation to appearance-related ideals, educational programs should address the unrealistic standards perpetuated online, while fostering resilience and promoting positive self-image. Educational programs and social media literacy programs in school have been suggested to increase adolescents’ reflections about their own and others social media use [ 42 , 66 , 67 ]. Gordon et al. [ 42 , 67 ] introduced a four-lesson social media literacy program in a junior high school that aimed to decrease body dissatisfaction, dietary restraints and focus on increased muscles among young adolescents. They found only a small effect of the intervention. The intervention did not focus on self-presentation and based on results from this study and previous research [e.g. 12 , 27 ], this would be an important topic to address for future interventions. Also, previous results suggest that interventions led by individuals who already have an established relationship with the adolescents and are familiar with their needs help facilitate discussions among the adolescents [ 42 ], and improve intervention outcomes. Teachers could therefore be considered effective social media educators, especially if social media literacy could be integrated in existing school subjects.

A study of university students showed that women who had a higher internalization of the thin-ideal, were more vulnerable to disordered body image and hence to appearance exposure in media [ 68 ]. They also found that body appreciation protected women from negative effects of the exposure [ 68 ]. Thus, developing social media literacy programs specifically focusing on the effects of self-presentation and upward social comparison could be an important target for interventions, and possibly reduce focus on self-presentation. Research [ 69 ] also suggest that increasing self-compassion is a useful strategy to prevent perfectionistic self-presentation on social media. As perfectionistic self-presentation is related to lower subjective well-being [ 35 ], this may also be a topic to address in an intervention aiming to reduce focus on self-presentation and upward social comparison on social media.

While our study adds to the knowledge base, future research should investigate the concept of self-presentation on social media more closely. It will be important to examine if different ways of self-presentation vary from each other. Previous research has investigated how people self-present, especially through the use of selfies [e.g. 70 , 71 ], and further research should investigate if taking pictures of oneself and posting them is dissimilar from other ways of self-presentation on social media when considering its association to mental health among adolescents. SPAUSCIS consist of only one item asking about specific ways of self-presenting (“I retouch images of myself to look better before I post them on social media”), thus future research on other ways of self-presenting behaviors should include self-presentation for example through pictures of other aspect of the adolescents’ life, like friends or hobbies, or through text only. Investigating focus on self-presentation on social media, perfectionism and disordered eating among younger adolescents than we included in our study will be important as the use of social media starts early and as disordered eating often emerges in adolescence [ 72 ]. Understanding at what age focus on self-presentation becomes more prominent for adolescents’ and potential gender differences regarding this, may also be important to pinpoint intervention opportunities.

Strengths and limitations

A major strength of the present study is that it is the first study to investigate the relationship between focus on self-presentation on social media, perfectionism and disordered eating. So far, the research on this has focused on self-presentation behaviors [e.g. 13 , 14 , 30 , 45 ] in addition to being exposed to others ’ (perfect) self-presentations and the prevailing body ideals [e.g. 24 , 25 , 43 ]. To our knowledge no previous study has examined the association between focus on self-presentation and perfectionism and disordered eating. In addition, the scales used in this study are well-established [ 55 , 54 , 56 ]. Also, the items of SPAUSCIS were derived from focus-group interviews with adolescents [ 23 ], which make them relevant for adolescents’ experiences related to self-presentation and social comparison on social media. Some limitations are also worth mentioning. The study is cross-sectional, thus we cannot determine causality between the investigated factors and mental health. Despite the sample being large, it is limited to high schools in Bergen, Norway. Consequently, the results may not be generalizable to other countries or cultures. Also, the participation rate was moderate (53% and 35%), which may impact the validity of our findings. However, associations are less vulnerable to bias caused by low participation rates than prevalence estimates [ 73 ]. Another limitation is that SPAUSCIS in this study does not differentiate between various methods of self-presentation. Consequently, we cannot conclude from this study whether specific types of self-presentation, such as taking selfies versus posting pictures of hobbies, have the same impact on perfectionism, eating disorders or disordered eating. Also, the use of self-reported amount of social media use has been shown to be biased in previous research and is not likely to be an accurate measure of actual use [ 74 ]. This may have impacted our ability to effectively account for the confounding effect of social media use. And finally, although EDS-5 is a well-established and validated measurement, the questionnaire does not cover specific symptoms of drive for muscularity and muscle dysmorphia.

While previous studies have focused on self-presentation behaviors, this study found that focus on self-presentation and upward social comparison on social media is positively associated with both perfectionism and disordered eating, as well as self-reported eating disorders among adolescents. As such, promoting a healthy use of social media could be established through increasing adolescents’ ability to reflect on and think critically about self-presentation and upward social comparison on social media. Our results underscore the importance of targeted public health interventions to promote awareness and healthy social media use among adolescents, emphasizing the need for educational programs that address focus on self-presentation, unrealistic appearance-related ideals and foster resilience and positive self-image.

Data availability

Explicit consent from the participant is required by the Norwegian Health research legislation and the Norwegian Ethics committees in order to transfer health research data outside of Norway. Ethics approval for this was also dependent on storing the research data on secure storage facilities located at the Norwegian Institute of Public Health, which prevent the authors from providing the data as supplementary information. Request to access these datasets should be directed to [email protected].

Kietzmann JH, Hermkens K, McCarthy IP, Silvestre BS. Social media? Get serious! Understanding the functional building blocks of social media. Bus Horiz. 2011;54(3):241–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2011.01.005 .

Article   Google Scholar  

Schønning V, Hjetland GJ, Aarø LE, Skogen JC. Social Media Use and Mental Health and Well-being among adolescents – A scoping review. Front Psychol. 2020;11. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01949 .

Woods HC, Scott H. #Sleepyteens: social media use in adolescence is associated with poor sleep quality, anxiety, depression and low self-esteem. J Adolesc. 2016;51:41–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2016.05.008 .

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Brunborg GS, Burdzovic Andreas J. Increase in time spent on social media is associated with modest increase in depression, conduct problems, and episodic heavy drinking. J Adolesc. 2019;74:201–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2019.06.013 .

Varghese NE, Santoro E, Lugo A, Madrid-Valero JJ, Ghislandi S, Torbica A, Gallus S. The role of Technology and Social Media Use in Sleep-Onset difficulties among Italian Adolescents: cross-sectional study. J Med Internet Res. 2021;23(1):e20319. https://doi.org/10.2196/20319 .

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Jarman HK, Marques MD, McLean SA, Slater A, Paxton SJ. Social media, body satisfaction and well-being among adolescents: a mediation model of appearance-ideal internalization and comparison. Body Image. 2021;36:139–48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2020.11.005 .

Keles B, McCrae N, Grealish A. A systematic review: the influence of social media on depression, anxiety and psychological distress in adolescents. Int J Adolescence Youth. 2020;25(1):79–93. https://doi.org/10.1080/02673843.2019.1590851 .

Coyne SM, Rogers AA, Zurcher JD, Stockdale L, Booth M. Does time spent using social media impact mental health? An eight year longitudinal study. Comput Hum Behav. 2020;104:106160. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.106160 .

Orben A, Dienlin T, Przybylski AK. Social media’s enduring effect on adolescent life satisfaction. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 2019;116(21):10226–10228. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1902058116 .

Panayiotou M, Black L, Carmichael-Murphy P, Qualter P, Humphrey N. Time spent on social media among the least influential factors in adolescent mental health: preliminary results from a panel network analysis. Nat Mental Health. 2023;1(5):316–26. https://doi.org/10.1038/s44220-023-00063-7 .

Frison E, Eggermont S. Harder, Better, faster, stronger: negative comparison on Facebook and adolescents’ life satisfaction are reciprocally related. Cyberpsychology Behav Social Netw. 2016;19(3):158–64. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2015.0296 .

Skogen JC, Hjetland GJ, Bøe T, Hella RT, Knudsen AK. Through the Looking Glass of Social Media. Focus on Self-Presentation and Association with Mental Health and Quality of Life. A Cross-Sectional Survey-Based Study. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 2021;18(6):3319. https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/6/3319 .

Bij de Vaate NAJD, Veldhuis J, Konijn EA. How online self-presentation affects well-being and body image: a systematic review. Telematics Inform. 2020;47:101316. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2019.101316 .

Mills JS, Musto S, Williams L, Tiggemann M. Selfie harm: effects on mood and body image in young women. Body Image. 2018;27:86–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2018.08.007 .

Baumeister RF, Hutton DG. Self-Presentation Theory: Self-Construction anf Audience Pleasing. In Theories of Group Behavior , Mullen, B. & Goethals, G. R., Eds.; Springer New York, NY, USA, 1987. pp. 71–87.

Herring S, Kapidzic S. Teens, gender, and Self-Presentation in Social Media. London, UK: Elsevier Health Sciences; 2015. pp. 146–52.

Google Scholar  

Lenhart A, Purcell K, Smith A, Zickuhr K. Social Media & Mobile Internet use among teens and young adults. Washington, D.C.: Pew Internet & American Life Project; 2010. pp. 17–25. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ed525056 .

Negru-Subtirica O, Pop EI, Damian LE, Stoeber J. The very best of me: Longitudinal associations of perfectionism and identity processes in adolescence. Child Dev. 2021;92(5):1855–71. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.13622 .

Eranti V, Lonkila M. The social significance of the Facebook like button. First Monday. 2015;20(6). https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v20i6.5505 .

Schlosser AE. Self-disclosure versus self-presentation on social media. Curr Opin Psychol. 2020;31:1–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2019.06.025 .

Hjetland GJ, Finserås TR, Sivertsen B, Colman I, Hella RT, Skogen JC. Focus on Self-Presentation on Social Media across Sociodemographic Variables, lifestyles, and personalities: a cross-sectional study. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022;19(17):11133. https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/17/11133 .

Zimmer-Gembeck MJ, Hawes T, Scott RA, Campbell T, Webb HJ. Adolescents’ online appearance preoccupation: a 5-year longitudinal study of the influence of peers, parents, beliefs, and disordered eating. Comput Hum Behav. 2023;140:107569. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2022.107569 .

Hjetland GJ, Schønning V, Hella RT, Veseth M, Skogen JC. How do Norwegian adolescents experience the role of social media in relation to mental health and well being: a qualitative study. BMC Psychol. 2021;9(1):78. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40359-021-00582-x .

Fardouly J, Pinkus RT, Vartanian LR. The impact of appearance comparisons made through social media, traditional media, and in person in women’s everyday lives. Body Image. 2017;20:31–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2016.11.002 .

Rodgers RF, Slater A, Gordon CS, McLean SA, Jarman HK, Paxton SJ. A Biopsychosocial Model of Social Media Use and body image concerns, disordered eating, and muscle-building behaviors among adolescent girls and boys. J Youth Adolesc. 2020;49(2):399–409. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-019-01190-0 .

Festinger L. A theory of social comparison processes. Hum Relat. 1954;7(2):117–40. https://doi.org/10.1177/001872675400700202 .

Chou HT, Edge N. They are happier and having better lives than I am: the impact of using Facebook on perceptions of others’ lives. Cyberpsychol Behav Soc Netw. 2012;15(2):117–21. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2011.0324 .

Castellacci F, Tveito V. Internet use and well-being: a survey and a theoretical framework. Res Policy. 2018;47(1):308–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2017.11.007 .

Nesi J, Prinstein MJ. Using Social Media for Social Comparison and Feedback-Seeking: gender and Popularity Moderate associations with depressive symptoms. J Abnorm Child Psychol. 2015;43(8):1427–38. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10802-015-0020-0 .

Scully M, Swords L, Nixon E. Social comparisons on social media: online appearance-related activity and body dissatisfaction in adolescent girls. Ir J Psychol Med. 2023;40(1):31–42. https://doi.org/10.1017/ipm.2020.93 .

Article   PubMed   CAS   Google Scholar  

Hawes T, Zimmer-Gembeck MJ, Campbell SM. Unique associations of social media use and online appearance preoccupation with depression, anxiety, and appearance rejection sensitivity. Body Image. 2020;33:66–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2020.02.010 .

Hewitt PL, Norton GR, Flett GL, Callander L, Cowan T. Dimensions of perfectionism, hopelessness, and attempted suicide in a sample of alcoholics. Suicide Life-Threatening Behav. 1998;28(4):395–406. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1943-278X.1998.tb00975.x .

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Curran T, Hill AP. Perfectionism is increasing over time: a meta-analysis of birth cohort differences from 1989 to 2016. Psychol Bull. 2019;145(4):410–29. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000138 .

Hewitt PL, Flett GL, Sherry SB, Habke M, Parkin M, Lam RW, McMurtry B, Ediger E, Fairlie P, Stein MB. The interpersonal expression of perfection: Perfectionistic self-presentation and psychological distress. 2003. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.84.6.1303 .

Mackinnon SP, Sherry SB. Perfectionistic self-presentation mediates the relationship between perfectionistic concerns and subjective well-being: a three-wave longitudinal study. Pers Indiv Differ. 2012;53(1):22–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2012.02.010 .

Limburg K, Watson HJ, Hagger MS, Egan SJ. The relationship between perfectionism and psychopathology: a Meta-analysis. J Clin Psychol. 2017;73(10):1301–26. https://doi.org/10.1002/jclp.22435 .

Bardone-Cone AM, Wonderlich SA, Frost RO, Bulik CM, Mitchell JE, Uppala S, Simonich H. Perfectionism and eating disorders: current status and future directions. Clin Psychol Rev. 2007;27(3):384–405. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2006.12.005 .

Sherry SB, Hewitt PL, Besser A, McGee BJ, Flett GL. Self-oriented and socially prescribed perfectionism in the eating disorder inventory perfectionism subscale. Int J Eat Disord. 2004;35(1):69–79. https://doi.org/10.1002/eat.10237 .

American Psychiatric Association. Feeding ans eating Disorders. In Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (5th ed.); 2013. pp. 329–354. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.books.9780890425596 .

World Health Organization. F50-59 Behavioral syndromes associated with psychological disturbances and physical factors. The ICD-10 classification of mental and behavioural disorders: Diagnostic criteria for research; 1993. pp. 136–142.

Galmiche M, Déchelotte P, Lambert G, Tavolacci MP. Prevalence of eating disorders over the 2000–2018 period: a systematic literature review. Am J Clin Nutr. 2019;109(5):1402–13. https://doi.org/10.1093/ajcn/nqy342 .

Gordon CS, Jarman HK, Rodgers RF, McLean SA, Slater A, Fuller-Tyszkiewicz M, Paxton SJ. Outcomes of a Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial of the SoMe Social Media Literacy Program for Improving Body Image-Related Outcomes in Adolescent Boys and Girls. Nutrients, 2021;13(11):3825. https://www.mdpi.com/2072-6643/13/11/3825 .

Holland G, Tiggemann M. A systematic review of the impact of the use of social networking sites on body image and disordered eating outcomes. Body Image. 2016;17:100–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2016.02.008 .

Meier EP, Gray J. Facebook Photo Activity Associated with body image disturbance in adolescent girls. Cyberpsychology Behav Social Netw. 2013;17(4):199–206. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2013.0305 .

McLean SA, Paxton SJ, Wertheim EH, Masters J. Selfies and social media: relationships between self-image editing and photo-investment and body dissatisfaction and dietary restraint. J Eat Disorders. 2015;3(1):O21. https://doi.org/10.1186/2050-2974-3-S1-O21 .

Dane A, Bhatia K. The social media diet: a scoping review to investigate the association between social media, body image and eating disorders amongst young people. PLOS Glob Public Health. 2023;3(3):e0001091. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgph.0001091 .

Thompson JK, Heinberg LJ, Altabe M, Tantleff-Dunn S. Exacting beauty: theory, assessment, and treatment of body image disturbance. Am Psychol Association. 1999. https://doi.org/10.1037/10312-000 .

Burke NL, Schaefer LM, Karvay YG, Bardone-Cone AM, Frederick DA, Schaumberg K, Klump KL, Anderson DA, Thompson JK. Does the tripartite influence model of body image and eating pathology function similarly across racial/ethnic groups of White, Black, Latina, and Asian women? Eat Behav. 2021;42:101519.

Shewale R. Social Media Users – Global Demographics. 2023. Demandsage.com. URL: https://www.demandsage.com/social-media-users/ .

Skogen JC, Andersen AIO, Finserås TR, Ranganath P, Brunborg GS, Hjetland GJ. Commonly reported negative experiences on social media are associated with poor mental health and well-being among adolescents: results from the LifeOnSoMe-study. Front Public Health. 2023;11. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2023.1192788 .

Garner DM. Eating Disorder Inventory-2 manual Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources. 1991. https://doi.org/10.1002/1098-108X(198321)2:2%3C15::AID-EAT2260020203%3E3.0.CO;2-6

Sand L, Bøe T, Shafran R, Stormark KM, Hysing M. Perfectionism in adolescence: associations with gender, Age, and socioeconomic status in a Norwegian sample. Front Public Health. 2021;9. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2021.688811 .

Lampard AM, Byrne SM, McLean N, Fursland A. The eating disorder Inventory-2 perfectionism scale: factor structure and associations with dietary restraint and weight and shape concern in eating disorders. Eat Behav. 2012;13(1):49–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eatbeh.2011.09.007 .

Engelsen BK, Laberg JC. A comparison of three questionnaires (EAT-12, EDI, and EDE-Q) for assessment of eating problems in healthy female adolescents. Nord J Psychiatry. 2001;55(2):129–35. https://doi.org/10.1080/08039480151108589 .

Rosenvinge JH, Perry JA, Bjørgum L, Bergersen TD, Silvera DH, Holte A. A new instrument measuring disturbed eating patterns in community populations: development and initial validation of a five-item scale (EDS-5). Eur Eat Disorders Rev. 2001;9(2):123–32. https://doi.org/10.1002/erv.371 .

Heradstveit O, Holmelid E, Klundby H, Søreide B, Sivertsen B, Sand L. Associations between symptoms of eating disturbance and frequency of physical activity in a non-clinical, population-based sample of adolescents. J Eat Disorders. 2019;7(1):9. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40337-019-0239-1 .

Goodman R. Psychometric properties of the strengths and difficulties questionnaire. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2001;40(11):1337–45. https://doi.org/10.1097/00004583-200111000-00015 .

Krokstad S, Langhammer A, Hveem K, Holmen TL, Midthjell K, Stene TR, Bratberg G, Heggland J, Holmen J. Cohort Profile: the HUNT Study, Norway. Int J Epidemiol. 2013;42(4):968–77. https://doi.org/10.1093/ije/dys095 .

Sivertsen B, Råkil H, Munkvik E, Lønning KJ. Cohort profile: the SHoT-study, a national health and well-being survey of Norwegian university students. BMJ Open. 2019;9(1):e025200. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2018-025200 .

Strahan EJ, Wilson AE, Cressman KE, Buote VM. Comparing to perfection: how cultural norms for appearance affect social comparisons and self-image. Body Image. 2006;3(3):211–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2006.07.004 .

Hjetland GJ, Finserås TR, Skogen JC. «Hele verden et tastetrykk unna – Ungdommers bruk og opplevelser med sosiale medier og online gaming» [Worldwide in a keystroke – Adolescents’ use and experiences with social media and online gaming]. Bergen: Folkehelseinstituttet. 2022. https://www.fhi.no/publ/2022/hele-verden-er-et-tastetrykk-unna---ungdommers-bruk-og-opplevelser-med-sosi/ .

Fredrickson BL, Roberts T-A. Objectification Theory: toward understanding women’s lived experiences and Mental Health risks. Psychol Women Q. 1997;21(2):173–206. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-6402.1997.tb00108.x .

Neumark-Sztainer D, Paxton SJ, Hannan PJ, Haines J, Story M. Does body satisfaction matter? Five-year Longitudinal associations between body satisfaction and Health behaviors in adolescent females and males. J Adolesc Health. 2006;39(2):244–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2005.12.001 .

Compte EJ, Sepulveda AR, Torrente F. A two-stage epidemiological study of eating disorders and muscle dysmorphia in male university students in Buenos Aires. Int J Eat Disord. 2015;48(8):1092–101. https://doi.org/10.1002/eat.22448 .

Eisenberg ME, Wall M, Neumark-Sztainer D. Muscle-enhancing behaviors among adolescent girls and boys. Pediatrics. 2012;130(6):1019–26. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2012-0095 .

McLean SA, Wertheim EH, Masters J, Paxton SJ. A pilot evaluation of a social media literacy intervention to reduce risk factors for eating disorders. Int J Eat Disord. 2017;50(7):847–51. https://doi.org/10.1002/eat.22708 .

Gordon CS, Rodgers RF, Slater AE, McLean SA, Jarman HK, Paxton SJ. A cluster randomized controlled trial of the SoMe social media literacy body image and wellbeing program for adolescent boys and girls: study protocol. Body Image. 2020;33:27–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2020.02.003 .

Halliwell E. The impact of thin idealized media images on body satisfaction: does body appreciation protect women from negative effects? Body Image. 2013;10(4):509–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2013.07.004 .

Keutler M, McHugh L. Self-compassion buffers the effects of perfectionistic self-presentation on social media on wellbeing. J Context Behav Sci. 2022;23:53–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcbs.2021.11.006 .

Diefenbach S, Christoforakos L. The Selfie Paradox: nobody seems to like them yet everyone has reasons to take them. An exploration of psychological functions of Selfies in Self-Presentation. Front Psychol. 2017;8. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00007 .

Rousseau A. Adolescents’ selfie-activities and idealized online self-presentation: an application of the sociocultural model. Body Image. 2021;36:16–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2020.10.005 .

Striegel-Moore RH, Bulik CM. Risk factors for eating disorders. Am Psychol. 2007;62(3):181–98. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066x.62.3.181 .

Knudsen AK, Hotopf M, Skogen JC, Øverland S, Mykletun A. The health status of nonparticipants in a population-based health study: the Hordaland Health Study. Am J Epidemiol. 2010;172(11):1306–14. https://doi.org/10.1093/aje/kwq257 .

Verbeij T, Pouwels JL, Beyens I, Valkenburg PM. The accuracy and validity of self-reported social media use measures among adolescents. Computers Hum Behav Rep. 2021;3:100090. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chbr.2021.100090 .

Download references

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to Bergen municipality and Vestland County Council for their collaboration on this study. The present study is linked to a larger innovation-project lead by Bergen municipality in Western Norway related to the use of social media and mental health and well-being. The innovation-project is funded by a program initiated by the Norwegian Directorate of Health and aims to explore social media as platforms for health promotion among adolescents. Above all, we are very thankful for the pupils who participated in this study.

The work of GJH was supported by Dam Foundation (grant number 2021/FO347287) while the work of JCS, AIOA, and TRF was supported by The Research Council of Norway (grant number 319845).

Open access funding provided by University of Bergen.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Health Promotion, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Bergen, Norway

Hilde Einarsdatter Danielsen, Turi Reiten Finserås, Amanda Iselin Olesen Andersen, Gunnhild Johnsen Hjetland & Jens Christoffer Skogen

Department of Clinical Psychology, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway

Hilde Einarsdatter Danielsen & Vivian Woodfin

Centre for Evaluation of Public Health Measures, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway

Gunnhild Johnsen Hjetland & Jens Christoffer Skogen

Department of Clinical Psychology, Solli District Psychiatric Centre, Bergen, Norway

Vivian Woodfin

Center for Alcohol and Drug Research (KORFOR), Stavanger University Hospital, Stavanger, Norway

Jens Christoffer Skogen

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

JCS analyzed the participants’ data regarding the LifeOnSoMe-study. All authors contributed to interpretation of the results. HED and JCS wrote the first draft of the manuscript. Additional contributions and revisions to the manuscript were made by TRF, AIOA, GJH, VW, JCS, and HED. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hilde Einarsdatter Danielsen .

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate:

Institutional Review Board Statement

The study was conducted in accordance to the guidelines of the Declaration of Helsinki, and approved by the Regional Ethical Committee (REK) in Norway (REK#65611). All participants gave informed consent prior to participation, and was informed about the general purpose of the study and the opportunity to withdraw from the study at any point. As all the adolescents invited were 16 years or older, they were considered competent to consent on their own behalf, and additional consent from parents or guardians was not prerequisite.

Consent for publication

not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

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

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Danielsen, H.E., Finserås, T.R., Andersen, A.I.O. et al. Mirror, mirror on my screen: Focus on self-presentation on social media is associated with perfectionism and disordered eating among adolescents. Results from the “LifeOnSoMe”-study. BMC Public Health 24 , 2466 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-024-19317-9

Download citation

Received : 04 July 2023

Accepted : 01 July 2024

Published : 10 September 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-024-19317-9

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Adolescents
• Upward social comparison
• Social media

BMC Public Health

ISSN: 1471-2458

• General enquiries: [email protected]