Content uploaded by Erin Vogel
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Erin Vogel on Oct 08, 2016
Content may be subject to copyright.
Self-Reflection and Interpersonal Connection: Making the Most of
Self-Presentation on Social Media
Erin A. Vogel and Jason P. Rose
University of Toledo
Research on the psychological consequences of social network site (SNS) use has produced
mixed results. Some studies suggest that SNS (particularly Facebook) use is beneficial,
whereas others suggest that it is harmful. What can account for these mixed results? This
article reviews the literature on this topic and offers self-presentation as a framework for
understanding the differential effects of SNS use on psychological well-being. There are 2
key points from our perspective. First, Facebook users tend to present themselves positively
on SNSs. Second, the psychological impact of SNS use will depend upon whether a user’s
activities are self-focused or other-focused. Focusing on one’s own positively presented
self-image generally leads to beneficial outcomes, whereas focusing on others’ idealized
images typically leads to harmful outcomes. Practical recommendations for SNS use are
offered.
Keywords: social media, social comparison, self-presentation, Facebook, well-being
From connecting with friends to staying up-
dated on current events or sharing the details of
everyday life, social network sites (SNSs) serve a
multitude of purposes. Although SNSs vary in
their presentation and purpose, all feature personal
profiles and publicly viewable connections with
other users (Boyd & Ellison, 2007). Among the
most popular SNSs is Facebook.com, which has
more than a billion active users worldwide (Face-
book, 2016). Although a growing literature has
explored the effects of SNS use, researchers have
not yet come to a definitive conclusion as to
whether SNS use is beneficial or harmful for psy-
chological well-being. Indeed, some studies have
found that SNS use produces outcomes such as
negative affect, loneliness, depression, decreased
life satisfaction, and poor self-evaluations (Burke,
Marlow, & Lento, 2010;Feinstein et al., 2013;
Haferkamp & Kramer, 2011;Kross et al., 2013;
Sagioglou & Greitemeyer, 2014;Tandoc, Fer-
rucci, & Duffy, 2015;Vogel, Rose, Roberts, &
Eckles, 2014). On the contrary, other research has
found positive effects, such as increased life sat-
isfaction, perceived social support, and high self-
esteem (Ellison, Steinfield, & Lampe, 2007;Gen-
tile, Twenge, Freeman, & Campbell, 2012;
Gonzales & Hancock, 2011;Kim & Lee, 2011;
Manago, Taylor, & Greenfield, 2012;Nabi, Pres-
tin, & So, 2013;Nadkarni & Hofmann, 2012;
Wilcox & Stephen, 2013).
In this article, we delineate a novel perspective
that enables an understanding of these mixed re-
sults. First, we suggest that SNS users selectively
present the most positive aspects of their lives,
such that their lives appear unrealistically happy
and successful. Second, we propose that under-
standing the consequences incurred—positive or
negative—will depend upon whether a person is
self- or other-focused when using the SNS. Below
we briefly review extant literature on self-
presentation and describe how the consequences
of self-presentation differ depending on whether
the SNS user focuses on the self or on others.
Later we offer practical recommendations for
reaping the benefits of SNS use without suffering
the costs. Notably, our review focuses primarily
on Facebook, as it is the most common and pro-
totypical SNS and has produced the most re-
search.
Self-Presentation
Facebook use is partially motivated by a need
for positive self-presentation (Nadkarni & Hof-
mann, 2012). Self-presentation is a subset of
impression management whereby individuals
develop their identities and roles and gain social
rewards through their interactions with others
Erin A. Vogel and Jason P. Rose, Department of Psy-
chology, University of Toledo.
Correspondence concerning this article should be ad-
dressed to Erin A. Vogel, Department of Psychology, Uni-
versity of Toledo, Mail Stop 948, 2801 West Bancroft
Street, Toledo, OH 43606. E-mail: erin.vogel@utoledo.edu
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
Translational Issues in Psychological Science © 2016 American Psychological Association
2016, Vol. 2, No. 3, 294–302 2332-2136/16/$12.00 http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/tps0000076
294
(see Brown, 2007, for a review). To control how
an audience views the self and promote a pos-
itive impression (Schlenker, 2012), individuals
adopt different behaviors and a different appear-
ance around others (Goffman, 1959).
In the context of Facebook, self-presentation
is unique in that users create their self-images
on publicly available profiles that can be ac-
cessed by a variety of other users, including
family, friends, and acquaintances. Unlike tra-
ditional interactions that take place in person,
Facebook makes users’ carefully constructed
identities available to their social networks at
any time (Hogan, 2010). Although the SNS
profiles typically do reflect users’ true selves
(Back et al., 2010), users tend to emphasize the
positive aspects of their lives (Chou & Edge,
2012;Qiu, Lin, Leung, & Tov, 2012) and por-
tray themselves as popular, well-rounded, and
thoughtful (Zhao, Grasmuck, & Martin, 2008).
Returning to the mixed results in the litera-
ture on the effects of Facebook on psychologi-
cal outcomes, we suggest that this positive self-
presentation bias can result in either positive or
negative psychological outcomes for users de-
pending upon whether their Facebook activities
are other- or self-focused. Specifically, we sug-
gest these outcomes differ because different
mental processes appear to be engaged depend-
ing on the user’s focus. When SNS users focus
on others, they engage in social comparison;
that is, they judge their own selves and lives
relative to their friends’ positively presented
selves (e.g., Chou & Edge, 2012;Haferkamp &
Kramer, 2011;Steers, Wickham, & Acitelli,
2014;Vogel et al., 2014). When they focus on
themselves, they undergo self-affirmation,
wherein they are reminded of the positive as-
pects of their own selves and lives (Toma &
Hancock, 2013).
Other-Oriented Focus
When users focus on others’ Facebook pro-
files, positive self-presentation typically leads to
negative outcomes via social comparison. Ac-
cording to social comparison theory, people
compare themselves to one another for a variety
of purposes, such as self-evaluation (Festinger,
1954), self-enhancement (Gruder, 1971), and
self-improvement (Lockwood & Kunda, 1997).
Comparisons are typically either upward (com-
paring the self to someone who is better off than
oneself; Wood, 1989) or downward (comparing
the self to someone who is worse off than one-
self; Wills, 1981). Moreover, social comparison
can have a wide range of effects, depending on the
direction of the comparison and the traits of the
perceiver. Notably, upward social comparison is
typically linked to indicators of decreased psycho-
logical well-being, such as worsened self-
evaluations (Cash, Cash, & Butters, 1983), lower
self-esteem (Buunk, Collins, Taylor, VanYperen,
& Dakof, 1990;Morse & Gergen, 1970), negative
affect (Testa & Major, 1990), and greater dissat-
isfaction (Pyszczynski, Greenberg, & LaPrelle,
1985). Importantly for Facebook users, compari-
sons occur most readily when the target is sim-
ilar to the perceiver, both in terms of the com-
parison domain of interest (Gruder, 1971;
Hakmiller, 1966) and on traits such as age,
gender, and geographical proximity (Zell & Al-
icke, 2010). The majority of a typical user’s
Facebook friends are of the same age and loca-
tion as the user (see Wilson, Gosling, & Gra-
ham, 2012, for a review of social network com-
position), making them easily accessible and
relevant comparison targets.
Because people present themselves positively
on Facebook, most social comparisons made on
Facebook are likely to be upward (i.e., compar-
ing the self to someone who is better off; Chou
& Edge, 2012). A user who is browsing an
acquaintance’s profile is likely to see an ideal-
ized version of that individual’s life that makes
the person seem very happy, likable, and suc-
cessful. Indeed, Chou and Edge (2012) found
that frequent Facebook use is associated with a
belief that others are happier and have better
lives than oneself, though the effect appears to
be stronger for those who know fewer of their
Facebook friends personally. Relatedly, Vogel
and colleagues (2014) found that users report
making more upward than downward social
comparisons on Facebook. Experimental evi-
dence also supports that viewing others’ posi-
tively presented content on social media has
adverse effects. Haferkamp and Kramer (2011)
found that women who viewed an attractive
woman’s Facebook profile (constructed by re-
searchers) showed a larger discrepancy in per-
ceptions of their actual and ideal bodies than
women who viewed a less attractive target’s
profile. Similarly, men who viewed a very suc-
cessful man’s profile showed a larger discrep-
ancy in perceptions of their actual and ideal
295SELF-PRESENTATION ON SOCIAL MEDIA
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
career statuses than those who viewed a less
successful target’s profile (Haferkamp &
Kramer, 2011). Finally, Vogel and colleagues
(2014) found that viewing users who were por-
trayed as very healthy or as receiving a great
deal of positive feedback from peers resulted in
more negative self-evaluations and lower self-
esteem, respectively (Vogel et al., 2014).
Additional evidence suggests that upward com-
parisons on Facebook lead to feelings of envy and
that envy may be an important mechanism under-
lying the impact of upward social comparison on
psychological well-being. For example, envy me-
diates the relationship between frequent passive
Facebook use (i.e., browsing) and negative out-
comes such as decreased life satisfaction (Kras-
nova, Wenninger, Widjaja, & Buxmann, 2013)
and depression (Tandoc et al., 2015). Viewing
perfectly polished renditions of others’ lives leads
to envy, which leads people to evaluate their own
lives negatively and feel poorly. Further, negative
thoughts and emotions then lead people to use
their own profiles for self-enhancement through
positive self-presentation (Krasnova, Widjaja,
Buxmann, Wenninger, & Benbasat, 2015). Thus,
envy on social media creates a vicious cycle in
which viewing unrealistically positive profiles
leads to the creation of more unrealistically posi-
tive content for others to view. Relatedly, the
public nature of exchanges on Facebook can en-
gender jealousy in romantic relationships, espe-
cially when Facebook is used frequently. Users
often see their partner having public, positive in-
teractions with other users, begin to question the
nature of those relationships, increase their Face-
book use to gain more information, and experi-
ence even more jealousy and distress (Muise,
Christofides, & Desmarais, 2009;Muscanell,
Guadagno, Rice, & Murphy, 2013). The over-
whelmingly positive nature of Facebook content
may make innocuous interactions appear more
threatening than they otherwise would.
Personal Moderators
Some Facebook users are more likely to be
negatively affected by social comparison on
Facebook than others. First, those who are high
in social comparison orientation (SCO)—a sta-
ble characteristic that reflects individual differ-
ences in the pervasiveness of social comparison
(Gibbons & Buunk, 1999)—spend more time
on Facebook and are more negatively affected
by viewing others’ idealized profiles than are
low SCO users (Vogel, Rose, Okdie, Eckles, &
Franz, 2015). Second, people with low self-
esteem use Facebook more frequently (Mehdi-
zadeh, 2010;Vogel et al., 2014) and report
making more social comparisons on Facebook
(Lee, 2014), compared to users with higher self-
esteem. Third, Lee (2014) found that users with
low self-concept clarity make more social com-
parisons on Facebook, possibly to make self-
evaluations to inform their identities (Festinger,
1954). Lastly, self-presentation motives as they
manifest on SNSs are stronger among women
than men (Haferkamp, Eimler, Papadakis, &
Kruck, 2012), as are the negative effects of
social comparison (Nesi & Prinstein, 2015) and
jealousy on SNSs (Muscanell et al., 2013).
Situational Moderators
Maintaining an other-focus during Facebook
activities is not always harmful and, under spe-
cific situational circumstances, focusing on oth-
ers can be beneficial. First, when users focus on
their close friends while browsing Facebook,
they experience an increase in self-esteem (Wil-
cox & Stephen, 2013). We suggest that the
increase in self-esteem when viewing close
friends’ profiles may be due to reflection pro-
cesses, such that Facebook users feel good
about themselves because their friends’ accom-
plishments and traits reflect positively on them
(Tesser & Campbell, 1982).
Second, focusing on others can produce pos-
itive outcomes when Facebook is used to fulfill
the need for belongingness (Nadkarni & Hof-
mann, 2012). Indeed, communicating on Face-
book is associated with increased social capital,
increased social self-esteem, and decreased
loneliness (Burke et al., 2010;Valkenburg, Pe-
ter, & Schouten, 2006). Moreover, positive self-
presentation may facilitate connection and com-
munication by making users more appealing to
acquaintances, as they present socially desirable
versions of themselves (Manago, Graham,
Greenfield, & Salimkhan, 2008;Zhao et al.,
2008). In sum, when users fulfill belongingness
needs on Facebook, they feel better about them-
selves and their standing in social circles.
Third, focusing on others can be positive
when social media users view the profiles of
downward comparison targets. According to
mood management theory (Zillmann, 1988),
296 VOGEL AND ROSE
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
consumers select media that will help regulate
their moods. When expanded to social media,
the theory suggests that users select social
content (such as another Facebook user’s pro-
file) that will improve their mood (Johnson &
Knobloch-Westerwick, 2014). Importantly,
though, these opportunities for downward com-
parisons on Facebook are relatively rare, as
upward comparisons are far more common
(Steers et al., 2014;Vogel et al., 2014).
Self-Oriented Focus
The positive self-presentation element of Face-
book can be quite beneficial when people focus on
themselves when using Facebook. When users
view or update their own profiles, they construct
an idealized view of themselves and incorporate
that idealized view into their self-concept (Gon-
zales & Hancock, 2011;Zhao et al., 2008). View-
ing and updating the profile then results in a boost
in self-esteem via a self-affirmation process (Gen-
tile et al., 2012;Gonzales & Hancock, 2011), and
research suggests that users are aware of the op-
portunities for positive self-presentation on SNSs
(Manago et al., 2008).
Focusing on the self while using Facebook
can also lead to the fulfillment of self-
presentation needs and, subsequently, self-
affirmation needs. Self-presentation is one of
the primary motivations for Facebook use (Na-
dkarni & Hofmann, 2012) and Facebook use
has positive implications for well-being when
users focus on self-presentation goals (Kim &
Lee, 2011). Updating one’s own profile pro-
vides a bigger self-esteem boost than simply
viewing one’s own profile (Gonzales & Han-
cock, 2011), suggesting that the act of generat-
ing positive, self-relevant content is particularly
beneficial for affirming one’s good qualities.
Indeed, Toma and Hancock (2013) found that
viewing one’s own profile is just as effective as
a traditional self-affirmation task (e.g., writing
an essay about one’s most important values) in
reducing defensive reactions to negative feed-
back. The most likely explanation for this find-
ing is that viewing an idealized version of the
self reminds Facebook users that they have
many good qualities and positive relationships
with others. Furthermore, participants who re-
ceived negative feedback chose viewing their
Facebook profiles over other online activities,
suggesting that people are aware that viewing
their profile will make them feel better (Toma &
Hancock, 2013). In sum, self-presentation on
Facebook can be beneficial when the positive
self-image created therein is used to improve
and affirm the self-concept.
Personal and Situational Moderators
The self-affirming benefits of focusing on
one’s own profile should theoretically only
emerge when one’s profile contains positively
self-presented content. Indeed, although most
content posted on Facebook is positive (Qiu et
al., 2012), users who post mostly negative con-
tent about themselves are unlikely to psycho-
logically benefit from viewing their profiles.
Thus, any personal and situational factors that
might cause a person to post negative (i.e.,
downward comparison) content would moder-
ate the typical benefits of a focus on self-
generated content. One such factor is self-
esteem, as users with low self-esteem tend to
post more negative content (Forest & Wood,
2012). Not only do they not reap the benefits of
seeing a positive version of themselves, they are
also unlikely to gain social support from SNS
use. Indeed, whereas people with high self-
esteem tend to receive ample social support on
Facebook (e.g., “likes” and comments from
their Facebook friends) when posting negative
content, people with low self-esteem tend to get
fewer responses. Social support gained from
Facebook is a key benefit of Facebook use that
leads to improvements in important psycholog-
ical outcomes such as subjective well-being
(Kim & Lee, 2011) and life satisfaction (Nabi et
al., 2013). Therefore, when users post negative
content, they are likely to be negatively affected
by viewing their own profile and by others’
lackluster responses.
Implications and Recommendations
As discussed above, evidence is mixed as to
whether Facebook use is helpful or harmful for
psychological well-being. A synthesis of the
extant literature suggests that positive self-
presentation— creating an idealized version of
oneself on social media—is a widespread and
consequential phenomenon. Facebook use is
positive when users take advantage of the ben-
efits of positive self-presentation and experi-
ence outcomes such as increased self-esteem
297SELF-PRESENTATION ON SOCIAL MEDIA
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
(e.g., Gonzales & Hancock, 2011) and self-
affirmation (Toma & Hancock, 2013). Con-
versely, Facebook use is harmful for psycholog-
ical well-being when users see acquaintances’
positively presented content, engage in upward
social comparison, and incur negative outcomes
such as decreased self-esteem (e.g., Vogel et al.,
2014) and depression (e.g., Steers et al., 2014).
As such, we offer the following recommenda-
tions for making the most of Facebook use.
Focus on Friends, Not Acquaintances
Research shows that much of Facebook use
involves passively browsing others’ content
(Pempek, Yermolayeva, & Calvert, 2009).
Importantly, passively browsing acquain-
tances’ profiles leads Facebook users to feel
envious of the profile owners and leads to
upward social comparison (Lin & Utz, 2015),
ultimately resulting in loneliness, depression,
and lower life satisfaction (Burke et al., 2010;
Krasnova et al., 2013;Tandoc et al., 2015).
Users who merely browse acquaintances’ pro-
files get the impression that the profile own-
ers’ lives are very happy and successful, be-
cause the profile owners present the most
positive aspects of their lives on social media
(Chou & Edge, 2012). On the other hand,
browsing close friends’ profiles is associated
with positive outcomes because people are
aware that their close friends’ lives are not as
positive as they appear on Facebook (Chou &
Edge, 2012) and because they sometimes ex-
perience close others’ accomplishments as a
positive reflection on themselves (Tesser &
Campbell, 1982). Moreover, actively commu-
nicating with friends on social media leads to
positive outcomes for two primary reasons.
First, it contributes to the sense of having an
audience for one’s own self-presentation
(Zhao et al., 2008). For example, having pub-
lic conversations with friends creates the im-
pression that the user is popular and well-
liked, which increases life satisfaction
(Manago et al., 2012) and subjective well-
being (Kim & Lee, 2011). Second, having a
strong online social network can diminish the
negative effects of social exclusion on well-
being. When people feel excluded from a
group, even a group of strangers, they typi-
cally experience distress and a need to belong
(Williams, Cheung, & Choi, 2000). Using
SNSs, or even just thinking about using SNSs,
can mitigate negative effects and fulfill be-
longingness needs (Chiou, Lee, & Liao, 2015;
Knausenberger, Hellmann, & Echterhoff,
2015;Knowles, Haycock, & Shaikh, 2015).
View and Update Your Own Profile
Viewing and updating one’s own profile is
crucial for taking advantage of the self-
presentation opportunities on SNSs. Construct-
ing an idealized version of oneself can improve
the self-concept (Zhao et al., 2008), raise self-
esteem (Gentile et al., 2012;Gonzales & Han-
cock, 2011), fulfill the need to share a positive
self-image with others (Nadkarni & Hofmann,
2012), and remind users of their best qualities
(Toma & Hancock, 2013). Viewing one’s own
profile can even reduce defensiveness after re-
ceiving negative feedback, which can be useful
in everyday life (Toma & Hancock, 2013).
Use Social Media in Moderation
Facebook can be a useful tool for rapidly
expanding social networks by acquiring a
large number of “friends” (Manago et al.,
2012). Connections made on Facebook can
provide a sense of social support (Nabi et al.,
2013) and social resources (Ellison et al.,
2007), and having more Facebook “friends”
(i.e., established, publicly visible connec-
tions) is generally positive. However, Face-
book use becomes problematic when users do
not know their “friends” very well offline
(Chou & Edge, 2012) or when they spend a
great deal of time on Facebook (Andreassen,
Torsheim, Brunborg, & Pallesen, 2012;Fein-
stein et al., 2013;Kross et al., 2013;Lee,
2014;Mehdizadeh, 2010;Sagioglou & Greit-
emeyer, 2014;Steers et al., 2014;Tandoc et
al., 2015;Vogel et al., 2014). Spending time
with one’s friends offline can buffer against
the harmful effects of positive self-presenta-
tion, reminding individuals that their friends
do have faults and that their friends’ lives are
not as perfect as they may seem (Chou &
Edge, 2012). Over time, maintaining a bal-
ance between communicating with friends on-
line, cultivating one’s own social media pres-
ence, and pursuing relationships offline
serves to optimize the benefits of SNS use.
298 VOGEL AND ROSE
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
Limitations and Future Directions
Although we expect that the recommendations
outlined above should apply to the majority of
SNS users, there are potential limitations of note.
First, much of the research to date has sampled
from Facebook users in the United States and
Canada. Because approximately 84% of active
Facebook users are outside of these countries (Fa-
cebook, 2016), the results and our recommenda-
tions may not apply to all users. Indeed, there may
be important country, orientation (e.g., individu-
alistic vs. collectivistic, independent vs. interde-
pendent), or ideology (e.g., Eastern vs. Western)
differences that limit the generalizability of the
recommendations described above (Lehman,
Chiu, & Schaller, 2004;Markus & Kitayama,
1991;Na, Kosinski, & Stillwell, 2015). For exam-
ple, compared to Facebook users from Eastern
cultures (e.g., Japan, China), Facebook users from
Western cultures (e.g., the United States, Canada)
tend to engage in more positive self-presentation
(Lee-Won, Shim, Joo, & Park, 2014;Mazur & Li,
2016;Peters, Winschiers-Theophilus, & Men-
necke, 2015), participate in more passive brows-
ing (Peters et al., 2015), and have larger, looser
social networks (Cho & Park, 2013). These char-
acteristics may lead to the hypothesis that both the
positive and negative effects of Facebook use
would be stronger in Western cultures than East-
ern cultures. In sum, it is important for future
research to examine the psychological impact of
Facebook use as a function of country, cultural
orientation, and cultural ideology.
Second, our framework mostly focuses on the
effects of exposure to positive content on Face-
book. Although browsing content is a major
aspect of Facebook use (Pempek et al., 2009),
online communication comes with its own set of
pitfalls that our framework does not fully ad-
dress. One notable example is the commonness
of misinterpreting others’ messages when com-
municating online. Important details of commu-
nication, such as tone of voice and gestures, are
lost in emails (Kruger, Epley, Parker, & Ng,
2005) and other online communication plat-
forms. A second example is cyberbullying,
which involves using online platforms (such as
Facebook) to harm others. This practice is quite
common among adolescents (Beran, Rinaldi,
Bickham, & Rich, 2012) and young adults (Pe-
luchette, Karl, Wood, & Williams, 2015), and
tends to affect those who have large online
social networks (Peluchette et al., 2015). These
consequences are among the many that may
result from online communication, and a richer
framework could be created to examine how the
effects specific to social media content may fit
in this larger context.
Conclusions
To date, there is a growing body of literature
exploring the positive and negative effects of
Facebook use on a variety of outcomes, includ-
ing self-esteem (e.g., Vogel et al., 2014), mood
(e.g., Sagioglou & Greitemeyer, 2014) and sub-
jective well-being (e.g., Kross et al., 2013).
Self-presentation offers one lens through which
to view the discrepant effects of Facebook use.
For most users, focusing on (nonclose) others’
unrealistically positive online selves will result
in negative outcomes, while focusing on their
own online selves will result in positive out-
comes. Therefore, we recommend that Face-
book users spend their time on the SNS catching
up with close friends and updating their own
profiles, while making time for offline relation-
ship maintenance as well.
References
Andreassen, C. S., Torsheim, T., Brunborg, G. S., &
Pallesen, S. (2012). Development of a Facebook
addiction scale. Psychological Reports, 110, 501–
517. http://dx.doi.org/10.2466/02.09.18.PR0.110.2
.501-517
Back, M. D., Stopfer, J. M., Vazire, S., Gaddis, S.,
Schmukle, S. C., Egloff, B., & Gosling, S. D.
(2010). Facebook profiles reflect actual personal-
ity, not self-idealization. Psychological Science,
21, 372–374. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0956
797609360756
Beran, T. N., Rinaldi, C., Bickham, D. S., & Rich, M.
(2012). Evidence for the need to support adoles-
cents dealing with harassment and cyber-harass-
ment: Prevalence, progression, and impact. School
Psychology International, 33, 562–576. http://dx
.doi.org/10.1177/0143034312446976
Boyd, D. M., & Ellison, N. B. (2007). Social network
sites: Definition, history, and scholarship. Journal
of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13, 210 –
230. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2007
.00393.x
Brown, J. D. (2007). The self. New York, NY: Psy-
chology Press.
Burke, M., Marlow, C., & Lento, T. (2010). Social
network activity and social well-being. Proceed-
299SELF-PRESENTATION ON SOCIAL MEDIA
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
ings of the ACM Conference on Human Factors in
Computing Systems. Atlanta, Georgia: ACM.
Buunk, B. P., Collins, R. L., Taylor, S. E., VanY-
peren, N. W., & Dakof, G. A. (1990). The affective
consequences of social comparison: Either direc-
tion has its ups and downs. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 59, 1238 –1249. http://dx
.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.59.6.1238
Cash, T. F., Cash, D. W., & Butters, J. W. (1983).
“Mirror, Mirror, on the Wall . . .?”: Contrast ef-
fects and self-evaluations of physical attractive-
ness. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,
9, 351–358. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/01461672
83093004
Chiou, W., Lee, C., & Liao, D. (2015). Facebook
effects on social distress: Priming with online so-
cial networking thoughts can alter the perceived
distress due to social exclusion. Computers in Hu-
man Behavior, 49, 230 –236. http://dx.doi.org/10
.1016/j.chb.2015.02.064
Cho, S. E., & Park, H. W. (2013). A qualitative
analysis of cross-cultural new media research:
SNS use in Asia and the West. Quality & Quantity:
International Journal of Methodology, 47, 2319 –
2330. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11135-011-
9658-z
Chou, H.-T. G., & Edge, N. (2012). “They are hap-
pier and having better lives than I am”: The impact
of using Facebook on perceptions of others’ lives.
Cyberpsychology, Behavior and Social Network-
ing, 15, 117–121. http://dx.doi.org/10.1089/cyber
.2011.0324
Ellison, N. B., Steinfield, C., & Lampe, C. (2007).
The benefits of Facebook “friends:” Social capital
and college students’ use of online social network
sites. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communica-
tion, 12, 1143–1168. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j
.1083-6101.2007.00367.x
Facebook. (2016). Company info. Retrieved from
http://newsroom.fb.com/company-info
Feinstein, B. A., Hershenberg, R., Bhatia, V., Latack,
J. A., Meuwly, N., & Davila, J. (2013). Negative
social comparison on Facebook and depressive
symptoms: Rumination as a mechanism. Psychol-
ogy of Popular Media Culture, 2, 161–170. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0033111
Festinger, L. (1954). A theory of social comparison
processes. Human Relations, 7, 117–140. http://dx
.doi.org/10.1177/001872675400700202
Forest, A. L., & Wood, J. V. (2012). When social
networking is not working: Individuals with low
self-esteem recognize but do not reap the benefits
of self-disclosure on Facebook. Psychological Sci-
ence, 23, 295–302. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/
0956797611429709
Gentile, B., Twenge, J. M., Freeman, E. C., & Camp-
bell, W. K. (2012). The effect of social networking
websites on positive self-views: An experimental
investigation. Computers in Human Behavior, 28,
1929 –1933. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2012
.05.012
Gibbons, F. X., & Buunk, B. P. (1999). Individual
differences in social comparison: Development of
a scale of social comparison orientation. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 76, 129 –142.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.76.1.129
Goffman, E. (1959). Presentation of the self in ev-
eryday life. New York, NY: Doubleday.
Gonzales, A. L., & Hancock, J. T. (2011). Mirror,
mirror on my Facebook wall: Effects of exposure
to Facebook on self-esteem. Cyberpsychology, Be-
havior and Social Networking, 14, 79 – 83. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2009.0411
Gruder, C. L. (1971). Determinants of social com-
parison choices. Journal of Experimental Social
Psychology, 7, 473– 489. http://dx.doi.org/10
.1016/0022-1031(71)90010-2
Haferkamp, N., Eimler, S. C., Papadakis, A.-M., &
Kruck, J. V. (2012). Men are from Mars, women
are from Venus? Examining gender differences in
self-presentation on social networking sites. Cy-
berpsychology, Behavior and Social Networking,
15, 91–98. http://dx.doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2011
.0151
Haferkamp, N., & Krämer, N. C. (2011). Social com-
parison 2.0: Examining the effects of online pro-
files on social-networking sites. Cyberpsychology,
Behavior and Social Networking, 14, 309 –314.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2010.0120
Hakmiller, K. L. (1966). Threats as a determinant of
downward comparison. Journal of Experimental
Social Psychology, 1(Suppl. 1), 32–39. http://dx
.doi.org/10.1016/0022-1031(66)90063-1
Hogan, B. (2010). The presentation of the self in the
age of social media: Distinguishing performances
and exhibitions online. Bulletin of Science, Tech-
nology & Society, 30, 377–386. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1177/0270467610385893
Johnson, B. K., & Knobloch-Westerwick, S. (2014).
Glancing up or down: Mood management and se-
lective social comparisons on social networking
sites. Computers in Human Behavior, 41, 33–39.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.09.009
Kim, J., & Lee, J. E. (2011). The Facebook paths to
happiness: Effects of the number of Facebook
friends and self-presentation on subjective well-
being. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social
Networking, 14, 359 –364. http://dx.doi.org/10
.1089/cyber.2010.0374
Knausenberger, J., Hellmann, J. H., & Echterhoff, G.
(2015). When virtual contact is all you need: Sub-
tle reminders of Facebook preempt social-contact
restoration after exclusion. European Journal of
Social Psychology, 45, 279 –284. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1002/ejsp.2035
300 VOGEL AND ROSE
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
Knowles, M. L., Haycock, N., & Shaikh, I. (2015).
Does Facebook magnify or mitigate threats to be-
longing? Social Psychology, 46, 313–324. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1027/1864-9335/a000246
Krasnova, H., Wenninger, H., Widjaja, T., & Bux-
mann, P. (2013, February 27–March 1). Envy on
Facebook: A hidden threat to users’ life satis-
faction? 11th International Conference on
Wirtschaftsinformatik, Leipzig, Germany.
Krasnova, H., Widjaja, T., Buxmann, P., Wenninger,
H., & Benbasat, I. (2015). Research note—why
following friends can hurt you: An exploratory
investigation of the effects of envy on social net-
working sites among college-age users. Informa-
tion Systems Research, 26, 585– 605. http://dx.doi
.org/10.1287/isre.2015.0588
Kross, E., Verduyn, P., Demiralp, E., Park, J., Lee,
D. S., Lin, N.,...Ybarra, O. (2013). Facebook use
predicts declines in subjective well-being in young
adults. PLoS ONE, 8, e69841. http://dx.doi.org/10
.1371/journal.pone.0069841
Kruger, J., Epley, N., Parker, J., & Ng, Z. W. (2005).
Egocentrism over e-mail: Can we communicate as
well as we think? Journal of Personality and So-
cial Psychology, 89, 925–936. http://dx.doi.org/10
.1037/0022-3514.89.6.925
Lee, S. Y. (2014). How do people compare them-
selves with others on social network sites?: The
case of Facebook. Computers in Human Behavior,
32, 253–260. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2013
.12.009
Lee-Won, R. J., Shim, M., Joo, Y. K., & Park, S. G.
(2014). Who puts the best “face” forward on Fa-
cebook?: Positive self-presentation in online social
networking and the role of self-consciousness, ac-
tual-to-total Friends ratio, and culture. Computers
in Human Behavior, 39, 413– 423. http://dx.doi
.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.08.007
Lehman, D. R., Chiu, C. Y., & Schaller, M. (2004).
Psychology and culture. Annual Review of Psy-
chology, 55, 689 –714. http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/
annurev.psych.55.090902.141927
Lin, R., & Utz, S. (2015). The emotional responses of
browsing Facebook: Happiness, envy, and the role
of tie strength. Computers in Human Behavior, 52,
29 –38. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.04
.064
Lockwood, P., & Kunda, Z. (1997). Superstars and
me: Predicting the impact of role models on the
self. Journal of Personality and Social Psychol-
ogy, 73, 91–103. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-
3514.73.1.91
Manago, A. M., Graham, M. B., Greenfield, P. M., &
Salimkhan, G. (2008). Self-presentation and gen-
der on MySpace. Journal of Applied Developmen-
tal Psychology, 29, 446 – 458. http://dx.doi.org/10
.1016/j.appdev.2008.07.001
Manago, A. M., Taylor, T., & Greenfield, P. M.
(2012). Me and my 400 friends: The anatomy of
college students’ Facebook networks, their com-
munication patterns, and well-being. Developmen-
tal Psychology, 48, 369 –380. http://dx.doi.org/10
.1037/a0026338
Markus, H. R., & Kitayama, S. (1991). Culture and
the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and
motivation. Psychological Review, 98, 224 –253.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.98.2.224
Mazur, E., & Li, Y. (2016). Identity and self-
presentation on social networking web sites: A
comparison of online profiles of Chinese and
American emerging adults. Psychology of Popular
Media Culture, 5, 101–118.
Mehdizadeh, S. (2010). Self-presentation 2.0: Narcis-
sism and self-esteem on Facebook. Cyberpsychol-
ogy, Behavior and Social Networking, 13, 357–
364. http://dx.doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2009.0257
Morse, S., & Gergen, K. J. (1970). Social compari-
son, self-consistency, and the concept of self. Jour-
nal of Personality and Social Psychology, 16,
148 –156. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0029862
Muise, A., Christofides, E., & Desmarais, S. (2009).
More information than you ever wanted: Does
Facebook bring out the green-eyed monster of
jealousy? CyberPsychology & Behavior, 12, 441–
444. http://dx.doi.org/10.1089/cpb.2008.0263
Muscanell, N. L., Guadagno, R. E., Rice, L., &
Murphy, S. (2013). Don’t it make my brown eyes
green? An analysis of Facebook use and romantic
jealousy. Cyberpsychology, Behavior and Social
Networking, 16, 237–242. http://dx.doi.org/10
.1089/cyber.2012.0411
Na, J., Kosinski, M., & Stillwell, D. J. (2015). When
a new tool is introduced in different cultural con-
texts: Individualism—Collectivism and social net-
work on Facebook. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psy-
chology, 46, 355–370. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/
0022022114563932
Nabi, R. L., Prestin, A., & So, J. (2013). Facebook
friends with (health) benefits? Exploring social
network site use and perceptions of social support,
stress, and well-being. Cyberpsychology, Behavior
and Social Networking, 16, 721–727. http://dx.doi
.org/10.1089/cyber.2012.0521
Nadkarni, A., & Hofmann, S. G. (2012). Why do
people use Facebook? Personality and Individual
Differences, 52, 243–249. http://dx.doi.org/10
.1016/j.paid.2011.11.007
Nesi, J., & Prinstein, M. J. (2015). Using social
media for social comparison and feedback-
seeking: Gender and popularity moderate associa-
tions with depressive symptoms. Journal of Ab-
normal Child Psychology, 43, 1427–1438. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10802-015-0020-0
Peluchette, J. V., Karl, K., Wood, C., & Williams, J.
(2015). Cyberbullying victimization: Do victims’
301SELF-PRESENTATION ON SOCIAL MEDIA
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
personality and risky social network behaviors
contribute to the problem? Computers in Human
Behavior, 52, 424 – 435. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.chb.2015.06.028
Pempek, T. A., Yermolayeva, Y. A., & Calvert, S. L.
(2009). College students’ social networking expe-
riences on Facebook. Journal of Applied Develop-
mental Psychology, 30, 227–238. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1016/j.appdev.2008.12.010
Peters, A. N., Winschiers-Theophilus, H., & Men-
necke, B. E. (2015). Cultural influences on Face-
book practices: A comparative study of college
students in Namibia and the United States. Com-
puters in Human Behavior, 49, 259 –271. http://dx
.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.02.065
Pyszczynski, T., Greenberg, J., & LaPrelle, J. (1985).
Social comparison after success and failure: Bi-
ased search for information consistent with a self-
servicing conclusion. Journal of Experimental So-
cial Psychology, 21, 195–211. http://dx.doi.org/10
.1016/0022-1031(85)90015-0
Qiu, L., Lin, H., Leung, A. K., & Tov, W. (2012).
Putting their best foot forward: Emotional disclo-
sure on Facebook. Cyberpsychology, Behavior and
Social Networking, 15, 569 –572. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1089/cyber.2012.0200
Sagioglou, C., & Greitemeyer, T. (2014). Facebook’s
emotional consequences: Why Facebook causes a
decrease in mood and why people still use it.
Computers in Human Behavior, 35, 359 –363.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.03.003
Schlenker, B. R. (2012). Self-presentation. In M. R.
Leary & J. P. Tangney (Eds.), Handbook of self
and identity (2nd ed., pp. 542–570). New York,
NY: Guilford Press.
Steers, M.-L. N., Wickham, R. E., & Acitelli, L. K.
(2014). Seeing everyone else’s highlight reels:
How Facebook usage is linked to depressive symp-
toms. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology,
33, 701–731. http://dx.doi.org/10.1521/jscp.2014
.33.8.701
Tandoc, E. C., Jr., Ferrucci, P., & Duffy, M. (2015).
Facebook use, envy, and depression among college
students: Is Facebooking depressing? Computers
in Human Behavior, 43, 139 –146. http://dx.doi
.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.10.053
Tesser, A., & Campbell, J. L. (1982). Self-
evaluation maintenance and the perception of
friends and strangers. Journal of Personality, 50,
261–279. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494
.1982.tb00750.x
Testa, M., & Major, B. (1990). The impact of social
comparisons after failure: The moderating effect of
perceived control. Basic and Applied Social Psy-
chology, 11, 205–218. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/
s15324834basp1102_7
Toma, C. L., & Hancock, J. T. (2013). Self-
affirmation underlies Facebook use. Personality
and Social Psychology Bulletin, 39, 321–331.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0146167212474694
Valkenburg, P. M., Peter, J., & Schouten, A. P.
(2006). Friend networking sites and their relation-
ship to adolescents’ well-being and social self-
esteem. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 9, 584 –
590. http://dx.doi.org/10.1089/cpb.2006.9.584
Vogel, E. A., Rose, J. P., Okdie, B. M., Eckles, K., &
Franz, B. (2015). Who compares and despairs?
The effect of social comparison orientation on
social media use and its outcomes. Personality and
Individual Differences, 86, 249 –256. http://dx.doi
.org/10.1016/j.paid.2015.06.026
Vogel, E. A., Rose, J. P., Roberts, L. R., & Eckles, K.
(2014). Social comparison, social media, and self-
esteem. Psychology of Popular Media Culture, 3,
206 –222. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/ppm0000047
Wilcox, K., & Stephen, A. T. (2013). Are close
friends the enemy? Online social networks, self-
esteem, and self-control. Journal of Consumer Re-
search, 40, 90 –103. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/
668794
Williams, K. D., Cheung, C. K. T., & Choi, W.
(2000). Cyberostracism: Effects of being ignored
over the Internet. Journal of Personality and So-
cial Psychology, 79, 748 –762. http://dx.doi.org/10
.1037/0022-3514.79.5.748
Wills, T. A. (1981). Downward comparison princi-
ples in social psychology. Psychological Bulletin,
90, 245–271. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909
.90.2.245
Wilson, R. E., Gosling, S. D., & Graham, L. T.
(2012). A review of Facebook research in the
social sciences. Perspectives on Psychological Sci-
ence, 7, 203–220. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/
1745691612442904
Wood, J. V. (1989). Theory and research concerning
social comparisons of personal attributes. Psycho-
logical Bulletin, 106, 231–248. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1037/0033-2909.106.2.231
Zell, E., & Alicke, M. D. (2010). The local domi-
nance effect in self-evaluation: Evidence and ex-
planations. Personality and Social Psychology Re-
view, 14, 368 –384. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/
1088868310366144
Zhao, S., Grasmuck, S., & Martin, J. (2008). Identity
construction on Facebook: Digital empowerment
in anchored relationships. Computers in Human
Behavior, 24, 1816 –1836. http://dx.doi.org/10
.1016/j.chb.2008.02.012
Zillmann, D. (1988). Mood management through
communication choices. American Behavioral Sci-
entist, 31, 327–340. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/
000276488031003005
Received June 8, 2015
Revision received July 6, 2016
Accepted July 8, 2016 䡲
302 VOGEL AND ROSE
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
A preview of this full-text is provided by American Psychological Association.
Content available from Translational Issues in Psychological Science
This content is subject to copyright. Terms and conditions apply.
