The rise of beauty filters is transforming how people see themselves—often for the worse. A study published in Computers in Human Behavior has found that users of slimming filters experience heightened body dysmorphia and a greater desire to lose weight, driven by comparisons with their enhanced image. This emerging phenomenon, termed “social self-comparison,” sheds light on the darker side of augmented reality technology.
The widespread use of beauty filters on platforms such as Instagram and Snapchat has raised concerns about their potential effects on mental health. These filters not only encourage users to conform to societal beauty standards, such as thinness, but also allow them to see themselves in ways they might find preferable to their real-life appearance.
While traditional social comparison theory explains how people evaluate themselves by comparing with others, the researchers proposed that beauty filters introduce a new dynamic: comparing one’s real appearance with an idealized, filtered version. This phenomenon, referred to as social self-comparison, could amplify the negative psychological outcomes already associated with social media use.
“A few years ago, I came across a TikTok trend where users employed augmented reality technology to alter their bodies, making them appear either larger or smaller. In one instance, I watched a video of a woman using augmented reality to digitally reduce her body size. She described the altered image as her ideal body and a source of motivation to lose weight,” said study author Makenzie Schroeder, a PhD candidate at the University of Missouri
“This moment left a lasting impression on me, as it highlighted the potential of such technology to harm self-image and trigger a desire for changing one’s body. In turn, I began thinking about how comparing our current self to a digitally altered version of the self could be more harmful than comparing ourselves to other people.”
The study involved 187 participants recruited online, primarily women, aged 19 to 66, with an average age of 36. Participants were randomly assigned to one of three conditions: (1) using a slimming beauty filter on their own image, (2) viewing a video of another person using the same beauty filter, or (3) using a neutral filter that simply added a blue tint to their image. These conditions allowed the researchers to compare the effects of social self-comparison (condition 1) with traditional social comparison (condition 2) and a control group (condition 3).
Participants first completed a questionnaire assessing their baseline body image perceptions and social media use. They were then instructed to use or view filters through a popular augmented reality app. Those in the self-filtering condition manipulated their own image using a slimming filter designed to narrow the face and enhance attractiveness. After exposure to their assigned condition, participants answered questions measuring body dysmorphic thoughts, self-objectification, desire for weight loss, anti-fat attitudes, and preference for their filtered image over their real appearance.
The results showed that using a slimming beauty filter led to more negative outcomes compared to viewing someone else use the same filter or using a neutral filter that did not alter appearance.
“Slimming beauty filters can trigger a process called social self-comparison, which we conceptualize as comparing one’s real-life appearance to their digitally altered appearance,” Schroeder told PsyPost.
Participants who used the slimming filter were more likely to experience heightened body dysmorphic thoughts. These thoughts reflect a distorted perception of their appearance, characterized by dissatisfaction with their real looks and a desire to change them.
The study also highlighted that participants who engaged in social self-comparison were more likely to express a stronger desire for weight loss. Participants in this condition reported a larger gap between their current body and their ideal body size compared to the other conditions, emphasizing how beauty filters exacerbate dissatisfaction with one’s real appearance.
Another significant finding was the increased tendency for self-objectification among participants who used the slimming beauty filter. Self-objectification occurs when individuals evaluate themselves primarily based on their appearance rather than other attributes or abilities. The study showed that users of the slimming filter ranked appearance-related traits, such as weight and attractiveness, as more central to their identity than non-appearance traits, like physical abilities or energy levels.
Additionally, participants in the social self-comparison condition exhibited stronger anti-fat attitudes, reflecting a deeper disdain for fatness or overweight individuals. This finding aligns with the societal pressures that equate thinness with beauty and success, pressures that are reinforced by digital tools like slimming filters. Interestingly, these anti-fat attitudes were also present, albeit to a lesser degree, among participants who watched someone else use the slimming filter, suggesting that even indirect exposure to these tools perpetuates harmful stereotypes and biases.
Lastly, the study revealed that participants who used the slimming filter had a greater preference for their filtered image over their real-life appearance, compared to participants in the other two conditions. This preference underscores the potential for beauty filters to alter users’ perceptions of their self-worth, making them feel that their natural appearance is inadequate or less appealing. However, this outcome was not directly mediated by social self-comparison but instead linked to the body dysmorphic thoughts triggered by the filter usage.
“As our study highlights, using slimming beauty filters can trigger body dysmorphia, which is the perception someone holds about their own body being flawed beyond someone else’s objective perception,” Schroeder explained. “This dysmorphia can exacerbate the gap between one’s true body size and their ideal body size, as well as lead to a desire for weight loss, a preference for one’s filtered image over their real-life appearance, self-objectification, and fatphobic attitudes.”
“In short, exercise caution when using beauty filters. They may lead to harmful comparisons and negative feelings about one’s appearance, further leading to other negative outcomes.”
The study’s findings are compelling but come with limitations. First, the sample skewed heavily toward women and Millennials, which may limit generalizability to younger, more social media-savvy populations such as Generation Z. Additionally, the experimental design required participants to use specific filters, which might not fully replicate real-world behavior where individuals choose filters based on personal preference. The study also focused on a single slimming filter, leaving open questions about the broader effects of various beauty filters, including those emphasizing features like musculature or skin tone.
“It’s important to note that this study focused on a single slimming beauty filter, which was relatively subtle in its effect,” Schroeder said. “Other filters with more exaggerated alterations could produce different or more pronounced outcomes. Future research should explore a broader range of filters to better understand their impact.”
“I believe it is essential to further develop this research through the lens of fatphobia, which refers to a societal bias against or dislike of fatness,” she added. “Given how deeply rooted fatphobia is in society, users may feel pressured to resemble their slimmer, filtered image. In turn, this pressure may lead to harmful outcomes beyond what is covered in the current manuscript. As a society, how can we address and combat the harms and perpetuation of fatphobia and weight stigma within mediated spaces? Additionally, I would like to further explore social self- comparison, focusing on its nuances and how it differs from traditional social comparison processes.”
The study, “Digitally curated beauty: The impact of slimming beauty filters on body image, weight loss desire, self-objectification, and anti-fat attitudes,” was authored by Makenzie Schroeder and Elizabeth Behm-Morawitz.
