Achieving the ideal-self while harming my relationship: Examining associations between self-discrepancy, instagram photo manipulation, and romantic relationship outcomes.

Abstract

As visual social mediums, Social Networking Sites (SNSs) such as Facebook and Instagram have been examined under the theoretical lenses of social comparison theory and self-discrepancy theory. Guided by self-discrepancy theory and recent work on romantic relationship outcomes and social media usage, this study examined the relationship between the magnitude of actual-ideal self-discrepancies, photo manipulation behaviors on Instagram, Instagram-related relationship conflict, and Instagram-enabled infidelity and dissolution. A total of 264 Instagram users aged 18 to 63 years (M = 21.34, SD = 4.99), predominately female (75%) and Caucasian (60.9%) completed an online survey questionnaire. Analysis of a serial multiple mediator model using bootstrapping methods indicated that the magnitude of participants’ actual-ideal self-discrepancies was sequentially associated with increased Instagram-enabled infidelity and dissolution through increased photo-manipulation behaviors on Instagram and Instagram-related conflict. The theoretical and practical implications of these findings are discussed in detail.

The Effect of Self-Discrepancy on Online Behavior: A Literature Review

“… Beos et al (2021) also found that appearance-based actual-ideal self-discrepancy is positively associated with facial dissatisfaction and photo manipulation. Similarly, Stewart and Clayton (2021) indicated that Instagram users with greater actual-ideal self-discrepancy are more likely to manipulate their photos. Self-discrepancy is also positively associated with narcissistic self-presentation on Facebook ( Yu and Kim, 2020 ).…”

“… Mankotia and Wesley (2020) suggested that the discrepancy between actual-ideal self and actual-ought self is not significantly associated with photo editing behavior. A possible explanation may be that photo editing can result in some negative consequences, such as judgment from peers and romantic relationship conflict (e.g., jealousy and argument; Johnson and Ranzini, 2018 ; Stewart and Clayton, 2021 ). In addition, the exaggeration of online self-image increases the incongruence between an individual’s actual self and the self he or she presented online.…”

“…First, more efforts should be made to explore the effect of actual-ought discrepancy. Most of the reviewed studies have focused on actual-ideal self-discrepancy and the discrepancy between the actual self and virtual self (i.e., virtual self-discrepancy; e.g., Jin, 2012 ; Suh, 2013 ; Beos et al, 2021 ; Stewart and Clayton, 2021 ). The research on actual-ought self-discrepancy is rare.…”

“…The self-discrepancy theory proposes that people’s behavior is motivated to reduce the self-discrepancy between the self that they actually present and the self they ought or wish to be ( Higgins, 1987 ). Existing studies have explored the relationships between different types of self-discrepancies and people’s behavior from different perspectives in various contexts, such as photo editing behavior on social network sites ( Mankotia and Wesley, 2020 ; Beos et al, 2021 ; Stewart and Clayton, 2021 ; Yang et al, 2021 ), knowledge contribution behavior in online communities ( Suh, 2013 ; Lee and Suh, 2015 ), and gaming behavior in online games ( Kim M.-K. et al, 2018a ; Mancini et al, 2019 ; Yang et al, 2021 ).…”

Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram: Simultaneously examining the association between three social networking sites and relationship stress and satisfaction.

“…Social networking sites (henceforth: SNSs) have significantly influenced the dynamics of interpersonal relationships and especially romantic relationships (Clayton et al., 2013; Clayton, 2014; Ridgway & Clayton, 2016; Stewart & Clayton, 2022). For instance, SNSs such as Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter have provided a relatively new platform for both personal and impersonal communication (Fox & Rooney, 2015; McLean et al., 2015; Ridgway & Clayton, 2016; Stewart & Clayton, 2022).…”