Video face filters play an increasingly important role in digitally mediated self-presentation for people around the world. We interviewed young adult video filter users from China, India, South Korea, Spain, and the United States, asking what video filters they use, who they use filters with, and how. Participants demonstrated sensitivity to public versus private spheres when determining what filter type was appropriate for particular audiences. Those audiences included the self-only, in what we call the “dressing room,” extending Goffman’s dramaturgical metaphor for self-presentation. We further identify a tendency for the women and East Asians we interviewed to be more attuned to different kinds of audiences, as well as East-West differences in acceptance of beauty filter enhancement. Implications for video filter research are discussed.
BellA (1984) Language style as audience design. Language in Society13(2): 145–204.
2.
BenderRLangeS (2001) Adjusting for multiple testing: when and how?Journal of Clinical Epidemiology54(4): 343–349.
3.
BharatiAVatsaMSinghR, et al. (2017) Demography-based facial retouching detection using subclass supervised sparse autoencoder. In: 2017 IEEE international joint conference on biometrics, Denver, CO, October, pp. 474–482. New York: IEEE.
4.
ChaeJ (2017) Virtual makeover: selfie-taking and social media use increase selfie-editing frequency through social comparison. Computers in Human Behavior66: 370–376.
5.
ChuaTHHChangL (2016) Follow me and like my beautiful selfies: Singapore teenage girls’ engagement in self-presentation and peer comparison on social media. Computers in Human Behavior55: 190–197.
6.
DaftRLengelRH (1984) Information richness: a new approach to managerial behavior and organizational design. Research in Organizational Behavior6: 191–233.
7.
Deloitte Digital (2021) Snap consumer AR global report 2021. Available at: https://bit.ly/3mvLn7K
8.
DhirAPallesenSTorsheimT, et al. (2016) Do age and gender differences exist in selfie-related behaviours?Computers in Human Behavior63: 549–555.
9.
FilhoJEInkpenKMCzerwinskiM (2009) Image, appearance and vanity in the use of media spaces and video conference systems. In: ACM 2009 international conference on supporting group work, Sanibel, FL, 10–13 May, pp. 253–262. New York: Association for Computing Machinery.
10.
GillR (2021) Changing the perfect picture: smartphones, social media and appearance pressures. Report, University of London, March.
11.
GlaserBStraussA (1967) The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. New York: Aldine Publishing Company.
12.
GoffmanE (1959) The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. New York: Doubleday Anchor Books.
13.
GrayLWong-WylieGRempelG, et al. (2020) Expanding qualitative research interviewing strategies: zoom video communications. The Qualitative Report25(5): 1292–1301.
14.
HerringSCDainasARLopez LongH, et al. (2020) “If I’m close with them, it wouldn’t be weird”: social distance and Animoji use. In: HCI International 2020–Late breaking papers: Interaction, knowledge and social media, Copenhagen, 19–24 July, pp. 285–304. Cham: Springer.
15.
HerringSCDedemaMRodríguezE, et al. (2022) Gender and culture differences in perception of deceptive video filter use. In: HCI International 2022–Late breaking papers: Interaction in new media, learning and games, Virtual Event, 26 July-1 July, pp. 52–72. Cham: Springer.
16.
JavornikAMarderBBarhorstJB, et al. (2022) “What lies behind the filter?” Uncovering the motivations for using augmented reality (AR) face filters on social media and their effect on well-being. Computers in Human Behavior128: 107–126.
17.
JungJLeeSH (2006) Cross-cultural comparisons of appearance self-schema, body image, self-esteem, and dieting behavior between Korean and US women. Family and Consumer Sciences Research Journal34(4): 350–365.
18.
KellyRWattsL (2015) Characterising the inventive appropriation of emoji as relationally meaningful in mediated close personal relationships. In: Experiences of Technology Appropriation: Unanticipated Users, Usage, Circumstances, and Design. Oslo, Norway.
19.
KimmelMS (1997) Masculinity as homophobia: fear, shame and silence in the construction of gender identity. In GergenMMDavisSN (eds) Toward a New Psychology of Gender. London: Taylor & Frances/Routledge, pp. 223–242.
20.
LearyMR (2019) Self-Presentation: Impression Management and Interpersonal Behavior. London: Routledge.
21.
LeongJPertenederFRajveeMR, et al. (2023) Picture the audience. . .: exploring private AR face filters for online public speaking. In: 2023 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems, Hamburg, 23–28 April, pp. 1–13. New York: Association for Computing Machinery.
22.
LimI (2008) The trend of creating atypical male images in heterosexist Korean society. Korea Journal48(4): 115–146.
23.
McNeillLSDouglasK (2011) Retailing masculinity: gender expectations and social image of male grooming products in New Zealand. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services18(5): 448–454.
24.
MadanSBasuSNgS, et al. (2018) Impact of culture on the pursuit of beauty: evidence from five countries. Journal of International Marketing26(4): 54–68.
25.
MarwickA (2015) Instafame: luxury selfies in the attention economy. Public Culture27(1): 137–160.
26.
MishraN (2015) India and colorism: the finer nuances. Washington University Global Studies Law Review14: 725.
27.
MorlingBKitayamaSMiyamotoY (2002) Cultural practices emphasize influence in the United States and adjustment in Japan. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin28(3): 311–323.
28.
PerssonA (2012) Front- and backstage in social media. Language, Discourse & Society1(2): 11–31.
29.
RiccioPOliverN (2022) Racial bias in the beautyverse: evaluation of augmented-reality beauty filters. In: KarlinskyLMichaeliTNishinoK (eds) European Conference on Computer Vision. Cham: Springer, pp. 714–721.
30.
RiccioPPsomasBGalatiF, et al. (2022) OpenFilter: a framework to democratize research access to social media AR filters. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems35: 12491–12503.
31.
SouidenNDiagneM (2009) Canadian and French men’s consumption of cosmetics: a comparison of their attitudes and motivations. Journal of Consumer Marketing26(2): 97–109.
WaltherJBLewZ (2022) Self-transformation online through alternative presentations of self: a review, critique, and call for research. Annals of the International Communication Association46(3): 135–158.
