JWith a click of the “Shiny Babe” filter, the young woman’s face was subtly stretched, her nose was refined and her cheeks were sprinkled with freckles. Next, a “glitter makeup” filter blotted out skin blemishes, plumped her lips into a rosebud, and lengthened her lashes beyond makeup reach. On the third click her face returned to reality.
Billions of people now use beauty filters to change their look on apps including Snapchat, Instagram and TikTok. This week TikTok announced new global restrictions on children accessing the effects of cosmetic surgery.
After an investigation into the feelings of nearly 200 teenagers and parents in the UK, US and other countries, it was found that girls are “susceptible to feelings of low self-worth” as a result of their online experiences.
There is growing concern about the well-being impact of rapidly advancing technology, such as the creation of artificial intelligence, enabling a new generation of so-called “micro-personality cults.” This is no small matter: TikTok has around 1 billion users.
A forthcoming study by Professor Sonia Livingstone, professor of social psychology at the London School of Economics, argues that stressors and social comparisons resulting from increasingly image-driven social media use may have a greater impact on mental health than viewing violence. .
Hundreds of millions of people use alternate reality filters on social media every day – from comic dog ears to beauty filters that alter noses, whiten teeth and widen eyes.
Dr Claire Bescott, an educator at the University of South Wales who has studied 10- and 11-year-olds, agrees that the impact of online social comparison is underestimated. During one study, one child, unhappy with their appearance, told her: “I wish I was wearing a filter right now.”
“There’s a lot of education in Internet security — protecting ourselves from pedophiles or catfishing [using a fake online persona to enable romance or fraud],” she said. “But really the dangers are interpersonal. Comparing ourselves to others has a greater emotional effect.”
But there is resistance to restrictions on effects that some feel is a fundamental part of their online identity. Olga Izupova, a Russian digital artist living in Greece who designs beauty filters, said such moves were “disgusting”. He said that having an adaptive face is a necessary part of being “multiple personas” in the digital age.
“One lives their normal life, but it’s not the same life online,” he said. “That’s why our social media lives need a facelift. For many people [online] It’s a very competitive field and it’s all about Darwinism. Many people are using social media not just for entertainment but as a place for advancement in life, future and earning money.
Either way, some filters aren’t likely to solve TikTok’s age-blocking problem quickly. Research by UK communications regulator Ofcom has found that one in five eight- to 16-year-olds lie about being over 18 on social media apps. Rules to tighten age verification won’t come into effect until next year.
There is a consistent body of research indicating the dangers of certain beauty filters for teenagers. Last month, a small study of schoolgirls using Snapchat in Delhi said they “experience a reduction in self-esteem and feelings of inadequacy when their natural appearance is replaced with filtered images”. A 2022 study of more than 300 Belgian teenagers found that use of facial filters was linked to their likelihood of accepting the idea of cosmetic surgery.
“Some kids are resilient, looking at these images and saying, ‘Oh, it’s a filter but very vulnerable … they feel bad when they see it,'” Livingstone said. “We’re seeing more evidence that teenage girls feel vulnerable about their appearance.”
When Internet Matters, TikTok’s research partner, asked a 17-year-old Swedish girl about beauty filters, she said: “I can’t look at my lips anymore without feeling like they’re too small because I’ve never had anything against them. must be the same as the effect.”
More experimental research is now needed into the social and psychological effects of more extreme beauty filters, said Jeremy Bailenson, founding director of Stanford University’s Virtual Human Interaction Lab.
In 2007, he helped coin the “Proteus effect” – a term that describes how people’s behavior can change according to their online avatar. People who wore attractive virtual selves revealed more about themselves than those who were less attractive.
“There needs to be a careful balance between regulatory and well-being concerns,” he said. “Even small changes to virtual selves will soon become tools we rely on, for example the ‘touch up’ feature on Zoom and other video conferencing platforms.”
In response, Snapchat said it doesn’t generally receive feedback about the negative impact its “beauty lenses” have on self-esteem.
Meta, which runs Instagram, said it walks a fine line between safety and exposure with its augmented reality effects. It said it consulted mental health experts and banned filters that directly promote cosmetic surgery — for example, by mapping surgical lines on a user’s face or selling the procedures.
TikTok has said there is a clear distinction between effects such as animal ear filters and those designed to alter appearance, and teenagers and parents have raised concerns about “appearance” effects. The regulations said they would raise awareness among people making filters of “certain unintended consequences that may have certain consequences”.
#Teenage #girls #feel #vulnerable #Fears #online #beauty #filters #grow