CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 224Impact of Technology on AdolescentsInnovative Human-Technology InteractionAugmented Reality Applications

'What lies behind the filter?' Uncovering the motivations for using augmented reality (AR) face filters on social media and their effect on well-being

Open access
Javornik, Ana, Marder, Ben, Barhorst, Jennifer Brannon, McLean, Graeme, Rogers, Yvonne, Marshall, Paul, Warlop, Luk·2022·Computers in Human Behavior
DOI 10.1016/j.chb.2021.107126
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.chb.2021.107126

Cites

28 of 28 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • There may be various motivations for enhancing and changing recorded content, ranging from improving self-presentation and fostering social interactions to enjoyment and playful exploration.

    “There may be various motivations for doing so, ranging from improving self-presentation and fostering social interactions to enjoyment and playful exploration (Javornik et al., 2022).”

    From Understanding Autobiographical Memory in the Digital Age: The AMEDIA-Model (2024) · cites this paper as Javornik et al., 2022

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 61

  1. Archer-Brown, C., Marder, B., Calvard, T., & Kowalski, T. (2018). Hybrid social media: Employees' use of a boundary-spanning technology. New Technology, Work and Employment, 33(1), 74-93.
  2. Batat, W., Peter, P. C., Moscato, E. M., Castro, I. A., Chan, S., Chugani, S., & Muldrow, A. (2019). The experiential pleasure of food: A savoring journey to food well- being. Journal of Business Research, 100, 392-399.
  3. Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1995). The need to belong: desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological bulletin, 117(3), 497.
  4. Berezan, O., Krishen, A. S., Agarwal, S., & Kachroo, P. (2018). The pursuit of virtual happiness: Exploring the social media experience across generations. Journal of Business Research, 89, 455-461.
  5. Bigley, I. P., & Leonhardt, J. M. (2018). Extremity bias in user-generated content creation and consumption in social media. Journal of Interactive Advertising, 18(2), 125-135.
  6. Caruso, E. M., & Shafir, E. (2006). Now that I think about it, I'm in the mood for laughs: decisions focused on mood. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 19(2), 155-169.
  7. Chatzopoulou, E., Filieri, R., & Dogruyol, S. A. (2020). Instagram and body image: Motivation to conform to the "Instabod" and consequences on young male well- being. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 54(4), 1270-1297.
  8. Chen, G. M. (2011). Tweet this: A uses and gratifications perspective on how active Twitter use gratifies a need to connect with others. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(2), 755-762.
  9. Chen, G. M. (2012). Why do women write personal blogs? Satisfying needs for self- disclosure and affiliation tell part of the story. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(1), 171-180.
  10. Choi, T. R., & Sung, Y. (2018). Instagram versus Snapchat: Self-expression and privacy concern on social media. Telematics and informatics, 35(8), 2289-2298.
  11. de Kerviler, G., & Rodriguez, C. M. (2019). Luxury brand experiences and relationship quality for Millennials: The role of self-expansion. Journal of Business Research, 102, 250-262.
  12. de Ruyter, K., Heller, J., Hilken, T., Chylinski, M., Keeling, D. I., & Mahr, D. (2020). Seeing with the customer's eye: Exploring the challenges and opportunities of AR advertising. Journal of Advertising, 49(2), 109-124.
  13. Dennis, C., Bourlakis, M., Alamanos, E., Papagiannidis, S., & Brakus, J. J. (2017). Value co-creation through multiple shopping channels: The interconnections with social exclusion and well-being. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 21(4), 517-547.
  14. Diener, E., & Emmons, R. A. (1984). The independence of positive and negative affect. Journal of personality and social psychology, 47(5), 1105-1117.
  15. Escalas, J. E., & Bettman, J. R. (2003). You are what they eat: The influence of reference groups on consumers' connections to brands. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 13(3), 339-348.
  16. Farace, S., van Laer, T., de Ruyter, K., & Wetzels, M. (2017). Assessing the effect of narrative transportation, portrayed action, and photographic style on the likelihood to comment on posted selfies. European Journal of Marketing. 51 (11/12), pp. 1961-1979.
  17. Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39-50.
  18. Franke, N., & Schreier, M. (2010). Why customers value self-designed products: The importance of process effort and enjoyment. Journal of Product Innovation management, 27(7), 1020-1031.
  19. Frazier, L. D., Barreto, M. L., & Newman, F. L. (2012). Self-regulation and eudaimonic well-being across adulthood. Experimental aging research, 38(4), 394-410.
  20. Ghani, J. A., & Deshpande, S. P. (1994). Task characteristics and the experience of optimal flow in human-computer interaction. Journal of Psychology, 128(4), 381- 391.
  21. Gioia, D. A., Price, K. N., Hamilton, A. L., & Thomas, J. B. (2010). Forging an identity: An insider-outsider study of processes involved in the formation of organizational identity. Administrative science quarterly, 55(1), 1-46.
  22. Hajdas, M., & Kłeczek, R. (2021). The real purpose of purpose-driven branding: consumer empowerment and social transformations. Journal of Brand Management, 1- 15.
  23. Hamari, J., Malik, A., Koski, J., & Johri, A. (2019). Uses and gratifications of pokémon go: Why do people play mobile location-based augmented reality games?. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 35(9), 804-819.
  24. Hilken, T., de Ruyter, K., Chylinski, M., Mahr, D., & Keeling, D. I. (2017). Augmenting the eye of the beholder: exploring the strategic potential of augmented reality to enhance online service experiences. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 45(6), 884-905.
  25. Hoffman, D. L., Novak, T. P., & Kang, H. (2017). Let's get closer: Feelings of connectedness from using social media, with implications for brand outcomes. Journal of the Association for Consumer Research, 2(2), 216-228.
  26. Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cut-off criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural equation modeling: a multidisciplinary journal, 6(1), 1-55.
  27. Jang, S., & Liu, Y. (2020). Continuance use intention with mobile augmented reality games. Information Technology & People, 33(1), 37-55.
  28. Javornik, A., Rogers, Y., Moutinho, A. M., & Freeman, R. (2016). Revealing the shopper experience of using a" magic mirror" augmented reality make-up application. In Conference on designing interactive systems, Association for Computing Machinery (ACM), 2016, 871-882.
  29. Javornik, A., Marder, B., Pizzetti, M., & Warlop, L. (2021). Augmented self -The effects of virtual face augmentation on consumers' self-concept. Journal of Business Research, 130, 170-187.
  30. Javornik, A., Duffy, K., Rokka, J., Scholz, J., Nobbs, K., Motala, A., & Goldenberg, A. (2021). Strategic approaches to augmented reality deployment by luxury brands. Journal of Business Research, 136, 284-292.
  31. Katz, Y., & Shifman, L. (2017). Making sense? The structure and meanings of digital memetic nonsense. Information, Communication & Society, 20(6), 825-842.
  32. Kostyk, A., & Huhmann, M. (2020). Perfect social media image posts: symmetry and contrast influence consumer response. European Journal of Marketing. In press.
  33. Kristofferson, K., White, K., & Peloza, J. (2014). The nature of slacktivism: How the social observability of an initial act of token support affects subsequent prosocial action. Journal of Consumer Research, 40(6), 1149-1166.
  34. Locke, K. (1996). A funny thing happened! The management of consumer emotions in service encounters. Organization Science, 7(1), 40-59.
  35. Loveday, P. M., Lovell, G. P., & Jones, C. M. (2018). The best possible selves intervention: A review of the literature to evaluate efficacy and guide future research. Journal of Happiness Studies, 19(2), 607-628.
  36. McKechnie, S., & Tynan, C. (2008). Halloween in a material world: trick or treat?. Journal of Marketing Management, 24(9-10), 1011-1023.
  37. McKenna, K. Y., Green, A. S., & Gleason, M. E. (2002). Relationship formation on the Internet: What's the big attraction?. Journal of social issues, 58(1), 9-31.
  38. McLean, G., Osei-Frimpong, K., & Barhorst, J. (2021). Alexa, do voice assistants influence consumer brand engagement?-Examining the role of AI powered voice assistants in influencing consumer brand engagement. Journal of Business Research, 124, 312-328.
  39. McQuail, D. (1984). With the benefit of hindsight: Reflections on uses and gratifications research. Critical Studies in Media Communication, 1(2), 177-193.
  40. Mirbagheri, S., & Najmi, M. (2019). Consumers' engagement with social media activation campaigns: Construct conceptualization and scale development. Psychology & marketing, 36(4), 376-394.
  41. Mueller, F. F., Lopes, P., Strohmeier, P., Ju, W., Seim, C., Weigel, M., Nanayakkara, S., Obrist, M., Li, Z., Delfa, J., Nishida, J., Gerber, E, Svanaes, D., Grudin, J., Greuter, S., Kunze, K., Erickson, T., Greenspan, S., Inami, M., Marshall, J., Reiterer, H., Wolf, K., Meyer, J., Schiphorst, T., Wang, D., & Maes, P. (2020). Next Steps for Human- Computer Integration. In Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 1-15).
  42. Neff, K. D. (2011). Self-compassion, self-esteem, and well-being. Social and personality psychology compass, 5(1), 1-12.
  43. Pera, R., & Viglia, G. (2015). Turning ideas into products: subjective well-being in co- creation. The Service Industries Journal, 35(7-8), 388-402.
  44. Phua, J., Jin, S. V., & Kim, J. J. (2017). Gratifications of using Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, or Snapchat to follow brands: The moderating effect of social comparison, trust, tie strength, and network homophily on brand identification, brand engagement, brand commitment, and membership intention. Telematics and Informatics, 34(1), 412- 424.
  45. Rauschnabel, P. A. (2018). Virtually enhancing the real world with holograms: An exploration of expected gratifications of using augmented reality smart glasses. Psychology & Marketing, 35(8), 557-572.
  46. Rauschnabel, P. A., Felix, R., & Hinsch, C. (2019). Augmented reality marketing: How mobile AR-apps can improve brands through inspiration. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 49, 43-53.
  47. Rajanala, S., Maymone, M. B., & Vashi, N. A. (2018). Selfies-living in the era of filtered photographs. JAMA facial plastic surgery, 20(6), 443-444.
  48. Ray, A., Dhir, A., Bala, P. K., & Kaur, P. (2019). Why do people use food delivery apps (FDA)? A uses and gratification theory perspective. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 51, 221-230.
  49. Rifkin, J. R., & Etkin, J. (2019). Variety in self-expression undermines self- continuity. Journal of Consumer Research, 46(4), 725-749.
  50. Samper, A., Yang, L. W., & Daniels, M. E. (2018). Beauty, effort, and misrepresentation: How beauty work affects judgments of moral character and consumer preferences. Journal of Consumer Research, 45(1), 126-147.
  51. Scholz, J., & Duffy, K. (2018). We ARe at home: How augmented reality reshapes mobile marketing and consumer-brand relationships. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 44, 11-23.
  52. Seidman, G. (2013). Self-presentation and belonging on Facebook: How personality influences social media use and motivations. Personality and individual differences, 54(3), 402-407.
  53. Sheldon, K. M., Gunz, A., & Schachtman, T. R. (2012). What does it mean to be in touch with oneself? Testing a social character model of self-congruence. Self and Identity, 11(1), 51-70.
  54. Smith, R. K., Vandellen, M. R., & Ton, L. A. N. (2021). Makeup Who You Are: Self- Expression Enhances the Perceived Authenticity and Public Promotion of Beauty Work. Journal of Consumer Research. In press.
  55. Tosun, L. P. (2012). Motives for Facebook use and expressing "true self" on the Internet. Computers in human behavior, 28(4), 1510-1517.
  56. Turkle, S. (1994). Constructions and reconstructions of self in virtual reality: Playing in the MUDs. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 1(3), 158-167.
  57. Venkatesh, V., Thong, J. Y., & Xu, X. (2012). Consumer acceptance and use of information technology: extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. MIS quarterly, 157-178.
  58. Watson, D., Clark, L. A., & Tellegen, A. (1988). Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: the PANAS scales. Journal of personality and social psychology, 54(6), 1063.
  59. Yee, N., & Bailenson, J. (2007). The Proteus effect: The effect of transformed self - representation on behavior. Human communication research, 33(3), 271-290.
  60. Zhao, S., Grasmuck, S., & Martin, J. (2008). Identity construction on Facebook: Digital empowerment in anchored relationships. Computers in human behavior, 24(5), 1816- 1836.
  61. Zheng, A., Duff, B. R. L., Vargas, P., Yao, M. Z. (2020) Self-presentation on social media: when self-enhancement confronts self-verification, Journal of Interactive Advertising, 20, 3, 289-302.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Javornik, A., Marder, B., Barhorst, J. B., McLean, G., Rogers, Y., Marshall, P., & Warlop, L.
Affiliations
  • University of Bristol (GB)
  • University of Edinburgh (GB)
  • College of Charleston (US)
  • University of Strathclyde (GB)
  • University College London (GB)
  • BI Norwegian Business School (NO)
Corresponding author
Javornik, Ana
ORCID
Venue
Computers in Human Behavior
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2022-03
Volume
128
Pages
107126
ISSN
0747-5632 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.chb.2021.107126
OpenAlex
W4200055500
Cited by
224
References
28
Citations by year
2026: 49 · 2025: 38 · 2024: 74 · 2023: 49 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 1
FWCI
43.54
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Computers in Human Behavior (publishedVersion)
  • Explore Bristol Research (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Edinburgh Research Explorer (University of Edinburgh) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Strathprints: The University of Strathclyde institutional repository (University of Strathclyde) (submittedVersion)
  • NORA - Norwegian Open Research Archives (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
  • Lirias (KU Leuven) (submittedVersion)
Funders
University of Bristol
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Impact of Technology on Adolescents
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Innovative Human-Technology Interaction
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Augmented Reality Applications
Keywords
social media use, uses and gratifications theory, user motivation, well-being, self-presentation, ideal self, true self, Instagram, social interaction, silliness

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review