Self-face perception: individual differences and discrepancies associated with mental self-face representation, attractiveness and self-esteem
Open accessAbstract
Self-face perception plays an important role in self-consciousness and personal identity as well as in social exchanges and well-being. Despite its significance, little is known about how individuals represent their faces internally. This study explored mechanisms of self-face perception in three experiments. First, participants chose from two images (self-face image vs. self-image with manipulated facial features) which one was their veridical image and which one they liked most. Afterwards, participants could (digitally) manipulate their facial features to increase their attractiveness (either to themselves or to an imagined other/s). Results showed that self-face recognition was better when veridical faces were paired with 'clones' with larger facial features or when all facial features were enlarged concurrently. Moreover, up to half of the participants preferred smaller noses and larger eyes and manipulated their self-images accordingly. State (but not trait) self-esteem was inversely correlated with eye, mouth and nose size manipulations made to increase one's attractiveness. The results indicate that a certain tolerance for error in self-face recognition might be required to maintain a consistent facial identity during one's lifespan. The discovered preference for neotenous features and discrepancies between one's perceived and one's veridical face and their link to state self-esteem are discussed.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Frequent use of beauty filters has already been found to lead to anxiety and depression, reduced self-esteem, body dysmorphia, an increase of plastic surgery, feelings of inadequacy and increased pressure to conform to unrealistic beauty standards.
“Frequent use of beauty filters has already been found to lead to anxiety and depression, reduced self-esteem, body dysmorphia, an increase of plastic surgery, feelings of inadequacy and increased pressure to conform to unrealistic beauty standards [47,50,52,96,99–102].”
From What is beautiful is still good: the attractiveness halo effect in the era of beauty filters (2024) · cites this paper as [100]
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 37 · Cited by 27
- Authors
- Felisberti, F. M., & Musholt, K.
- Affiliations
- Kingston University London (GB)
- Otto-von-Guericke-Universität Magdeburg (DE)
- Venue
- Psychology & Neuroscience
- Published
- 2014-01
- Volume
- 7
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 65-72
- ISSN
- 1983-3288 (ISSN-L)
- 1984-3054
- OpenAlex
- W2136527413
- Cited by
- 27
- References
- 37
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 8 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 4 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 1
- FWCI
- 0.19
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Locations
- Psychology & Neuroscience (publishedVersion, other-oa)
- LA Referencia (Red Federada de Repositorios Institucionales de Publicaciones Científicas) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
- Research Repository (Kingston University London) (acceptedVersion)
- Americanae (AECID Library) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Redalyc (Universidad Autónoma del Estado de México) (submittedVersion)
- Bristol Research (University of Bristol) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Face Recognition and Perception
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Evolutionary Psychology and Human Behavior
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Body Image and Dysmorphia Studies
- Keywords
- self-face perception, self-face recognition, facial attractiveness, self-esteem, neoteny, face identity, individual differences, state self-esteem
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