Social Comparisons and Compensatory Consumption: The Art of Buying a Superior Self

Abstract

This paper examines how consumers’ body satisfaction, beliefs about the malleability of their appearance, and incidental comparisons with upward vs. lateral social media influencers interact to affect the type of consumption behaviors they engage in. Based on propositions of the compensatory consumption behavior (CCB) model and the social comparison theory, this study employs an online experiment with a 2 (social comparison: upward/lateral) × 2 (body satisfaction: low/high) × 2 (implicit theory: entity/incremental) × 2 (product type: head- and body-related) mixed-factorial design among a sample of 192 women (19–35 years). The appearance of the influencers was manipulated (upward: thinner, primped models; lateral: average weight, natural models), as were the products being advertised, whereas body satisfaction and consumers’ implicit theory were measured. The results indicated that consumers were more persuaded to purchase products from lateral compared to upward influencers. Further, lateral influencers were more persuasive for head-related (vs. body-related) products, whereas upward influencers were more successful in promoting body-related (vs. head-related) products. A significant (p < 0.05) interaction between body satisfaction, implicit theory of appearance, and product type also emerged, supporting the proposals of the CCB model on how consumption behaviors are affected by felt discrepancies. These findings indicate that marketers can access more effective marketing results by collaborating with influencers that have a similar appearance to that of their target audience.

1. Introduction

The previous decade embodied a steep learning curve in the art of communication, with social media and its intense popularity being the source. Social media platforms (e.g., Facebook, Instagram, TikTok) have effectively transformed many aspects of our daily lives, including how we shop, receive news, and the way in which we are confronted with social comparisons. As it happens, humans have an innate drive to compare themselves to others, particularly when an objective, social standard is not available to them [1]. These comparisons come in one of three forms: (a) upward (places one below those perceived to be “better”, (b) lateral (places one with “like” others), and (c) downward (places one above those believed to be “worse off”) [2]. The upward comparisons frequently trigger what is known as a discrepancy, which often leaves individuals with a feeling of inferiority [3].

While social comparisons routinely take place online and offline, social networking sites (SNSs) have impacted this phenomenon in a few profound ways. The first being the frequency of social comparisons, which prior to SNSs, typically occurred during social outings. However, SNSs are populated with user-generated content, and Instagram, for example, is designed to encourage users to share content through digital photos and videos. Thus, high usage of a platform such as Instagram increases the likelihood of appearance-related social comparisons (when one perceives others to be better, worse, or the same as that of themselves based on appearance alone) [3,4]. The second notable impact being the environment in which these comparisons are received. For example, Fardouly et al. [3] argue that one’s appearance is considerably more difficult to control in-person compared to the edited images presented on SNSs, and as a result, appearance-related social comparisons that occur on SNSs generate more upward than lateral or downward comparisons [3]. Finally, SNSs have changed the accessibility of coping mechanisms. Specifically, if an individual is met with an in-person social comparison that triggers a self-discrepancy, there is likely a gap between recognizing the discrepancy and having access to a coping mechanism such as shopping. Conversely, with the multitude of retailers employing social media influencers to market their products on SNSs, consumers on these platforms are often confronted with appearance-related social comparisons that contain links directing consumers to the depicted product(s). Hence, these directed website links grant individuals experiencing a self-discrepancy with an immediate coping mechanism in the form of shopping [5,6].

The aforementioned impacts become relevant to the discussion of sustainability since negative consequences of incidental comparisons on social media and resulting coping consumption behaviors affect both people and the planet. In 2015, the United Nations established a set of 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), designed to serve as a call-to-action for all countries, to work in global partnership to improve health, reduce inequality, and preserve our planet’s resources [7]. Of these 17 SDGs, this study addresses goal 3, which aims for good health and well-being, and goal 12, which underscores responsible consumption and production [7]. Given that exposure to SNSs increases the risk of upward social comparisons, which can negatively impact body image and mental-health [2,3], this behavior, in turn, can impede progress toward goal 3 at both the individual and collective levels. Moreover, previous research has postulated that shopping acts as an immediate coping mechanism and is often relied on as a means to reduce a felt self-discrepancy [5,6]. Thus, the increase in upward comparisons on SNSs may lead to an increase in consumers engaging in unsustainable consumption patterns, which negates the progress being made toward a global standard of responsible consumption and production, the 12th SDG.

The sequential behaviors discussed above are further supported by the compensatory consumption behavior (CCB) model, which reasons that consumption behaviors are affected by (appearance-related) self-discrepancies, which are in turn affected by consumers’ body and appearance satisfaction levels. Consumers engage in CCBs when they feel the need to compensate or regulate after a discrepancy is triggered [8]. In the interest of gaining a holistic understanding of consumer reactions, this study incorporates implicit theory as a potential moderator of consumption behaviors. Implicit theory suggests that people are intrinsically different, and as such, their goals, behaviors, and beliefs will vary in degrees of salience and importance [9]. Implicit theory identifies two contrasting belief systems, the first of which is entity theorists, who believe attributes to be fixed and rather unchanging; the second is incremental theorists, who believe attributes to be more adaptive and malleable and hence embody a growth mindset [8]. These differing belief systems influence how entity and incremental theorists cope with self-discrepancies, and we examine these differential coping strategies in context to their compensatory consumption behaviors. In summary, the broad purpose of this study is to examine how upward and lateral appearance-related social comparisons interact with consumers’ body satisfaction levels (high vs. low) and implicit theory of appearance (entity vs. incremental to affect consumers’ (a) motivations to change or affirm the self, and (b) behavioral intentions for compensatory consumption-based coping strategies).

With the ever-increasing popularity of SNSs and retailers’ reliance on them, it is important to understand how and why consumers respond differently to influencers. While there are studies existing in the literature on CCBs resulting from self-discrepancies [8], this research focuses on appearance-related social comparisons via SNSs. Specifically, the significance of this research is that it observes consumer response in an environment where the felt discrepancy and coping mechanism are experienced simultaneously, which offers a new perspective to the current literature on CCBs, social comparison theory, and the impacts upward appearance-related comparisons have on consumers [2,6,8]. Further, it contributes to the literature on the impacts of SNSs, specifically from a consumer consumption perspective, and broadens current research on the social psychological impacts of influencer marketing.

2. Literature Review

Social Media and Incidental Social Comparisons

According to the Pew Research Center, as of 2021, 84% of people between the ages of 18 and 29 and 81% of those aged 30–49 use SNSs, with at least 74% of those consumers logging in daily [4]. Intentionally or not, SNSs have transformed from the friend-connecting, social community they started as into platforms populated with omni-channel retailers determined to increase their brands’ reach. Given the progressively high rates of consumer engagement, it is clear why retailers aspire to monetize these platforms. Moreover, previous research has indicated that people tend to process visual information in a holistic fashion to establish if it matches their self-image [10,11,12,13]. Park and Young [14] state that when viewing expressive items (such as clothing), the visual process is swifter and more automatic than when consumers engage in the piecemeal processing of words [12]. Given that SNSs are image-dominant platforms, consumers’ abilities to quickly process images makes the immediate reactions triggered by them particularly important.

Often, advertisements found on SNSs are fed to consumers through social media influencers, individuals who use their social media accounts to promote and educate others about products and services, most often from the beauty, fashion, and fitness industries [15]. As such, influencers now play a vital role in the creation of savvy advertisements that, at first glance, appear to be a social post from a friend, but instead are highly edited, eye-catching photographs that increase consumer engagement and brand awareness [14]. Research indicates that consumers tend to identify with social media influencers more so than traditional celebrities, believing them to be more authentic and relatable, thus deepening their sense of connectedness and increasing their purchase intention for the brands and products endorsed by them [16,17]. The deeper sense of perceived authenticity and connectedness lends to more strongly felt self-discrepancies for consumers, who compare themselves to the portrayals of influencers [5]. Likewise, Fardouly et al. [3] state that women are more likely to make upward versus lateral appearance-related comparisons while using social media, and studies have suggested that these comparisons harness stronger effects on viewers than in-person or traditional media comparisons due to the perception that these ‘regular’ people (i.e., influencers) have not altered or enhanced their photographs [5,14].

3. Theoretical Framework and Hypotheses Development

3.1. Social Comparison Theory

In his theory of social comparison, Festinger [1] proposes that humans have an innate drive to be superior. As such, when there is not an objective measure available, people will often evaluate their own standing by observing how their appearance, abilities, opinions, and achievements are similar to that of others around them [1,18]. Hence, the drive to be superior can trigger the use of comparison as a tool to determine who is ‘better off’ (upward comparison), ‘worse off’ (downward comparison), or equal (lateral comparison) to oneself [1]. Of equal importance is how these comparisons make an individual feel. For instance, downward comparisons induce positive effects, as this category of comparisons assists in the aspiration to be superior [2]. Likewise, lateral comparisons can create positive effects, as people prefer to compare themselves with those that are most similar [2]. Upward comparisons, on the other hand, force one to recognize the characteristics and traits that are inferior to others, which results in a negative effect, or a self-discrepancy [2].

In consequence to a felt self-discrepancy, a desire to move closer to the (target) other(s) is often activated [1]. With multiple strategies being available to alleviate or overcome a discrepancy [19], the strategy one chooses may be determined by the severity of the discrepancy. For instance, Festinger [1] suggests that in the event of an upward comparison, if the difference between oneself and the target is felt to be too large, the tendency to compare decreases, or an individual may decide to dissociate from the target of comparison completely and instead choose to self-affirm by other means. Alternatively, Johnson [20] describes how upward comparisons, and their resulting discrepancies, can act as a motivator to change the self by means of behavior or performance to achieve an enhanced goal.

Recalling the notion that consumers perceive influencers as peers [3], it is suggested that most social media users will create comparisons between themselves and social media influencers. Moreover, because of the highly edited photographs displayed by influencers and the reality that women are more likely to generate upward appearance-related comparisons on SNSs [14], it is probable that most of the comparisons made between influencers and consumers will produce upward appearance-related social comparisons, likely with a comparison gap that feels too large to initiate a desire to change the self. Alternatively, it may happen that influencers that are laterally closer in appearance to consumers may create positive effects by allowing consumers the ability to recognize a discrepancy with their appearance, but without subjecting them to a standard they feel is unachievable. Based on the preceding rationale, we hypothesize the following:

H1. 

Lateral social comparisons will result in higher purchase intentions than upward social comparisons.

3.2. Compensatory Consumer Behavior (CCB)

In the discussion of the social comparison theory, a connection between upward appearance-related social comparisons, self-discrepancies, and the resulting impulse to reduce the discrepancy was discussed. When threatened by a self-discrepancy, people are motivated to engage in behavior that either directly or indirectly helps reduce the self-discrepancy and re-establish their overall sense of self [21,22]. CCBs can be defined as the reactive acquisition of, longing for, or use of a product to reduce or eliminate a felt self-discrepancy [23] and are often considered an effective way to re-establish one’s sense of self. Often, the potential for consumers to engage in CCBs is initiated when they recognize a self-discrepancy, or a difference between their ideal self and actual self [7,24].

Researchers have identified five common coping strategies used to reduce the negative feeling left by a self-discrepancy, namely direct resolution, symbolic-self completion, dissociation, escapism, and fluid compensation. Direct resolution focuses on directly resolving the source of a self-discrepancy, while symbolic-self completion indirectly resolves a discrepancy by relying on possessions to signal proficiency in a particular domain [7]. Dissociation allows an individual to separate themselves from a self-discrepancy, escapism distracts an individual from the self-discrepancy, and fluid compensation allows an individual to reinforce another part of their identity [7]. The origins of the CCB model largely rest on Wicklund and Gollwitzer’s [25] theory of symbolic self-completion, which postulates that when a threat to this ideal identity is felt, one will engage in self-symbolizing to restore the feeling of completeness. Accordingly, symbolic self-completion CCBs occur if a consumer prefers to self-affirm, meaning they feel the desire to cope by affirming another important aspect of the self that is unrelated to the source of the discrepancy.

The CCB model specifically suggests that the type of self-discrepancy is a contributing factor to the type of consumption behavior an individual chooses as a coping strategy [7]. For instance, if the domain of the self-discrepancy relates to one’s physical appearance, they can cope through appearance-boosting activities (direct resolution) or choose appearance-enhancing accessories (symbolic self-completion) [7]. In the case of this research, a direct resolution would occur when a consumer is met with an upward appearance-related social comparison, which prompts them to buy into the product or service they believe will help reduce the gap between their appearance and that of the comparison target. For example, if the self-discrepancy was felt about appearance, more specifically one’s weight, the consumer would cope by joining a fitness group, buying into a nutrition program to have healthier eating habits, or purchasing an outfit as a motivator to exercise more at home. However, if a consumer deems certain aspects of their appearance (such as weight) to be unmalleable, when a comparison triggers a weight-related discrepancy, the individual may instead choose to focus on features they believe they can change, such as their hair or complexion. Hence, the CCB model explains how consumers situationally respond to self-discrepancies by means of a direct resolution (motivation to change self) or symbolic self-completion (motivation to affirm self). Please see Figure 1 for an adaptation of Mandel et al.’s [7] CCB model below.

As previously mentioned, the focus of this research is to evaluate how discrepancies in an appearance-related domain can impact CCBs. Thus, for this study, appearance includes one’s hair, facial features, make-up, complexion, figure or body shape, weight, and muscle tone. Notably, today’s consumers consider appearance, nutrition, fitness, and mental health to be essential components of their overall wellness. Relatedly, the self-care industry, which consists of products promising consumers improvements in one or all of these vital areas, has grown to be a USD 1.5 trillion industry [26]. Since many products within the self-care industry offer the ability to enhance or change an aspect of one’s appearance, this study focuses on this category to examine consumers’ coping behaviors. Moreover, self-care products are easily categorized. For example, nutritional products promote improvement in focus (mental), weight, complexion, and hair; beauty products promise to alter or mend complexion and facial features. Fitness and clothing products offer more immediate results for the appearance of one’s figure or body shape, as well as the appearance of their muscle tone, thus allowing consumers to quickly change or enhance the structures of the body. Given the nature of these two categories of products, influencers that are more lateral in their appearance will be more persuasive for beauty and nutrition (head-related) products since they will motivate consumers to affirm the self through symbolic self-completion. On the other hand, influencers that create more of an upward comparison will be more persuasive for fitness and clothing (body-related products) since they potentially give rise to the motivation to change the self through direct resolution coping. Therefore, we propose:

H2a. 

When the appearance-related social comparison is lateral, consumers will have higher purchase intentions for beauty and nutrition (head-related) products than fitness and clothing (body-related) products.

H2b. 

When the appearance-related social comparison is upward, consumers will have higher purchase intentions for fitness and clothing (body-related) products than beauty and nutrition (head-related) products.

3.3. Implicit Theories

Mandel et al. [7] reported in their study that consumers’ naïve philosophies about consumption behaviors may contribute to their perceived pliability of self-discrepancies. As Dweck [8] explains, people’s fundamental beliefs about themselves and others act as a guide that motivates the choices and goals they choose to pursue. More broadly known as implicit theories, Dweck [8] proposes the idea of people having two types of belief systems: (1) incremental theorists, who believe character traits and attributes such as personality, morality, intelligence, and appearance can be changed or developed over time, and (2) entity theorists, who believe these attributes and traits to be fixed or unchangeable. Notably, a person is not necessarily one theorist or the other, meaning that while one might hold more of an entity belief regarding intelligence, they may hold more incremental-like ideals about their appearance [8]. Consequently, when a person believes they can change one aspect of themselves but not another, this will undoubtedly impact the type of goals they choose to pursue, as well as how they go about pursuing them [8].

As Mandel et al. [7] indicate, one’s belief about the malleability of a self-discrepancy will influence the type of consumption behavior the consumer chooses to engage in. If one is met with an upward appearance-related social comparison from a social media influencer, the consumption behavior they choose to engage in is influenced by their implicit (incremental vs. entity) mindset regarding their appearance [7,27,28]. Due to incremental theorists believing their appearance can be improved upon, they are more likely to seek out opportunities for self-improvement [29]. Mandel et al. [7] support this position with their suggestion of incremental theorists being more likely to employ direct resolution CCBs, as a direct resolution for an appearance-related self-discrepancy can be resolved through the consumption of appearance-enhancing products. However, entity theorists, who believe that a certain aspect of their appearance is unchangeable, will instead look for opportunities to signal their other positive qualities to heighten their overall self [28].

Dweck [27] further describes how the self-esteem of an incremental theorists is not an internal quality that can easily be increased or diminished because of successes and failures. These theorists have a different outlook, which is more opportunistic, particularly when an experience affords them the ability to improve upon their current skillset. Thus, they look forward to the opportunity to improve the self and, as such, it can be rationalized that incremental theorists may view self-discrepancies as an opportunity to change and focus on direct resolutions that can change the self, moving them closer to their ideal self [7,27]. For example, if an incremental theorist has a high level of body satisfaction, they may seek opportunities to improve in more head-related areas, such as their facial features, hair, complexion, or nutritional health.

Entity theorists, on the other hand, often embrace the ideology that circumstances are often outside of their control and are also quick to form opinions of and place judgements on others [8]. Hence, entity theorists are likely to perceive a self-discrepancy as a circumstance that is outside of their control, thus inflicting a feeling of defeat [27]. Due to the lack of control felt over a particular attribute, entity theorists will want to re-establish their sense of superiority by engaging in acts that affirm their valued traits [1,21,27]. For example, if an entity theorist has a high level of body satisfaction, they will not do as the incremental theorists and pursue other domains to improve upon. Instead, it can be reasoned that entity theorists will engage in CCBs that affirm their valued traits and thus have higher purchase intentions for body-related products. Therefore, we propose:

H3a. 

When body satisfaction is low, incremental theorists will have higher purchase intentions for fitness and clothing (body-related) products, whereas entity theorists will have higher purchase intentions for nutrition and beauty (head-related) products.

H3b. 

When body satisfaction is high, incremental theorists will have higher purchase intentions for beauty and nutrition (head-related) products, whereas entity theorists will have higher purchase intentions for fitness and clothing (body-related) products.

4. Method

4.1. Design

This study used a 2 (social comparison: upward vs. lateral) × 2 (body satisfaction: low vs. high) × 2 (implicit theory: entity vs. incremental) × 2 (product type: head- and body-related) mixed-factorial online experimental design, with the two levels of social comparison, body satisfaction, and implicit theory as the between-subjects factors, and product type as the within-subjects factor.

4.2. Stimulus Development

Prior to the main experiment, a pretest was conducted with the goal of identifying stimuli that would create upward and lateral social comparison conditions. A total of 20 influencers (10 per condition) were collected from the social media platform Instagram. A panel of experts (fellow graduate students with social media marketing experience) assisted with the selection of the final 14 influencers (7 per condition) used for the pretest. The top three influencers that created the strongest feeling of an upward appearance-related comparison, as well as the three influencers that created the strongest feeling of a lateral appearance-related comparison, were selected to be the final fourteen influencers (seven per condition) used for the pretest. The top three influencers that created the strongest feeling of an upward appearance-related comparison, as well as the three influencers that created the strongest feeling of a lateral appearance-related comparison, were chosen for the main study.

The visual stimuli used for this study included content collected from the profiles of six social media influencers who had at least 150,000 followers (i.e., macro influencer category verified by Instagram). Selecting influencers that had a following this size increased the credibility of the influencers for the purposes of the study and increased the likelihood that the influencers’ level of expertise, sincerity, and likeability would be similarly perceived for the influencers in both conditions. To manipulate the social comparison appearance factor, images for the upward comparison condition consisted of very fit, thinner primped models, while images for the lateral comparison condition consisted of models with a ‘normal’ weight and a more natural aesthetic. The inclusion of three influencers per social comparison (upward vs. lateral) condition ensured external validity, while the utilization of images from the influencer’s existing profiles enhanced ecological validity. Using three influencers per experimental condition also ensured that the results were not stimulus-specific.

The product type factor included products typically endorsed by influencers within the self-care industry that were either head-related (beauty and nutrition) or body-related (fitness and clothing). Head-related products were represented with media posts collected from the influencers’ profiles that consisted of endorsements for hair- and skin-care items (body wash, moisturizers, under-eye masks), make-up, and nutritional provisions (healthy meal recipes, smoothies, and shakes). Content for the body-related items consisted of workout sequences, yoga videos, athletic clothing, and swimwear. Endorsement posts for each of the product types (beauty, nutrition, fitness, clothing) were collected from the influencers’ social media accounts and shown as a collection of four images per influencer (i.e., participants saw four images of one influencer at a time).

4.3. Sample Characteristics

This study, which was conducted under the approval of the Institutional Review Board (Ethics Committee) with Auburn University (protocol code 21-300 EX 2106, date of approval: 29 June 2021), used female consumers between the ages of 19 and 35 who lived in the U.S. The higher usage of social media, specifically Instagram, found in this age group of women served as the rationale for the choice of our sample. The Pew Research Center [4] demographic data state that 44% of women compared to 36% of men use the social media platform Instagram, justifying the female sample. Additionally, this age range was chosen based on data from the Pew Research Center [4] which show that 71% of those aged 18–29 and 48% of those aged 30–49 use Instagram, with 59% logging onto the platform daily, and 21% logging on weekly.

Among the 204 respondents who participated in the study, 12 respondents either did not complete the questionnaire or inaccurately responded to the attention check question and were omitted from the sample. Thus, the utilizable sample included 192 respondents between the ages of 19 and 35 (see

Table 1. Participants’ characteristics (N = 192).

Characteristics	n	%
Ethnic Group
Asian/Pacific Islander	13	6.8
American Indian/Alaskan Native	2	1.0
Non-Hispanic Black	22	11.5
Hispanic	16	8.3
White	137	71
Other	3	1.6
Age
19–24	89	46.4
25–35	103	53.6
Education
High school diploma	22	11.5
Some college or technical school	74	38.5
College degree (4 years)	62	32.3
Graduate degree (Master’s, Doctorate, etc.)	26	13.5
Preferred not to say	8	4
Income
USD 29,000–below	88	45.8
USD 30,000–49,999	46	24
USD 50,000–79,999	36	18.7
USD 80,000 and above	22	11.5
Marital Status
Single	160	83.3
Married	29	15.1
Divorced	3	1.6
Body Satisfaction Distribution by Score and Experimental Condition Group
High body satisfaction score in upward comparison condition	42	21.9
High body satisfaction score in lateral comparison condition	48	25
Low body satisfaction score in upward comparison condition	55	28.6
Low body satisfaction score in lateral comparison condition	48	25

for more details). All participants reported having a social media account and previous experience with online shopping. Specifically, 73.1% of participants had purchased self-care-related items at least 1 to 3 times after seeing it advertised by an influencer, 19.7% of participants had done so 4 to 6 times, while 6.7% of the participants had purchased items 7 or more times. Additionally, of the 192 respondents, 45.8% had high body satisfaction scores, while the other 54.2% had low body satisfaction scores. This resulted in a relatively equal distribution of participants with differing body satisfaction levels in each condition of the survey (see Table 1).

4.4. Measures

The measures taken during the experiment included manipulation check measures, individual difference measures, dependent measure, and demographic measures. Items from Ohanian’s [30] scale for endorser credibility, along with items from Edell and Burke’s [31] influence of endorsers scale, were adapted to determine if the manipulation was successful. To measure individual differences in the participants, items from Cruzat et al.’s [32] body satisfaction scale and Dweck’s [28] implicit theories were employed. To measure the dependent variable, one item from Speed and Thompson’s 2009 purchase intention scale was engaged. Further details for each scale and adapted items can be found in

Table 2. List of measurements.

Variable	Items	α
Evaluation of Influencers	Adapted from Ohanian (1990) [30] The social media influencer in the above ads strikes me as being: Unattractive–Attractive Insincere–Sincere Unlikeable–Likeable Unqualified–Qualified	0.87
Influence of Endorser	Adapted from Edell and Burke (1987) [31] Regarding my personal self, the above social media ads made me feel _______. Critical–Confident Not Beautiful–Beautiful Overweight–Skinny Discouraged–Motivated	0.87
Body Satisfaction	Adapted from Cruzat et al. (2017) [32] Please circle the number that best describes how satisfied you are with your: Facial features Hair Lower body Midsection Upper body Muscle tone Weight Complexion Overall appearance	0.88
Implicit Theory of Appearance	Adapted from Dweck (2000) [9] I don’t think I personally can do much to enhance my appearance. My appearance is something about me that I personally can’t change very much. To be honest, I don’t think I can really change how I look. I can learn new things, but I don’t have the ability to change my appearance. With enough time and effort, I think I could significantly improve my appearance. I believe I can always substantially improve my appearance. Regardless of my current appearance, I think I have the capacity to change it quite a bit. I believe I have the ability to change my appearance level considerably over time.	0.91–0.94
Purchase Intention	Adapted from Speed and Thompson (2000) [33] I would seriously contemplate buying ________.	0.94

below.

4.5. Data Collection and Procedure

An internet-based questionnaire using a mixed-factorial experimental design was created using the platform Qualtrics. Participants received a link to participate in the survey through the Prolific research marketplace and were selected based on the criteria of being a female consumer, living in the U.S., and being between the ages of 19 and 35. As participants entered the online survey, they were presented with an information letter which outlined the expected time commitment and reminded participants this was a self-administered questionnaire, from which they could withdrawal from at any point during the experiment. After answering an additional screening question about their social media usage, participants were randomly assigned to either the upward or lateral social comparison conditions. Random assignment helped ensure that the possible effects of confounding personal variables were randomly distributed between the two experimental conditions, alleviating the risks of personal variables creating systematic differences between groups. Each participant examined content from three influencers, which included four mockup endorsement posts, with imagery and text that was originally created by the influencers.

The mockup endorsements for each influencer were followed by the succeeding measures (a) influencer familiarity; (b) intent to purchase [33]; (c) endorsers’ perceived expertise, trustworthiness, and attractiveness [30]; and (d) feelings from the ad [31]. Following the evaluation of all three influencers, the participants completed a multidimensional body self-relations questionnaire [32] and an implicit theory of appearance scale [27]. Each of the scales were based on previous studies within the literature and were either presented on five-point Likert scales or semantic differential scales. The last portion of the questionnaire involved demographic information, including education, ethnicity, and income. Finally, participants were given instructions on how to enter their completion code to receive compensation from the Prolific platform and thanked for their time.

5. Results

5.1. Reliability and Factor Analysis

Adequate reliability was revealed for each scale, with Cronbach’s α being at least 0.8 (Table 2). Factor analysis for each multidimensional scale was completed prior to creating composites for all variables. The median split method was applied to create two groups (entity vs. incremental) on the implicit theory of appearance scale [8] and two groups (high body satisfaction vs. low body satisfaction) on the body satisfaction scale [32].

5.2. Manipulation Check

The results from a repeated measure analysis of variance (ANOVA) with social comparison (upward vs. lateral) as the between-subjects factor, the three endorsers as the within-subjects factors, and endorser influence as the dependent variable revealed that the manipulation was successful. The between-subjects effects revealed a significant main effect for social comparison on endorser influence ($F_{1,190}$ = 76.908, p < 0.001; ${\mathsf{\eta }}_p^2=28.8\%$). Specifically, endorser influence was measured by asking participants how the influencers made them feel about their own appearance. As such, it was expected that influencers in the upward appearance-related condition would create stronger negative effects on participants’ self-compared appearance than the influencers in the lateral appearance-related condition, which was reflected in the means [$M_{UPinf.}$ = 2.67, SD = 0.075, $M_{LATinf.}$ = 3.614, SD = 0.075; p < 0.001].

5.3. Test of Hypotheses

The hypotheses were tested through a five-way repeated measures ANOVA with social comparison, implicit theory, and body satisfaction as the between-subjects factors and CCBs (head- and body-related) and the three endorsers as the within-subjects factors, with purchase intentions as the dependent variable. As predicted, the result of the between-subject effects revealed a significant main effect for social comparison on purchase intention [$F_{\left(1,184\right)}$ = 5.10, p = 0.025; ${\mathsf{\eta }}_p^2=2.7\%]$, with a higher purchase intention for the lateral influencers than the upward influencers ($M_{latPI}$ = 2.64, SD = 0.099, $M_{upPI}$ = 2.32, SD = 0.099; p = 0.025), supporting H1.

Though the lateral influencers proved to be more persuasive for overall purchase intention, a significant interaction effect also emerged for social comparison × product type on purchase intention [$F_{\left(1,184\right)}$ = 10.11, p = 0.002, ${\mathsf{\eta }}_p^2$ = 5.2%]. Specifically, the purchase intention from upward comparisons was higher for body-related products than head-related products ($M_{UPbodyPI}$ = 2.37, SD = 0.099, $M_{UPheadPI}$ = 2.28, SD = 0.104; p = 0.05), whereas lateral comparisons led to a higher purchase intention for head-related products than body-related products ($M_{LATheadPI}$ = 2.70, SD = 0.105, $M_{LATbodyPI}$ = 2.58, SD = 0.10; p = 0.01), thus supporting H2a and H2b.

H3a and H3b predicted a significant interaction effect between body satisfaction (high vs. low), implicit theory (incremental vs. entity), and product type (head-related vs. body-related) on purchase intention. As predicted, the results of the repeated measures ANOVA revealed a significant interaction effect between body satisfaction (high vs. low), implicit theory (incremental vs. entity), and product type (head- vs. body-related products) on purchase intention [$F_{1,184}$ = 3.66, p = 0.05, ${\mathsf{\eta }}_p^2$ = 1.9%]. When body satisfaction was low, entity theorists showed a higher purchase intention for head-related products than for body-related products ($M_{LowEntHR}$ = 2.51, SD = 0.13, $M_{LowEntBPI}$ = 2.45, SD = 0.13). However, when body satisfaction was high, entity theorists showed a higher purchase intention for body-related products than head-related products ($M_{HighEntBR}$ = 2.54, SD = 0.14, $M_{HighEntHR}$ = 2.46, SD = 0.15). Thus, entity theorists are more likely to engage in the CCBs that allow them to minimize the importance of a self-discrepancy by means of escapism, disassociation, or affirming the self in an unrelated domain (symbolic self-completion or fluid compensation).

The results for incremental theorists indicated that these individuals are more likely to engage in CCBs that help them to improve their self. For instance, incremental theorists with low body satisfaction had a higher purchase intention for body-related products than for head-related products ($M_{lowIncBR}$ = 2.60, SD = 0.14, $M_{LowIncHR}$ = 2.58, SD = 0.14). Likewise, incremental theorists with high body satisfaction showed a higher purchase intention for head-related products than body-related products ($M_{HighIncHR}$ = 2.40, SD = 0.15, $M_{HighIncBR}$ = 2.30, SD = 0.14), suggesting that incremental theorists were engaging in direct resolution CCBs. Thus, H3a and H3b were supported [see Figure 2].

6. Discussion and Implications

The goal of this research was to provide further understanding on how appearance-related social comparisons, that occur on SNSs, influence the choices that consumers make in the same platform. This purpose aligns with the increasing use of SNSs as online social commerce platforms that allow brands to reach digital native consumers through influencers, while simultaneously providing a variety of convenient purchasing options [6]. While previous research has proposed consumer behavior models that explain how consumers make purchase decisions on SNSs from the lens of informational factors such as technology acceptance and flow theory [6], the social–psychological lens taken in the current study is novel in that it effectively integrates social comparison theory, implicit theories, and compensatory responses [2,6,8]. Specifically, by predicting consumer response in an environment where the felt discrepancy and coping mechanism are concurrently experienced, this study contributes a new perspective to CCB, social comparison theory, and implicit theory and broadens current research on the social psychological impacts of influencer marketing [15,17].

While there is existing literature on CCBs resulting from self-discrepancies [8], this research focuses on appearance-related social comparisons via SNSs, extending the application of CCBs to interactions within these online platforms. The results of this study indicate that appearance-related social comparisons, consumers’ level of body satisfaction (high vs. low), as well as consumers’ implicit (incremental vs. entity) mindset are notable predictors of consumer purchase intentions. Remarkably, influencers that create an upward appearance-related comparison are not as effective at persuading consumers to purchase products compared with the influencers that create a lateral appearance-related comparison. It may be that consumers consider the gap between themselves and the upward appearance-related influencers to be too large. As Festinger [1] discovered, when the comparison gap between oneself and a target other is too large, there is a tendency to avoid the comparison.

The findings of this study further support Mandel et al.’s [8] CCB model, indicating that CCBs are affected by felt discrepancies via varied coping mechanisms. Our findings contribute to the CCB model through the implication of implicit theories, which rationalizes how one’s implicit mindset influences their CCBs [8,9]. Specifically, these results suggest that entity theorists will be more likely to engage in CCBs that allow them to disassociate or escape from a felt discrepancy or engage in CCBs that reduce the salience of the discrepancy through symbolic self-completion or fluid consumption [8]. For example, when entity theorists had high body satisfaction levels, they were more likely to purchase body-related items compared to when they had low body satisfaction levels. Similarly, with low body satisfaction levels, entity theorists had higher purchase intentions for head-related items; hence, the results of each condition model entity theorists choosing CCBs that allow them to self-affirm instead of changing the self [9,28]. Likewise, the results for incremental theorists further support prior research on implicit theory as these theorists consistently had higher PIs in the domain of their felt discrepancy. Thus, incremental theorists had a desire to change or improve the self by engaging in direct resolution CCBs.

As Jin et al. [14] suggested, the highly edited imagery posted to SNSs by influencers may be effective for grabbing consumers’ attention; however, for influencers that create an upward appearance-related comparison, their ability to grab consumers’ attention may effectively increase brand awareness, but not necessarily purchase intentions. Practically speaking, our findings indicate higher overall purchase intentions from influencers that were more lateral in their appearance, suggesting that companies can access more effective results from social media marketing by knowing their target market and collaborating with influencers that are similar in appearance with the consumers they are marketing to.

With the ever-increasing popularity of SNSs and retailers’ reliance on them, it is important to understand how and why consumers respond differently to social media influencers. While there is a significant amount of research on implicit theory, much of the research has depicted entity theorists to portray defensive or helpless behaviors when they are met with a discrepancy [8]. However, a study completed by Park and John [28] found that when met with a discrepancy, consumption behaviors proved to be a positive influence for entity theorists, thus helping them overcome feelings of failure and helplessness, which could prove to be beneficial information for entity dominant theorists, in addition to having marketing implications.

Moreover, while there are existing studies in the literature on CCBs resulting from self-discrepancies, this research focuses on appearance-related social comparisons that occur on SNSs and how they impact CCBs. The addition of SNSs is an important contribution as it adds an essential nuance to the literature on CCBs by studying the immediate reactivity of consumers meeting a discrepancy that simultaneously offers a related coping mechanism. Finally, this research contributes to the current literature by combining implicit theory with the CCB model to determine how incremental vs. entity theorists respond in terms of CCBs. A study such as this adds to the literature by further explaining CCB pattern differences that may exist between the two types of implicit theorists.

7. Limitations and Future Research Directions

As with all research, despite the value of the findings, there are limitations that should be noted. First, the study collected materials including imagery and text directly from social media influencer accounts. Though a measure was in place to determine if the participants were familiar with the influencer, product brand names were still visible and could have impacted purchase intent measures. This decision did increase ecological validity as it made the mock-up of influencers more realistic. Also, while outside sources were cited and confirmed that females have higher SNS usage and are more likely to purchase items from influencers, it remains unanswered if males would respond in a similar way. Thus, methods of this study could be adapted and expanded to include other genders and SNSs since this study only looked at influencers on the SNS Instagram. Further, future research could focus on the phenomenon of buyers’ remorse and observe if consumers who frequently purchase items from influencers after experiencing a felt discrepancy experience buyers’ remorse more often than consumers that are not as easily influenced. Alternatively, researchers could investigate if consumers who purchase from lateral appearance-related influencers are happier with their purchases than those who purchased from an upward appearance-related influencer. Each of these ideas could be further researched from a sustainability perspective as they all involve the consumption and disposal behaviors of consumers, which, as mentioned earlier in the study, causes significant setbacks in the pursuit of the 17 Sustainable Development Goals set forth by the United Nations [7].