Face It: the Impact of Gender on Social Media Images Essay

Social websites equal Facebook enable designrs to upload ego-created digital range of a functions it is therefore of interest to see how sexual urge is performed in this domain. A panel apply a literature limited review of pictorial features associated with sexuality traits, and a sample of Facebook pictures to assess sex activity stereotypes toast in Facebook images. Traits emerging in greater prominence in pictures of potents include active, dominant, and independent. Those prominent with fe potent users included attractive and dependent. These findings generally conform to gender stereotypes anchor in prior inquiry and extend the research regarding unimaginative gender traits ostentationed in original media depictions to self-selected genial media displays. They alike extend the research on gender differences in printing manage handst generally, in some(prenominal) inter soulal converse and favorable media, to include gender-specific traits that be part of teenaged handss and wo custodys impression manage work forcet. Keywords Facebook sex Display Impression Manage manpowert subroutine Theory Social MediaJessica Rose (B.A., Villanova University, 2011) is a marketing and communications professional in the great Philadelphia Area. Susan Mackey-Kallis (Ph.D., Penn State University, 1986) is an associate professor in the surgical incision of Communication at Villanova University. Len Shyles (Ph.D., Ohio State University, 1981) is an associate professor in the discussion section of Communication at Villanova University. Kelly Barry (B.A., Villanova University, 2011) is a marketing and communications professional in the Greater New York line of business. Danielle Biagini (B.A., Villanova University, 2011) is a marketing and communications professional in the Greater San Diego ara. Colleen Hart (B.A., Villanova University, 2011) is a student at the University of North Carolina initiate of Law. Lauren Jack (B.A., Villanova Universit y, 2011) is a marketing and communications professional in the Greater New York ara. The authors would like to thank Dr. Jesse Frey of the Mathematics Department of Villanova University for his help in creating the tables presented in this article. Correspondence Susan Mackey-Kallis, Department of Communication, 800 E. Lancaster Avenue, Villanova, PA 19085 E-mail susan.mackey-kallisvillanova.edu ISSN 0146-3373 print/1746-4102 online 2012 eastern Communication Association DOI 10.1080/01463373.2012.725005The fundamentality of gender embodiment has animated novel debates in media studies roughly the relationship among gender representations in media, gendered bodies in practical(prenominal)(prenominal) space, and gender as exercise. With the emergence of affable media websites, much(prenominal) as Twitter, Facebook, and MySpace, users drive home an online platform that allows them to turn over widely, to virtually manage others impressions of them, and to rase express gend ered identities in cyberspace. With over 500 million active users as of 2011 (http//www.facebook.com/press/info.php?statistics), Facebook dominates the neighborly media market. Offering a luxuriouslyly interactive platform, Facebook users suffer leave comments on their friends walls, deliver the goods status updates and photos, and cig atomic number 18t even access one other wirelessly done Facebook Mobile. As of 2010, users spent over 700 billion minutes per month on Facebook (http//www.facebook.com/ press/info.php?statistics), oft updating their Facebook visiblenesss to add relationships to their friends lists.One well-known(a) feature of Facebook is the users write picture, displayed in the upper left corner of each users home pageboy. Intended to be the number one thing seen, it is arguably one of the most important features of the users Facebook page. The profile picture produces friends, acquaintances and even potential employers a firstimpression of the users appearance and, perhaps, their character. Therefore, the content of users Facebook profile pictures is an important object of theme for researchers arouse in how tribe practice impression perplexity. According to role theory, people follow unwritten kindly and cultural rules and norms as they be throw away in ways that be different and predictable depending on their respective hearty identities and the situations they find themselves in (Biddle, 1986, p. 68). sexual practice identity and gender roles are a signifi lowlifet part of insouciant life and, according to G murderman, are very constituted by dint of social interaction (1976). sexuality shapes how people suffice sense of themselves and their social relationships. However, as Wood notes, What gender means depends heavily on cultural values and practices a cultures definitions of maleness and femininity shape expectations most how individual men and women should communicate and how individuals communicate establ ishes gender that, in turn, influences cultural views (Wood, 2009, p. 20). Gender display, as a never-ending communication loop, is defined by society and expressed by individuals as they interact era shaping evolving societal expectations regarding gender.In contemporary media and culture, womens and mens social desirability and gender carry often been defined in footing of their bodies. For women, this has often involved comparing themselves to and even replicating the thin subjectl (presented in modern mass media despite the looming touch of anorexia and bulimia), altering their bodies to heighten perceived sexuality or youthfulness (through augmentative surgery, exercise or eating), or conforming to traditional definitions of femininity including qualities such as submissiveness or creaminess (through dress, cosmetics, style, etc.). For men, gender-based definitions of success ofttimes revolve approximately presenting or developing their bodies as strong, youthful, acti ve, and physically dominant. The evolution of social media (such as Facebook) and online digital maneuver environments (such as massive, multiple online backs MMOs) now offer venues where individuals can consciously self-select and present virtual versions of themselves that can each conform with, challenge, or defy societal expectations and media presentations.Digital formats, on the one hand, represent elicit possibilities for individuals who can explore the freedom of presenting a physical self that king differ from the one they present or perform in nonchalant life or from socially-defined expectations. As Rettberg argues, our fascination with creating digital self-portraits is indicative of our bodied coming of age where we as a culture are discovering that we thrust voices online and can express ourselves rather than simply accepting the mass medias views of the cosmea (2009, p. 453). On the other hand, digital formats may simply offer a chance to replicate cultural a nd mass media normative versions of the individual, specifically as they relate to gender. Since how people present and perform their bodies in virtual spaces offer specific impressions, many of which relate to gender, one objective of the received sphere is to encounter how gender portrayals manifest themselves in self-selected social media displays.Specifically, can social media website content help us understand much than about gender roles and the way people present themselves in the virtual social world? Do the ways they manage their images reinforce existing gendered stereotypes? Because social ne t achievements such as Facebook are relatively recent phenomena, the content of self-presentation profile pictures has not been analyzed in great depth. Extant literature supports the idea of expected gender roles unique to males and females (Goffman, 1976 Lauzen, Dozier, & Horan, 2008 Wanta & Legett, 1989 Williams & Best, 1990) and the idea that society advocates these roles th rough dissimilar media (Bell & Milic, 2002 autograph & Toma, 2009), with both males and females engaging in impression management in order to control their public image (Dominick, 1999 Jones, 1997 Leary, 1996).Witmer and Katzman (1997) argued that females may display more(prenominal) emotional graphics than males while communicating on the Internet. Extant literature, however, that reveals one study that has examined gender differences in self-selected portraits in self-posed photographs (Mills, 1984) and one study that has examined gender differences in Facebook profile pictures (Strano, 2008). Stranos study, focaliseing exclusively on gender difference in impression management, found that women engage in management more than men (Strano, 2008). In a related area of literature, self-presentation in computer-mediated communication (CMC), some studies suggest a great argue of gender-swapping on the Internet (Bruckman, 1993 Roberts & Parks, 1999 Witmer & Katzman, 1997) with som e estimates as high as 60% (Roberts & Parks, 1999), and with males gender-swapping more than females (Bruckman, 1993 Suler, 1999).The fantastical and fantasy-based reputation of many gaming environments, however, and the anonymous nature of most CMC in general might suggest that the freedom to create oneself not only in terms of gender but in any case race, ethnicity, and other variables is much broader than in Facebook profile pictures. Facebook friends, who may know the person in real life, recognize a photograph as a self-selected presentation but, researchers argue, most in all probability do not assume that the profile picture reflects extensive alteration or photo retouching. The current study, therefore, makes a unique contribution by investigating whether self-selected Facebook profile pictures exhibit stereotypical gender roles consistent with traits emerging from existing research.Literature Review Gender Roles Some researchers suggest that gender differences result fr om a transmutation of cyphers including assimilation and biology as such, gender roles are often manifested through communication and culture (Goffman, 1976 Lauzen et al., 2008 Wanta & Legett, 1989 Williams & Best, 1990 Wood, 2009). West and Zimmerman (1987) claim gendering is a routine interaction of everyday life. Both gender role and gender display focus on behavioral aspects of being a man and a woman (p. 127). They use Goffmans (1976) account of gender display to suggest gender is overly constituted through interaction. Says Goffman, If gender can be defined as the culturally established correlates of sex (whether in consequence of biology or learning), accordingly gender display refers to conventionalized portrayals of these correlates (1976, p. 69). Goffman cites sports as a frame plump to let off masculine tendencies, asserting that the male gender is categorically viewed as aggressive, strong, and competitive. In agreement, West and Zimmerman (1987) assert that Doing gender is unavoidable . . . because of the social consequences of sex- menage membership this includes the allotment of power and resources not only in the domestic, economic, and political domains but also in the broad arena of social relations (p. 145).As men and women tend to assume proper societal gender roles, associated behaviors are viewed as cultural markers that indicate norms of social interaction. Williams and Best (1990) searched for gender stereotypes among respondents from 25 nations worldwide. Participants were presented with a list of 300 character traits and instructed to indicate whether the trait was more frequently associated with men than with women, more frequently associated with women than with men, or not differentially associated with the two sexes. Table 1 presents results for the traits most commonly associated with men and women and indicates the traits isolated for this analysis. Gender Roles in the Media Society often promotes gender role markers as social norms through photographs and other visual displays used in advertising. Wanta and Legett (1989) studied the media images of male and female athletes of the 1987 Wimbledon Tennis Tournament, concluding that men and women were depicted differently in terms of emotion, dominance, and power.Goffman (1976) accounts for these traits in his research of magazine and newspaper photography, finding women to be pictured in more submissive positions while men are depicted in more elevated positions. Based on Goffmans inquiries, Wanta and Legett (1989) hypothesized that female tennis players would be shown more often in positions implying helplessness than male tennis players. Goffmans (1976) studies of power within photographs asserted that the more dominant a persons face was (i.e., the more full-front, direct-to-camera druthers of the face, and the greater the percentage of photo space taken up by the face), the more power was held and=or portray by the person pictured. Wanta and Legett used these ideas to predict that the photographs of female tennis players would focus more on the players bodies, while male tennis players would have more concentrated images of their faces. However, the majority of Wanta and Legetts (1989) hypotheses remained unsubstantiated their gender stereotypes were not confirmed. In fact, opposite portrayals often emerged.They cogitate that the photographer was trying to break gender stereotypes. In contrast to the work of Wanta and Legett, the research conducted in the current study does not rely on images shot by professional photographers. Rather, the present analysis is based on self-selected and, almost exclusively, self-created Facebook profile pictures. Gender roles, present in everyday interaction, are also enacted on television. Lauzen and colleagues (2008) examined gender roles enacted by men and women on television. development a stratified random sample of 124 prime-time television series public exposure on six broadcast net incomes during the 200506 seasons, they looked at the rates at which men and women fell into categorically different social roles. Taking a category scheme developed by earlier research, Lauzen and colleagues defined social roles as the things people do in daily life (see Eagly & Steffan, 1984, p. 735). These roles vary from child occupy and household chores to workplace activities. Through a content analysis, they found male characters on prime-time television were more presumable to inhabit work roles, including hot collar, white collar, and extracurricular activities, while women were portrayed in more interpersonal roles involving romance, friendship, and family.Similarly, in their content analysis of 827 Australian magazine advertisements from 199798 to chance the presence of stereotypical gender roles, Bell and Milic (2002) concluded that Males were more frequently shown in narrative ways (as actors) than females, and this is true of both groups and individuals. Wome n were more likely than men to behave (or to express emotion) (p. 215). Their findings suggest stereotypical gender traits of men and women consistent with those of Williams and Best (1990) and consistent with Goffmans (1976) analysis of advertising which found that women were more likely to be portrayed performing submissive or appeasing gestures such as head or body canting, alter shape one knee inward (bashful knee-bend), smiling, clowning, and acting less severely and were often portrayed as being under the physical care and protection of a man (as cited in Bell and Milic, 2002, p. 205).Ragan (1982) analyzed gender differences in 1,296 portrait photos from high school and university yearbooks, concluding there are gender differences females smiled more than males, smiled more expansively than males, tilted their heads at greater angles than males, faced the camera less directly than males, and wore glasses less frequently than males. While this research identifies gender diff erences, it was limited by an influential factor Photographers posed the subjects (Ragan, 1982). In hopes of accounting for this limitation, Mills (1984) conducted a study in which 34 men and 34 women were asked to present themselves as typical college students in pictures. Mills findings reinforced the suggestion that females smile more, and smile more expansively, than males. Gender stereotypes also abound in video games.Female characters are delineate as highly sexualized while male characters possess exaggerated strength, are hypermasculine, aggressive, and, with the exception of showing hostility, lack emotion. They are also less likely to display helping or nurturing qualities (Robinson, Callister, Clark, & Phillips, 2008). One study found that the central role for male characters was competitor while females central roles were victim, damsel in distress, or evil obstacle for the hero to overcome (Heintz-Knowles et al., 2001). The findings of these video game content analyses have remained fairly consistent over time and have also been shown to be perceived by audiences (Robinson et al., 2008).Based on the work from several decades of research on gender roles from the fields of advertising, television, photography, digital gaming studies, and cultural studies, it is apparent that masculinity often implies strength, ambition, and independence, whereas femininity implies physical attractiveness, reverence, and sentimentality (Wood, 2009). The rapid growth of digital media invites researchers interested in the cultural doctor of gender to investigate this alternative outlet for self-presentation. This study provides a inwrought extension of such work in investigation of gender differences in self-selected Facebook profile pictures. Self-Presentation Goffman (1959) argued that individuals were concerned with self-presentation during all social encounters. This is because, among other reasons, impressions impact the opinions of others unheeding of an indiv iduals intentions. Burr (2002) claims J. Rose et al.The other people reservation up our audience can, by their own conduct, either legitimate or reject our claim to be a certain kind of person, and Goffman (1959) argues that this is through by carefully monitoring the match or mismatch amongst what we give (the things we say or do to create an impression) and what we give off (the body language, our general demeanorthe communicative aspects of our conduct that are harder for us to control and manipulate). The foot and maintenance of impressions is therefore a two-way street (2002, p. 73).Hence, for Goffman (1959), the presentation of self in everyday life and the roles maintained are pertinent to everyday interaction. People constantly play characters to avoid astonishment and to fit-in with social norms. Gender role, then, focuses on the collectivity of logical, behavioral, cognitive, and emotional responses to social situations (Burr, 2002). Most self-presentation studies hav e examined the excogitation only in face-to-face communication (Goffman, 1959 Leary 1996). Recent studies (Oh, 2004 Cho, 2006) about self-presentation in personal websites analyze only the styles and not gender display specifically. Similar to face-to-face contexts, individuals do make choices about gender-related impressions over the Internet. A number of studies, for example, have demonstrated extensive gender-swapping in avatar creation for online gaming and in text-based CMC (Bruckman, 1993 Roberts & Parks, 1999 Suler, 1999).In these virtual environments, physical identity markers are not apparent and, as a result, the self is more unstable and changeable (Gergen, 1991) and offers increased opportunities for strategic self-presentation (Walther, 1993 Walther, Anderson, & Park, 1994). Gender is often one of the variables that communicators can consciously shape in these mediated environments (Roberts & Parks, 1999 Bruckman, 1993 Wilbur, 1996). Some researchers have asleep(p) s o far as to argue that the computer-mediated environment is a gender-bending world (Witmer & Katzman, 1997). Modern gaming environments, in particular, allow gamers to design or learn avatars, their virtual self in the gaming world, that possess a vicissitude of differing characteristics such as height, weight, age, gender, dress, and profession. In these environments, the avatar becomes inextricably linked to their performance of self and engagement in a virtual community (Taylor, 1999, p. 438).Despite the above cited studies of gender-swapping and self-presentation in CMC, no researchers have examined the extent to which social media users ascribe to gender stereotypes in their presentation of self on the Internet. Samp, Wittenberg, and Gillett (2003) examined the extent to which gender schematic individuals (individuals with either strong masculine or feminine gender orientations versus androgynous orientations) and individuals who were high (versus low) self-monitoring engaged in gender-swapping on the Internet. The researchers in this study used self-report info from Internet users about their online gender-swapping behavior generally.The researchers in the current study, by contrast, provide a content analysis of actual Facebook profile pictures in terms of the presence or absence of gender stereotypes and do not focus on gender swapping. Hancock and Tomas 2009 study of profile pictures on online dating websites created and posted with the intention of creating relationships comes closest to the focus of the current study. In line with Goffmans (1959) suggestion that self-presentation is the process of packaging and editing the self in order to create a certain impression for an audience, Hancock and Toma (2009) examined the impact of gender on self-presentation and social desirability. They found that both women and men edit their profiles to create a better self-presentation through self-enhancement (Hancock & Toma, 2009). Some get in in selective self-presentation, an even more controlled act of impression management in which images are changed or distorted, often leading to further inaccuracy portrayed by the profile (Hancock & Toma, 2009).Having the ability to select or specifically change or display particular points of interest, the users can greatly affect the impression made of them (Hancock & Toma, 2009). Both men and women on the online dating social network use selective self-presentation to their advantage to give the impression of being more desirable to their audiences. Hancock and Toma (2009) suggest men and women can control their self-presentation through social networks (i.e., online dating sites). Such sites comprise one segment of social networks Facebook is another. Realizing stereotypical gender roles are present in society, Dominick (1999) studied how men and women presented themselves on personal homepages. Dominick (1999) coded 500 randomly sampled personal homepages based on demographic and personal i nformation, creative expressions, and photographs. He used Jones (1997) five strategies of image construction ingratiation (statements of modesty, familiarity, and humor) competence (statements of abilities and achievements) intimidation (statements of anger and unpleasantness) exemplification (acts of clean-living superiority) and supplication (images of helplessness, while acting self-deprecating Dominick, 1999).He concluded that females released more information than males while both males and females were equally likely to have photographs on their pages. Womens photographs tended to be more sentimental in nature, while mens more often were joke images and images that made them seem more competent and capable. He concluded that A personal web page can be viewed as a carefully constructed selfpresentation (Dominick, 1999, p. 647). Dominick asserted that the concept of impression construction exposes the different strategies men and women use to present themselves through images and information to gain a higher level of likeability, respect, and power in society (1999). Jones (1997) noted that individuals strive to be want and accepted, resulting in social rewards such as friendship, social support, companionship, romance, and social status.Because smiling is associated with being liked and competent, Jones (1997) correlates gestures with the ingratiation and competence strategies of image construction. As Facebook was not founded until 2004, Dominicks (1999) study is expanded upon in this study (http//www.facebook.com/press/info.php?factsheet). Buffardi and Campbell (2008) studied whether photographs from a variety of social networks are self-promoting. They state, Self-promoting connoted persuading others about ones own cocksure traits (p. 1307) and define physical attractiveness as the degree to which an individual appears self-promoting and narcissistic in a photograph. While not examining gender differences in self-promotion per se, the researchers did examine how sexy and modest . . . the individual in the main photo appeared to be (Buffardi & Campbell, 2008, p. 1307).