A diary study investigating the differential impacts of Instagram content on youths’ body image

The study investigates how specific Instagram content triggers youths’ body image, moving beyond prior work that focused on usage duration or one‑time exposures. Youth (18–25) frequently use visually oriented platforms like Instagram, where idealized images and cultural standards can shape body image via social comparison and internalization of beauty ideals. Traditional quantitative and experimental approaches may not capture everyday, moment‑to‑moment experiences. This study therefore uses a qualitative diary method to identify the types of Instagram posts that youth themselves report as triggering body image thoughts, and to explore associated social comparison processes (upward/downward) and emotions (positive/negative/neutral). The purpose is to provide a nuanced understanding of content‑specific effects and potential gender differences, informing more targeted interventions and guidance for healthy social media engagement.

Prior research links social media exposure—especially to thin‑ideal imagery—to increased body dissatisfaction via social comparison and thin‑ideal internalization (e.g., Perloff, 2014; Fardouly et al., 2015; Brown & Tiggemann, 2016; Cohen et al., 2017; Rafati et al., 2021). The Tripartite Influence Model (Thompson et al., 1999) posits family, peers, and media as key sources of pressure fostering appearance comparisons and internalization, leading to dissatisfaction and maladaptive behaviors. Objectification theory suggests women may self‑objectify, intensifying vulnerability to appearance‑focused content (Fredrickson & Roberts, 1997). Gender differences are reported: women often engage more in appearance comparisons and may exhibit greater body dissatisfaction after viewing attractive same‑sex images, while effects among men are less consistent (Casale & Flettl, 2019; Twenge & Martin, 2020). Social comparison operates via upward and downward processes affecting self‑evaluation and self‑enhancement (Festinger, 1954; Levallan & Behm‑Moravitz, 2016). Passive social media use has been associated with poorer well‑being and body image (Valkenburg et al., 2021; Verduyn et al., 2017). Conversely, body positivity content may improve body satisfaction, appreciation, and mood (Cohen et al., 2019; Williams & Karasinski, 2021). Existing studies often rely on one‑time exposures and may not reflect everyday dynamics (Slater et al., 2017), underscoring the need for qualitative, repeated, ecologically valid assessments of content‑specific effects.

Design: Qualitative diary study over five consecutive days focusing on Instagram. Participants were prompted daily to identify and screenshot one Instagram post that made them think about their body image (positive, neutral, or negative). After uploading the screenshot, they answered open‑ended questions on selection motives, discovery path (followed/suggested/advertisement), engagement (like/comment/share), relationship/connectedness with the creator, perceived attractiveness change, and impact on body image (valence; 1–10 impact scale), thoughts and feelings elicited, and social comparisons. On day 5, participants also evaluated the study’s influence on their perceptions and behaviors. Participants: Target n ≈ 30. Inclusion: daily Instagram users, age 18–25, English literacy. Recruited n=33; final analyzed n=28 who met inclusion and completed ≥90% of diaries. Demographics: 21% male (n=6), 79% female (n=22); M age = 21.86 (SD = 1.33; range 18–24). Mostly German (n=15; 68%), Dutch (n=5; 18%), plus Spain, Bulgaria, India (each ~3.5%). All full‑time university students. Instagram use: most 1–2 h/day (46.4%); top reasons: keeping up with friends (98%), boredom (54%), self‑presentation (46%); activities: liking (96%), sending posts (93%), saving (75%), commenting (64%). Daily survey link sent 10 a.m. via WhatsApp; reminder 6 p.m. Instruments/Measures: Daily prompt to screenshot one Instagram post influencing body image; open‑ended questions on motives, discovery, engagement, relation to creator, perceived attractiveness change; impact rating (1–10) with valence (positive/neutral/negative); narrative on thoughts/emotions; day‑5 reflection on study impact. Data handling and analysis: Data pseudo‑anonymized; responses organized in participant‑level Excel files. Thematic analysis with constant comparison and open coding. Images clustered to derive content categories; four emerged: Thin Ideal, Body Positivity, Fitness, Lifestyle. Additional codes for post characteristics (e.g., number of persons, skin exposure), sender type, discovery path. Motivational themes: inspiration, desire to look like, motivation to change body, jealousy, feeling good about oneself. Comparison types (upward/downward), emotions, and overall impact recorded. Demographics linked to codes. A nine‑code codebook guided analysis: Instagram post characteristics, Source Sender, Content, Post selection motive, Post trace, Body image impact, Triggered emotion, Social comparison, Study impact.

Data: 140 posts across 5 days from 28 youth. Four content categories identified with counts: Thin Ideal (53), Body Positivity (45), Fitness (30), Lifestyle (12). Sender types across posts: strangers (55), celebrities (47), influencers (14), social circle (10), brands (6), relatives (2), news (2), inspiration page (2), home page (2). Discovery: following creator (72), Instagram suggestion (51), advertising (8), sent by friend (1), not mentioned (8). Thin Ideal: Selected only by females (53 posts; 21 participants). Features: women showing substantial skin (bikinis, underwear, tight/see‑through clothing), mirror/close‑up/full‑body shots emphasizing bodies. Elicited both upward and downward comparisons. Upward comparisons commonly evoked negative emotions (stress, sadness, feeling less pretty) without motivating change. Some downward comparisons framed thin‑ideal bodies as unhealthy/undesirable, producing positive feelings about one’s own body. Body Positivity: Selected only by females (45 posts; 19 participants). Content included candid images, posts of women not fitting thin ideal, and explicit body‑positive illustrations/quotes. Motives: social critique of unrealistic standards and personal relatability/reassurance. Effects: consistently positive emotions and either neutral/downward comparisons supporting body appreciation and acceptance. Fitness: Predominantly selected by males (about 24 male‑focused posts) with some by females (≈6). Content: muscular creators posing or working out. All engaged in upward comparisons. Gender pattern: men reported inspiration and motivation to work out (“goal physique,” “push myself”), with positive affect; women reported discouragement, sadness, and self‑criticism about not training enough. Lifestyle: Selected by both genders (12 posts; 6 participants). Content de‑emphasized bodies and focused on context/emotions (concerts, beach, socializing, outfits). Effects: neutral toward body image but positive overall mood; minimized appearance comparisons. Study awareness effects: By day 5, many participants reported increased awareness of Instagram’s algorithmic emphasis on idealized bodies and noted how content affected their moods/body perceptions; several described the diary as inadvertently prompting reflection and more conscious use.

Findings address the central question by showing that specific Instagram content types elicit distinct social comparison processes and emotional outcomes, moderated by gender. Thin‑ideal content predominantly triggered negative affect via upward comparisons among women, though occasional downward comparisons buffered effects. Body positivity content functioned as protective, evoking positive affect and reassurance. Fitness content elicited upward comparisons for both genders; however, men commonly reported positive motivation (suggesting upward comparison can sometimes be adaptive), while women more often reported discouragement. Lifestyle content shifted attention away from bodies, yielding neutral body‑image effects and improved mood, underscoring the role of context and activities beyond physical appearance. These results nuance the simplistic view that social media exposure uniformly harms body image, highlighting the importance of content type and user characteristics (including gender) in shaping outcomes. The study also suggests potential cognitive frameworks (e.g., fixed vs growth mindset) that might underlie gendered responses, though this remains speculative. Practically, encouraging conscious curation and engagement with body‑positive and lifestyle content, and reframing fitness content toward self‑referenced goals, may mitigate harm and harness potential benefits.

This qualitative diary study provides a nuanced account of how four Instagram content types—Thin Ideal, Body Positivity, Fitness, and Lifestyle—differentially affect youths’ body image via social comparison and emotional responses, with clear gender distinctions. The same content can trigger upward or downward comparisons and positive, negative, or neutral outcomes depending on user and context. The diary approach uncovered real‑time, ecologically grounded insights and appeared to raise participants’ awareness of content effects. Future work should: (1) employ larger, more gender‑balanced and culturally diverse samples; (2) integrate complementary methods (e.g., eye‑tracking, data scraping) to reduce prompting biases; (3) examine algorithmic amplification cycles and test interventions (e.g., content filters, media literacy, mindset training) fostering conscious social media use; and (4) parse individual trajectories to tailor strategies that promote positive body image.

- Gender imbalance: Only 21% male participants, limiting the reliability and generalizability of gender‑based comparisons. - Cultural and sample homogeneity: Predominantly German/Dutch university students; findings may not generalize across cultures where body ideals differ. - Prompting/measurement bias: Daily prompt to “select a post that triggered your body image” may have steered participants toward same‑sex, appearance‑focused content and heightened awareness. - Ecological validity of usage: Requiring daily selection may have increased platform use and directed attention to body‑related content unlike natural behavior. - Method constraints: Self‑report and retrospective daily entries may be subject to recall and social desirability biases; reliance on screenshots excludes ephemeral content or nuanced interactions. - Algorithmic influences not directly measured: Although participants noted perceived algorithmic emphasis on idealized bodies, algorithmic exposure patterns were not quantitatively assessed.