The effect of Advertising Models’ Body Size on Consumers’ Perceptions of Self and the Ad
Hoori Rafieian, Ph.D. Student, Department of Marketing
Faculty Advisor: Hyokjin Kwak, Ph.D., Department of Marketing
LeBow College of Business
Methodology
Background & Literature
• Mode magazine was one of the first fashion magazines
which featured plus-size women in 1997 and was named
the best new magazine launch by Ad week. The failure of
several fashion designers into the plus size market,
however, led to demise of this magazine only 3 years after.
• H&M has been successfully using plus size models since
early 2013.
90 female undergraduate students at Drexel University participated in a 3 (model’s body
size: slim, average, large) × 2 (product type: luxury vs. non-luxury) between subject
design.
They were first shown a set of three ads of either a luxury or non-luxury piece of clothing
by a model in one of the six conditions. Models who are advertising for the same
product across conditions are all the same only varying in size (using photoshop and
based on a pretest).
Results
Social Comparison Theory:
• In absence of objective means, people evaluate
themselves by making comparisons with others.
• upward comparison has direct negative effect on mood
and self-esteem while downward comparison has been
shown to be positively correlated with self-esteem
(Pyszczynski et al., 1981; Wills, 1986).
• Comparison with slightly superior others are deemed by
people to be more useful and motivational and less
painful (Gruder, 1977; Wood, 1989; Collins, 1997).
H1a: Women will show higher self-esteem when exposed to
average-sized clothing models than when exposed to slimsized or large-sized clothing models.
H1b: The relationship between exposure to advertising
models and women’s self-esteem is stronger for women who
care more (than less) about their body size.
Similarity/attraction theory:
Normally Attractive Models (NAMs) are shown to be more
liked by consumers than Highly Attractive Models (HAMs).
H2a: Women will have more favorable attitude towards the
advertisement of clothes advertised by average-sized
models than of those advertised by slim-sized or large-sized
models.
H2b: The relationship between exposure to advertising
models and participant’s attitude towards the advertisement
is stronger when the advertised product has non-luxury
(versus luxury) overtones.
H3: Women will have a more (than less) realistic view of their
body when exposed to average-sized clothing models than
when exposed to slim-sized or large-sized clothing models.
Participants in the large and slim size conditions
consistently underestimate their weight (2,34, p<.005 &
3.27, p<.001) while participants in the average group
showed significantly more realistic predictions (.18, p=.63).
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Participants then filled various scales pertinent to hypothesized dependent variables
regarding self-esteem and ad evaluation. They were then asked to choose the body type
which they deem closer to how their body looks like. Data on weight and height are
collected.
Collins, R. L. (1996). "For better or worse: The impact of upward social comparison
on self-evaluations." Psychological bulletin 119(1): 51.
Festinger, L. (1954). "A theory of social comparison processes." Human relations
7(2): 117-140.
Gruder, C. L. (1977). Choice of comparison persons in evaluating oneself. Social
comparison processes: Theoretical and empirical perspectives, 21, 42.
Pyszczynski, T., Greenberg, J., & LaPrelle, J. (1985). Social comparison after success
and failure: Biased search for information consistent with a self-serving conclusion.
Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 21(2), 195-211.
Wills, T. A. (1981). Downward comparison principles in social psychology.
Psychological Bulletin, 90(2), 245.
Wood, J. V. (1989). Theory and research concerning social comparisons of
personal attributes. Psychological bulletin, 106(2), 231.
printed by
www.postersession.com