OPEN ACCESS Top-Quality Science Review of Communication Research

Peer Reviewed 2021, Vol.9

Open Peer Reviewed ISSN: 2255-4165

Self-Presentation in Social Media:

Review and Research Opportunities
Erin E. Hollenbaugh
Kent State University at Stark, USA
ehollen2@kent.edu

Abstract
This paper reviews existing research on self-presentation in social media in order to inform future research. Social media
offer seemingly limitless opportunities for strategic self-presentation. Informed by existing self-presentation theories, a review
of research on self-presentation in social media revealed three significant context and audience variables that were concep-
tualized in a model. First, three affordances of social media – anonymity, persistence, and visibility – were discussed, as
research has revealed the moderating effects of these affordances between self-presentation goal and the self-presentational
content shared in social media. For example, one might expect that social media users are more likely to present their ac-
tual selves under conditions of less anonymity, more persistence, and more visibility. On the other hand, the freedom as-
sociated with more anonymous, less persistent, and less visible social media may lead to idealized self-presentation. The
second finding revealed the impact of other-generated content in the form of likes, comments, tags, and shares on social
media users’ self-presentation content, mediated by how they choose to manage such content. The third theme concerned
the moderating effect of context collapse on the relationship between goals and self-presentation content. The composition
of an impression manager’s audience from one platform to the next varies across social media platforms, impacting and
often complicating the attainment of self-presentation goals in the midst of merging networks of people. Social media users
have adopted varying ways to navigate the complexities of context collapse in their pursuit of self-presentation. Although
we have learned much from this body of literature, a more comprehensive theory of self-presentation in the hypermedia age
is needed to further advance this area of research.

Highlights
• Social media provide increased opportunities and challenges to manage self-presentation.
• Existing theories of self-presentation should be updated to include variables unique to social media channels in order to
apply to the social web.
• Self-presentation is moderated by the technological and social affordances of social media platforms, such as anonymity,
persistence, and visibility.
• Social media users respond to content provided by others in an effort to manage their online image.
• The composition of online networks impacts users’ decision-making about self-presentation content.
• This review of literature identifies three key variables – affordances, managing content generated by others, and audience
composition – that impact self-presentation in social media.
• A new model is presented that identifies moderating relationships among variables, drawn from existing literature.

Suggested citation: Hollenbaugh, E. E. (2021). Self-Presentation in social media: Review and research opportunities. Review
of Communication Research, 9, 80-98. https://doi.org/10.12840/ISSN.2255-4165.027

Keywords: self-presentation; social media; impression management; context collapse; social networking sites.

Editor: Giorgio P. De Marchis (Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Spain).

Reviewers who acceepted to sign their review: Anneleen Meeus (KULeuven, BE), Johanna M.F. van Oosten (University
of Amsterdam, NL), a third reviewer prefers to stay blind.

Received: Jan 14th, 2020 Accepted: Sep, 30th, 2020 Prepublished: Dec, 2020 Published: Jan, 2021
Hollenbaugh

Content

INTRODUCTION.........................................................................................................81
GOALS AND APPROACH...........................................................................................82
Figure 1......................................................................................................................83
SELF-PRESENTATION AND IDENTITY....................................................................84
AFFORDANCES OF SOCIAL MEDIA........................................................................84
Anonymity..................................................................................................................85
Persistence..................................................................................................................86
Visibility.....................................................................................................................86
MANAGING SELF-PRESENTATION CONTENT FROM OTHERS...........................87
AUDIENCES AND CONTEXT COLLAPSE................................................................88
Context collapse..........................................................................................................88
DISCUSSION................................................................................................................90
REFERENCES..............................................................................................................92
APPENDIX. RESEARCH DATABASES.......................................................................96

Introduction
1997). In 1993, the famous New Yorker cartoon canine de-
clared, ‘On the Internet, nobody knows you’re a dog,’ high-
It is well accepted that people engage in selective self-pre- lighting the freedom afforded by the Internet to carefully
sentation by highlighting certain aspects of themselves structure one’s self-presentation. Turkle (1997) explored
while downplaying others (Goffman, 1959). Self-presenta- anonymous online interactive environments as spaces for
tion is goal-directed and is performed for an audience, and playing with identity and trying on new personae. The hy-
the success of one’s self-presentation is measured by wheth- perpersonal perspective connected structural features of the
er or not the audience accepts this performance (Schlenker, Internet with users’ ability to control their selective self-
1985). Early theories of self-presentation focused primarily presentation (Walther, 1996). Visual and discursive anonym-
on face-to-face performance of the self, where the audience ity reduced people’s inhibitions online, resulting in a host of
and context are bounded and more apparent (Goffman, benign and toxic disinhibition (Suler, 2004).
1959; Leary & Kowalski, 1990; Schlenker, 1985). As hu- Despite the freedom associated with online communica-
manity became more engrossed in electronic media, theo- tion in the late 20th century (Turkle, 1997) and the dawn of
rists such as Meyrowitz (1986) attempted to reinvent the 21st (Suler, 2004), the creation and proliferation of social
traditional self-presentation theories into mediated environ- media since that time has changed the metaphoric game of
ments through his second-generation medium theory (see self-presentation in at least three ways through social media’s
Meyrowitz, 1994). Early theories of self-presentation such features and use. Decreasing anonymity for users, contribu-
as the dramaturgical perspective (Goffman, 1959) and tions from audiences, and increased context collapse have
Schlenker’s (1985) theory of self-identification have found shaped self-presentation in social media. First of all, instead
new life in the present, as they have been useful to under- of using pseudonyms and avatars to represent one’s identity,
stand self-presentation processes in social media. social networking sites like Facebook have decreased online
Among other things, the massification of the Internet anonymity through encouraging users to frequently update
brought with it expanded and exciting avenues for self- profile pictures and even requiring its users to register their
presentation. Research exploring multi-user domains, cha- actual name (see Facebook, 2020). Although specific plat-
trooms, and personal websites gave rise to new theorizing forms and tools afford more anonymity (e.g., Yik Yak [Hes-
about expression and self-presentation on the Web (Turkle, ton & Birnholtz, 2016] and reddit [Leavitt, 2015]), the more

www.rcommunicationr.org 81
 Self-Presentation in Social Media

common uses of social media (e.g., Facebook, Instagram) Attributes of the channel itself provide social information
are less anonymous. The prominence of offline friends and that is necessary to read the social situation and make deci-
family members in social media users’ friends list further sions about self-presentation performances (Meyrowitz,
remove opportunities for anonymity (e.g., Anderson & Ji- 1986). Though Goffman (1959) and other early self-presen-
ang, 2018; Manago et al., 2012). The grounding of one’s tation theorists focused on face-to-face contexts for impres-
online identity in an offline identity and physical space sion work, it is helpful to examine mediated channels as
limits the capacity for highly controlled, selective self-pre- environments in which self-presentation and facework may
sentation online because of these changes in anonymity occur (Meyrowitz, 1986). Studying self-presentation on so-
afforded by some social media sites. cial media is important because fulfilling this need is a sig-
Instead, today’s social media space offers limited con- nificant predictor of social media attachment and addiction
trol, especially given the opportunity that users have to (Chen, 2019). Toward that end, the author conducted a
contribute to or even change the impressions of others. The search of the literature on self-presentation and social media,
second way that social media has changed self-presentation ultimately focusing on the unique contributions of social
is by the increased opportunities for others to contribute media contexts in self-presentation content and processes.
content that has implications for one’s self-presentation. In particular, research has shown that the affordances of
Actors wishing to present a specific aspect of themselves social media channels (i.e., the interaction between attributes
must also manage such content provided by others. Net- of the technology and its typical uses; Evans et al., 2017),
worked publics contribute to one another’s impression man- management of content from others (i.e., ignoring, deleting,
agement through actions such as tagging, commenting, or commenting on others’ activity linked to one’s social
liking, and sharing (Rui & Stefanone, 2013). In accordance media profile), and context collapse (i.e., merging various
with Brunswik’s (1956) lens model, audiences use all of the social networks that would otherwise be separate in offline
available cues to build an impression of a person. According life) are unique variables that should be integrated into pre-
to warranting theory, other-generated content may be more vailing theories and models of self-presentation. Further, a
influential on observers’ impressions of social media users model is provided that illustrates the possible relationships
than the users’ own posts (Walther et al., 2009). In fact, among variables that were yielded from this research, which
impressions that others make of social media users are in- is described below and evidenced throughout this paper (see
fluenced by the attractiveness of users’ friends (Walther et Figure 1). This model can be used to understand online self-
al., 2008). While some social networking sites have tools presentation research as well as guide future researchers in
built in to help manage the contributions of others (i.e., refining and testing these predictions.
tagging, commenting, liking, and sharing), the use of such
tools requires active attention to social media that older
Goals and Approach
users may be unwilling to give (see Ongun & Demirag,
2014).
Along with decreasing anonymity and contributions of In a world where social media are ubiquitous (see A. Smith
others, a third way in which social media has impacted & Anderson, 2018) and where the impressions people leave
self-presentation is through increased context collapse online will follow them throughout their lives, it is important
within the large and diverse audience of social media. Much to more systematically examine the elements of self-presen-
like a wedding where otherwise disparate groups collide in tation on social media platforms. Doing so will modernize
a shared social space, social media friend lists typically existing self-presentation theories that have not been fully
integrate networks of varying intimacy levels from many tested in online spaces. A functional perspective to self-
aspects of life: work, school, family, friends, and commu- presentation focuses on the variables affecting social behav-
nity (Vitak, 2012). The collapsing of contexts, paired with ior within a larger system. The purpose of this paper is to
the invisible nature of the audience in social media, makes review the literature of online self-presentation, focusing on
selective self-presentation especially difficult. Social actors social media, in an effort to organize research findings.
have adopted varying strategies in response to these chal- The author first used a broad search strategy to collect as
lenges, which will be further explored in this paper. many papers as possible. The keywords “self-presentation or

82 2021, 9, 80-98
 Self-Presentation in Social Media

impression management” AND “social media, social net- lapse”. Combing through these results yielded another seven
working sites”, or particular social media applications (e.g., publications relevant to the review, resulted in a total of
“Twitter”) were searched in all EBSCOhost databases during approximately 100 papers.
September – December 2017 (see Appendix). “Self-presenta- These three themes were identified because they were not
tion” and the social media terms revealed 44 relevant results, only dominant in the literature, but they also represent
whereas “impression management” yielded an additional 16 unique characteristics that are distinct among social media
papers. While reviewing the 60 papers uncovered during the when compared to face-to-face self-presentation. A model is
initial search, special care was taken to organically identify proposed to map out the relationships among study variables
additional publications that were relevant to the project and (see Figure 1). Overall, this model illustrates the moderating
brought to light in the literature reviews, yielding an addi- effects of social media affordances and perceived audience
tional 13 papers. Through the process of external review by on the relationship between one’s identity goal and chosen
colleagues and others, approximately 20 additional papers self-presentation content in social media. Prevailing self-
and books were added to the set of review materials. presentation theories based in face-to-face communication
Initially, all relevant themes were identified and consid- suggest that the context and audience are important factors
ered for this project, such as the impact of individual and which moderate the effects of self-presentation motive on
cultural variables on self-presentation content (e.g., Pearce how to perform one’s identity (e.g., Goffman, 1959). In social
& Vitak, 2016), as well as self-presentation of celebrities (e.g., media, the context can be measured as affordances of the
L. R. Smith & Sanderson, 2015) and politicians (e.g., Stan- chosen social media platform, while invisible audiences are
yer, 2008) in today’s influencer culture (e.g., Audrezet et al., considered by social media users when making decisions
2018). Ultimately, the review focused on the three dominant about the content they will post. Additionally, when con-
themes impacting self-presentation in social media: affor- nected audience members tag and comment on one’s content,
dances, other-generated content, and context collapse. The these posts contribute heavily to one’s self-presentation per-
corpus of research reviewed was continually updated formance. Social actors must consider how to manage and
through July 2020 using the same research databases noted respond to such content, bearing in mind that ignoring the
above. However, given the more advanced stage of writing, content is a strategy as well.
search terms were refined to include three search strategies: The proposed relationships are further described with
“self-presentation” AND “social media” AND (a) “affor- evidence from the literature review. First, a brief overview
dances”, (b) “other-generated content”, or (c) “context col- of the fundamental elements of self-presentation is offered.

Figure 1. Predicted Relationships Among Variables in Self-Presentation on Social Media (back to p82)

83 2021, 9, 80-98
Hollenbaugh

Self-Presentation and Identity

Effectiveness is determined by whether or not the audi-
ence accepts one’s self-presentation as accurate. According
Through psychological processes of self-identification, peo- to self-verification theory, the reactions of others to a perfor-
ple develop private and public images of themselves (Schlen- mance are important contributors to one’s self-conception
ker, 1985). Images of the self, known as self-concept, are (Swann, 1983). People desire others see them the way they
multidimensional. For example, the actual self includes see themselves, and social media provide countless oppor-
characteristics that one possesses, while the ideal self in- tunities to perform and test self-conceptions for varying
cludes characteristics one wishes to have (Higgins, 1987). audiences. For example, recent research has shown that
Self-presentation involves “attempting to control images of Facebook users consider paralinguistic digital affordances
self to others” (Schlenker, 1985, p. 67). Many communication (i.e., one-click reactions) as one measure of success (Carr et
cues, verbal and nonverbal, are used by actors to try to influ- al., 2018). In a qualitative study of adolescents, Barbovschi
ence audiences’ perceptions of one’s identity (Goffman, et al. (2018) found that young girls specifically identified the
1959), whether that is the actual self or ideal self. number of likes on a post as validation of their popularity.
Self-disclosure, the revelation of personal information Swann (1983) explained that people construct opportunity
(i.e., thoughts or feelings) to others (Derlega et al., 2008), is structures that will confirm their self-conceptions. In social
distinct from self-presentation, yet it is an essential tool for media, this may involve carefully curating a friends’ list that
those attempting to present their actual or ideal image (Goff- will accept the user’s self-presentation content and respond
man, 1959). Self-disclosure is a core component of self-pre- positively to posts. Importantly, the effectiveness of self-
sentation, especially online because in the largely text-based presentation may be used as feedback to influence future
environment of social media, verbal disclosures are often impression management. If others’ reactions do not confirm
highly controlled and audience-specific. Along with verbal and accept the user’s self-presentation, then the performer
self-disclosures, research has found that social media users may scrutinize that feedback to determine its acceptability.
share pictures (e.g., Barbovschi et al., 2018; Pounders et al., Overall, self-verification theory proposes that social actors
2016) and location check-ins (e.g., Schwartz & Halegoua, will typically find ways to preserve their sense of self by
2015) in hopes of influencing the impressions that others dismissing or reframing disconfirming feedback (Swann,
make of them. 1983).
Central to the topic of self-presentation is the notion of With a greater understanding of self-presentation mes-
the audience. Without an audience, there is no self-presen- sages and processes, attention is now turned to the first
tation. Social media users heavily weigh the perceptions of theme identified in the literature: the moderating effects of
their audiences when posting and liking self-presentation social media affordances on self-presentation. When social
content online (Lowe-Calverley & Grieve, 2018). Selective media users prepare to present their actual or ideal selves,
self-presentation varies by audience, such that people may they must accept that certain features of the chosen medium
present some aspects of themselves in a certain way to one can impact the messages that they ultimately craft to fulfill
audience but different parts of their identity in a different their identity goal (see Figure 1).
way to another (Goffman, 1959). Schlenker (1985) identified
three possible audiences who may bear witness to one’s ef-
Affordances of Social Media
forts at self-presentation. “Interactants” are the actual people
who receive one’s self-presentation messages. “Imagined
audiences” are internalized audiences whom one considers The features of a communication technology help inform
when engaging in self-presentation (Schlenker, 1985). For people of its use (Norman, 1988). Structural affordances
example, one might consider what parents, teachers, or cler- emerge when one examines the relationship between a tech-
gy members would think of a message prior to publishing it. nology and the ways that humans use it (Evans et al., 2017).
Finally, the presenter is their own audience. Social actors This review revealed three affordances that may be signifi-
bring their own “internalized knowledge and standards for cant to self-presentation in social media: (a) anonymity, or
self-regulation” during self-presentation (Schlenker, 1985, p. the disconnect between one’s offline and online identity, (b)
66). persistence, or the durability of a message to remain available

www.rcommunicationr.org 84
 Self-Presentation in Social Media

online, and (c) visibility, or the appearance of messages eas- ies have supported the connection between anonymity and
ily in search results or newsfeeds. self-presentation performance. For example, a survey of al-
Although these three structural affordances might influ- most 200 adults in the U.S. explored the relationships be-
ence how people use communication technology to fulfill tween social media affordances and self-presentation.
goals, it does not necessarily determine its use (Evans et al., Tumblr users in particular perceived high amounts of ano-
2017). For example, although Twitter is highly visible and nymity in this medium and, in turn, less constraint with their
allows the user to broadcast a message, a person may use self-presentation (DeVito et al., 2017). Reddit is another so-
Twitter to send messages to a small group of friends, ignoring cial media platform that affords high anonymity for its users.
the public nature of that technology. Leavitt’s (2015) qualitative study found that reddit users
Examining the affordances of social media channels is established and used ‘throwaway accounts,’ or alternate
one way to consider the moderating effects of the channel identities not tied with their primary identity, in order to post
on users’ self-presentation efforts. Focusing on affordances unpopular or controversial opinions anonymously. Addition-
also provides one mechanism by which scholars can build ally, reddit users were less likely to use throwaway accounts
upon past research findings amid a swift current of evolving under conditions of more perceived anonymity, suggesting
social media channels and features (DeVito et al., 2017). that the protections of anonymity were found in this social
According to Bayer et al. (2020), “an affordance approach media platform (Leavitt, 2015).
may help researchers synthesize findings across studies, time Increased innovations in new technology have compli-
periods, and specific social media platforms” (p. 475). In an cated the effects of anonymity on goal fulfillment through
effort to catalog affordances in communication research, self-presentation. Location-aware apps, such as Yik Yak,
Evans et al. (2017) argued for several affordances that are mark their users with a social identity based in geographic
relevant to self-presentation in social media, which also ap- location, which can lead to increased use of language that
peared as significant predictors in the reviewed literature: invokes local group identity while still maintaining per-
anonymity, persistence, and visibility. These three affor- sonal anonymity (Heston & Birnholtz, 2016). Location-based
dances moderate the relationship between identity goals and ‘hookup’ apps such as Grindr, designed originally to connect
self-presentation content (see Figure 1). men who have sex with men, introduce unique challenges
with managing identity (Birnholtz et al., 2014). Grindr users
Anonymity express a desire to be seen by co-situated others to facilitate
casual sex, but often struggle with disclosing their offline
Social media platforms afford anonymity when “the message identities given perceived stigma (Birnholtz et al., 2014;
source is unknown and unspecified” (Scott, 1998, p. 387), Blackwell et al., 2014). Qualitative research has shown that
which separates a person’s online identity from their offline Grindr users employ linguistic techniques to distance them-
one. Like all affordances, anonymity exists on a continuum selves from potential stigma related to casual sex; for ex-
from identified to anonymous (Evans et al., 2017; Scott, ample, using terms such as “fun” and “no strings attached”
1998). Under conditions of more visual or discursive ano- (“nsa”) were more frequent than specifically naming a
nymity, where people are not tied to their offline identities, “hookup” as the goal (Birnholtz et al., 2014). Another inter-
social media users should feel more uninhibited in their esting result of this research is that identifiability is deter-
self-presentation (Suler, 2004; Walther, 1996). Walther’s mined not only by disclosure of the name and other
(1996) hyperpersonal perspective argued that anonymity personal identifiers, but also pictures with the face featured
allows for more selective self-presentation. Although the (Blackwell et al., 2014).
theory is somewhat outdated, the more recent research re- Taking and posting “selfies,” or pictures taken by and of
viewed below provides support for this prediction. Therefore, oneself, has exploded in recent years as a social media prac-
we can expect that anonymity moderates the relationship tice, due in part to the proliferation of smartphones with
between presentation motives and content, such that in- cameras (Taylor, 2014). Research has found that females in
creased anonymity allows for presentation that fits our ide- particular are more likely than males to post selfies that
al self better. demonstrate positive physical appearance (Jyrkiäinen, 2016;
Evidence from quantitative and qualitative research stud- Pounders et al., 2016). While posting a picture of one’s face

85 2021, 9, 80-98
Hollenbaugh

is in and of itself reducing anonymity, women may post self- across social media challenges, users expressed more con-
ies to reflect positively on their offline identity performanc- cern for the privacy of their information on Instagram than
es. Participants in Pounders et al.’s (2016) qualitative study on Snapchat, arguably due to the persistence of content on
said they post selfies, in part, to demonstrate that they have Instagram (T. R. Choi & Sung, 2018).
the capacity to look good when they want to or on special Snapchat, on the other hand, has less persistence because
occasions. For example, one participant said, “…it’s kind of of the ephemeral or temporary nature of its content. In a
like saying ‘I look nice today, just so you know. Monday survey of over 500 Snapchat and Instagram users, T. R. Choi
through Thursday, um, but check me out on Friday’” and Sung (2018) found that Snapchat users were more likely
(Pounders et al., 2016, p. 1887). Several participants said they to report revealing their true self, including characteristics
liked posting selfies to demonstrate their attractiveness be- they do not feel comfortable displaying offline, due in part
cause most people, most of the time do not see them dressed to the low persistence of that medium’s use. Regarding the
up or with their hair and makeup done. persistence of identity information, DeVito et al. (2017)
Under conditions of anonymity, online communicators found that Facebook and LinkedIn were the platforms with
may disclose more information and present themselves in the highest persistence of those studied. On the other hand,
ways that are ideal or preferred, which moderates the effect Tumblr users can easily maintain multiple identities and
of self-presentation goal on content (see Figure 1). Research switch from one self-presentation to another (DeVito et al,
in online dating sites has supported this connection: people 2017). Therefore, one would expect that content shared on
who anticipate face-to-face encounters with those they meet Tumblr is less persistent, or less enduring on one’s public
online (i.e., reduced anonymity) are more likely to be honest persona. Although only a few qualitative and quantitative
in their online dating profiles (e.g., Ellison et al., 2006; Toma studies have examined the impact of persistence on self-
et al., 2008). On the other hand, some online daters take presentation specifically, it appears that a relationship does
advantage of the asynchronicity and reduced nonverbal cues exist.
available in social media and share deceptive information
about themselves (Ellison et al., 2011). For Ellison et al.’s Visibility
(2011) participants, this “profile as promise” framework
implies that deceptive information shared in online dating The use of social media has high visibility when the in-
apps are realistic and achievable aspects of identity, such as formation can be easily located or retrieved (Evans et al.,
losing weight or earning a promotion at work. It appears that 2017). Specific features such as the use of trending hashtags
the relationship between anonymity and veracity of self- in Twitter or posting to a public story in Snapchat suggest
presentation content is complicated and in need of further increased visibility. Under conditions of high visibility, social
exploration. media users may be more selective in their self-presentation
to convey an ideal image (see Figure 1). DeVito et al. (2017)
Persistence found that Facebook users perceived this medium to have
the highest level of visibility control, such that users can
Persistence is the durability of a message over time, such employ built-in tools to manage who can see each piece of
that it is archived and available (Evans et al., 2017). It is content. However, Y. H. Choi and Bazarova (2015) found
expected that people using social media channels that have conflicting results. In their survey of Facebook users, the
higher persistence will be more deliberate and selective with participants expressed more concern for privacy in Facebook
their self-presentation, due in part to the enduring nature of than their private Twitter accounts because of the unbound-
that content (see Figure 1). Social media research has hailed ed nature of the audience where one’s post may be visible to
Facebook as a platform with high persistence; people are friends of friends, beyond the original intended audience.
often motivated to use Facebook to archive significant life Velten et al. (2017) argued that Snapchat users typically have
events through posts and photo albums (see Sundar & Limp- high expectations of privacy, given the restrictions on allow-
eros, 2013, for a review). Twitter has high content persistence ing others into the collective boundary. However, when one’s
as well, where posts are archived and typically made public message is ‘screenshot’ and saved, boundary turbulence can
(DeVito et al., 2017). When comparing privacy concerns occur because a violation of expected invisibility has oc-

www.rcommunicationr.org 86
 Self-Presentation in Social Media

Managing Self-Presentation
curred (Velten et al., 2017). Content from Others
Along with the content and visual components of posts,
modern social media users are able to disclose location as an
added element of self-presentation, with often increase vis- Research reviewed thus far in this paper focuses on the
ibility to those in a geographic area or to those who have also moderating effects of affordances on self-generated content
checked into that location. Social media users can commu- in the form of social media posts. However, the nature of
nicate spatially through location-based social media net- networked publics allows the audience members in the net-
works (e.g., Foursquare), photo-sharing platforms (e.g., work to contribute to one’s self-presentation as well through
Instagram), and mixed-use networks that combine several comments and images (boyd, 2011). The way that social
modes of communication (e.g., Facebook, Twitter; Schwartz media users manage content generated by others mediates
& Halegoua, 2015). Although research has focused on the the effects of that content on the users’ self-presentation
power of these technologies to coordinate our social activities content (see Figure 1).
and drive consumerism (see de Souza e Silva, 2013), rela- Boyd (2011) argued that social media users typically
tively few studies have examined how the broadcasting of welcome engagement with their networks, but at times this
such location-based activity can be employed as a tool for may pose a challenge. Through tagging people in photos,
self-presentation (cf. Cramer et al., 2011; Saker, 2017; checking others into a location through geotagging, and
Schwartz & Halegoua, 2015). posting on other people’s timelines, for example, much in-
Increased visibility may have implications not only for formation may be provided that can impact the impression
self-presentation, but for safety and well-being as well. For of another person without permission. In fact, research on
Muslim women living in Copenhagen, social media and warranting theory has shown that other-generated content
physical space are intimately tied together (Waltorp, 2013). tends to have a stronger effect on impressions that others
The women in Waltorp’s (2013) case study found that social create of social media users than the content that users post
media can be used by powerful others to track their move- themselves (e.g., Walther et al., 2009). Social information
ments and behaviors, potentially fueling stalking behavior. provided by others is typically judged by observers to have
Pearce et al. (2018) identified visibility as the most influential higher warranting value, or the value to “draw a reliable
affordance in Azerbaijan, a politically marginalizing culture. connection between a presented persona online and a cor-
Social media users who are highly motivated to present poreally anchored person in the physical world” (Walther et
themselves as dissenters must carefully craft their messages al., 2009, p. 232). For example, research has shown that a
to allow for self-expression and facilitate connection with Facebook user will be perceived as more attractive and cred-
others while also protecting themselves from punishment ible when they have more prosocial wall posts by physically
(Pearce et al., 2018). Though most of the research on visibil- attractive friends (Walther et al., 2008).
ity as a vehicle for self-presentation demonstrates how social Social media users who are highly motivated to manage
media users actively curate their online identities through their self-presentation must make decisions about how to
managing check-ins, there is a potential “dark side” applica- react to and manage the comments, tags, and wall posts that
tion of this feature of social media. In short, increased visibil- others contribute. Therefore, the management of other-gen-
ity of self-presentation content may lead to more careful erated content will mediate the effects of such content on
posting when revealing their true or ideal self. However, self-presentational content (see Figure 1). Adolescents who
various interaction effects among anonymity, persistence, were interviewed by Barbovschi et al. (2018) indicated they
and visibility should be examined to clarify differing effects did not have a lot of control over their self-presentation due
in self-presentation. Without a strong body of quantitative to the contributions from others. Specifically, they identified
results, it is difficult to draw specific hypotheses. that pictures from others in which they were tagged can
contribute negatively to their online image. When others
post content that social media users deem undesirable, deci-
sions must be made about how to manage that content. These
protective self-presentation behaviors can be repudiative,
such as adding another post or photo, or subtractive, such as

87 2021, 9, 80-98
Hollenbaugh

deleting or untagging the content (Rui & Stefanone, 2013). which potential audience members actually read or viewed
Rui and Stefanone (2013) found that Facebook users who a post, they instead imagine that audience and craft their
reported they based more of their self-esteem on external self-presentation with that audience in mind (Litt & Hargit-
validation, appearance, and/or competence were signifi- tai, 2016). For example, Marwick and boyd (2010) conducted
cantly more likely to engage in protective self-presentation a qualitative analysis of Twitter users, observing that al-
when they received unwanted other-provided posts and pho- though Twitter users typically recognize the amorphous
tos. Untagging oneself from less desirable content is fre- nature of their audience, they are more likely to post to a
quently used by more experienced Facebook users, bounded, identifiable audience. Similarly, a longitudinal
especially those with stricter privacy settings, to manage diary study of over 100 Facebook, LinkedIn, and/or Twitter
impressions (Birnholtz et al., 2017). In a large-scale content users found that about half of the time, participants imagined
analysis of log data from 50 million Facebook photo tags, a specific audience when crafting their posts (Litt & Hargit-
Birnholtz et al. (2017) found that users were most likely to tai, 2016). Of those imagining a specific audience, 70% of
untag photos that were close-ups, did not include food or the posts were intended for family and/or friends; however,
landscape, and had fewer likes or comments. People were participants reported fluctuating between various audience
also more likely to untag themselves in photos posted by types from post-to-post (Litt & Hargittai, 2016). Litt and
others who were significantly older than 20 years (Birnholtz Hargittai (2016) argued that there are two sets of strategies
et al., 2017). social media users may employ to manage their audiences:
Research has examined the impacts that others’ likes and audience-reaching and audience-limiting. Audience-reach-
friend requests have on well-being and self-esteem (Burrow ing strategies, such as increased personal disclosures, are
& Rainone, 2017; Meeus et al., 2019; Valkenberg et al., 2006), designed to draw in the target audience; on the other hand,
but less is known about the direct contributions of others on audience-limiting involves excluding people who are not in
one’s presentation of self. Managing self-presentational con- the target audience, perhaps through managing who can
tent from others is a byproduct of the networked publics view particular posts or removing someone from the network
afforded by social media that is ripe for future research using (Litt & Hargittai, 2016). The complex task for social media
a quantitative approach. Having reviewed research on af- users is to manage potentially competing self-presentation
fordances and other-generated content, it is now time to turn goals in social networks with large, diverse audiences. The
attention toward the complicated impacts that audience research reviewed hereafter suggests that the perceived audi-
composition has on self-presentation. ence will moderate the effects of self-presentation goal on
content, such that under conditions of context collapse, self-
presentation content will be more carefully selected, self-
Audiences and Context Collapse
censored, and segmented (see Figure 1).

In social media, the audience – real or imagined – is often Context collapse

difficult to ascertain. Audiences are often imagined through
consideration of the cues that are given off by the technology In imagining the audience within social media, widely-
and the social context (boyd, 2007; Litt, 2012; Litt & Hargit- adopted social networking sites such as Facebook are often
tai, 2016; Marwick & boyd, 2010). However, real and imag- marked by context collapse, or “the flattening out of multiple
ined audiences may be quite different. With social media distinct audiences in one’s social network, such that people
tools and practices, such as sharing, tagging, and retweeting, from different contexts become part of a singular group of
the potential audience of a single post or tweet is amorphous message recipients” (Vitak, 2012, p. 451). The invisible audi-
(Marwick & boyd, 2010). That seems to especially be the ence makes it impossible to fully assess the social context
case with Facebook, where the content originally shared to and background of the real audience, and given that content
one’s audience might be made available to other networks posted in social media is persistent, this presents challenges
when friends comment on, like, or share the content for social media users (boyd, 2011). As boyd (2011) explained,
(Y. H. Choi & Bazarova, 2015). “In networked publics, contexts often collide such that the
Regardless of the medium, because posters cannot be sure performer is unaware of audiences from different contexts,

www.rcommunicationr.org 88
 Self-Presentation in Social Media

magnifying the awkwardness and making adjustments im- context collapse, social media users may adopt a ‘lowest
possible” (p. 51). common denominator’ approach, where they post in ways
Context collapse increases self-presentation concerns for that are socially appropriate for even the most socially dis-
social media users, and therefore moderates the relationship tant person in their network (Hogan, 2010).
between self-presentation motivations and content (see Fig- There is qualitative support for the lowest common de-
ure 1). Davis and Jurgenson (2014) proposed two different nominator effect (LCDE) in the location service Foursquare
types of context collapse: context collusion and context col- (e.g., Guha & Birnholtz, 2013; Saker, 2017). Study partici-
lision. Context collusion involves intentionally drawing to- pants expressed concern with sharing late-night check-ins at
gether varied audiences, which can have benefits to social bars for fear of the impression it would leave on parents
capital (Davis & Jurgenson, 2014). Context collision, on the (Guha & Birnholtz, 2013). Interview data suggested that
other hand, describes situations where the unintentional Foursquare users often refrain from checking into locations
flattening of one’s social network results in “potentially that may reflect poorly on the image they wish to portray to
chaotic results” (Davis & Jurgenson, 2014, p. 481). The po- important others in their network (Saker, 2017). Twitter users
tential for widely diverse audiences (e.g., friends, classmates, responding to Marwick and boyd’s (2010) survey reported
employers, professors, grandparents), coupled with the invis- refraining from topics that could be potentially controversial
ibility of that audience leads to confusion and often privacy or too personal for some members of the imagined audience,
concerns regarding verbal and visual posted content. as a form of self-censorship.
Many social networking sites have developed tools to In contrast to the LCDE, Marder et al. (2016) have posed
allow users to target particular posts to only certain others an alternate perspective, the strongest audience effect (SAE).
in their network, which can be used to facilitate audience- Rather than accommodating the strictest audience, as with
limiting strategies (Litt & Hargittai, 2016). Although early the LCDE, college students in Marder et al.’s (2016) study
research has shown that some people use these tools to man- adjusted their disclosures according to the strict audience
age the privacy of their content (e.g., Child et al., 2011; On- whom they valued the most. This newer model of audience
gun & Demirag, 2014), these tools may often be abandoned effects in self-presentation has yet to be fully tested to see if
for ease of use. Segmenting the audience and reaching out it is a better predictor of behavior than the LCDE in social
to particular target audiences can help users manage context media.
collapse (Litt & Hargittai, 2016). Utilizing decision-making tools such as the LCDE may
Stigmatized groups often experience intensified self- jeopardize the success of self-presentation attempts for other
presentation concerns in collapsed contexts. For example, segments of one’s network. Additionally, context collapse
LGBTQ Facebook users in Duguay’s (2016) qualitative study typically results in more cognitive efforts to manage varied
discussed their experiences with disclosing their sexual iden- self-presentation goals. For example, Facebook users with
tity on the social medium. Some participants took advantage more diverse friends lists who received unwanted other-
of the affordances of Facebook and, in an act of context provided posts and photos, such as being tagged in unat-
collusion, intentionally broadcasted their disclosure of sex- tractive photos, tend to be more actively engaged in protective
ual identity. Others fell victim to context collisions when self-presentation (Rui & Stefanone, 2013). In other words,
their sexual identities were involuntarily disclosed to seg- more heterogeneous networks may require Facebook users
ments of their networks whom they did not wish to tell to un-tag, delete, or post alternative content in an effort to
(Duguay, 2016). Involuntary disclosures took the form of repair their images.
comments from others, page likes, group membership, and Along with self-censorship via the LCDE or SAE, an-
friends’ posts (Duguay, 2016). other option for managing context collapse is through seg-
In most cases, and as would be expected, collapsed net- mentation of one’s network. Rather than broadcasting
works require more careful management of one’s self-pre- self-presentation content to one’s entire audience, social
sentation, which is often accomplished through media users might participate in closed groups or use differ-
self-censorship. According to boyd (2011), “The most con- ent social media accounts or apps to reach different types of
troversial actors are those who hold power over the partici- audience. For example, politically active Norwegian teens
pant, such as parents, bosses, and teachers” (p. 44). Due to in Storsul’s (2014) qualitative study explained that they

89 2021, 9, 80-98
Hollenbaugh

joined Facebook groups dedicated to particular causes not offline. When there are inconsistencies between online and
only as a self-presentation strategy, but also to identify a offline impressions, observers tend to judge their acquain-
relatively safe space to disclose their ideals. Within these tances quite harshly, more so than their friends (DeAndrea
more homogenous groups, they felt free to engage in political & Walther, 2011). DeAndrea and Walther (2011) conducted
discussions, whereas they avoided commenting in those an experiment involving Facebook users’ identification and
discussions open to their larger Facebook networks (Storsul, evaluation of inconsistencies in self-presentation for them-
2014). selves, their acquaintances, and their friends. Participants
Another response to context collapse in social media with rated their acquaintances’ inconsistencies as more intention-
large, diverse audiences is to reconcile differences in self- ally misleading and were more likely to think they indicated
presentation and instead convey authenticity. Authenticity more hypocrisy and untrustworthiness than the inconsisten-
may be more objectively identified, such as through Twitter’s cies of their friends. However, even friends were judged more
verification checkmark (Hearn, 2017), as well as through harshly than the participants’ own inconsistencies (DeAn-
posted content. However, authenticity may further compli- drea & Walther, 2011).
cate the impression management process online because Given the prevailing research on audience effects, it is
authenticity is also audience-specific (Marwick & boyd, clear that the audience is central to the study of online self-
2010). What makes a person authentic to one audience may presentation and resulting content shared via social media.
seem out of place or strange to another. Research suggests that social media users with large net-
Self-censorship may work for most people, but Twitter is works have more opportunities to present themselves, but
also frequently home to ‘micro-celebrities’ who are building must balance the diversity of those networks. Impacted by
and maintaining a large fanbase, often for commercial pur- the LCDE or perhaps the SAE, they may use self-censorship
poses (Marwick & boyd, 2010). Research suggests that these and segmentation while maintaining authenticity. As social
individuals balance professional content with some per- media users consider the composition of their real or imag-
sonal content (but not too personal) to appear authentically ined audience, they can utilize a number of communication
human on Twitter (Marwick & boyd, 2010). They attempt channels to present themselves.
to appeal to the interests of the imagined audience to keep Although there are varied benefits to social media par-
them connected. Often this balance is struck across posts, ticipation, social media users often balance their desire for
rather than within a post, such that tweets may appeal to self-presentation with concern for privacy amid collapsed
different audiences in an effort to satisfy them collectively networks (Vitak, 2012). People’s concern for privacy differs
(Marwick & boyd, 2010). Qualitative research findings sug- from one social media application to the next (Katz & Crock-
gest that authors attempting to connect with their readership, er, 2015; Quinn, 2014), with especially high concern for
as well as other authors, use personal self-disclosure to main- privacy in Facebook given the likelihood for context collapse
tain authenticity in self-presentation (Laing, 2017). (Y. H. Choi & Bazarova, 2015; Hollenbaugh, 2019). The
Social media users are authentic when they appear genu- research reviewed above suggests that audience composition,
ine in their social media posts, demonstrating that they are namely differences in context collapse, moderate the rela-
not trying too hard to secure a particular image of them- tionship between self-presentation motivations and content
selves. Posting very frequently, especially about mundane (see Figure 1).
topics, could threaten one’s authentic self-presentation. In a
recent study of Danish teenagers, too many check-ins, such
Discussion
as at a fitness center, were perceived as giving excessive ef-
fort. One study participant said, “…to me you can just feel
the need for attention screaming out of all those updates” The purpose of this review was to synthesize existing re-
(Bertel, 2016, p. 169). This was the case for their participants search on the impact of technological affordances and audi-
especially when the check-ins were at mundane locations, ences on social media users’ self-presentation in hopes of
such as school, work, and home (Bertel, 2016). sparking new directions for research and theoretical exten-
Another threat to authenticity is when online impressions sions. Traditional self-presentation theories can be built upon
do not match what people know to be true about someone and expanded through considering many influencers, such

www.rcommunicationr.org 90
 Self-Presentation in Social Media

as audience composition. Based on this review of literature, The modeled effects of these variables on self-presenta-
several variables have emerged that should be considered in tion should be understood within the confines of particular
comprehensive and updated self-presentation theories. limitations. First, most available research on online self-
Social actors have near-limitless options for performing presentation is qualitative, which provides a detailed descrip-
identity. Each social media channel brings with it particular tion of the reality for many social media users, but is not
social and technological affordances that may be salient in meant to suggest generalized effects for the majority of
self-presentation processes. Therefore, the chosen channel(s) people. Additional quantitative studies, informed by the
should be included in studying a model of self-presentation. qualitative research reviewed here, will provide more con-
The research reviewed above that affordances such as ano- clusive supporting or contradicting evidence. Second, al-
nymity, persistence, and visibility likely moderate the rela- though attempts were made to include all available research
tionship between one’s motivation to present the actual or on the topic, this review may not be exhaustive. For example,
ideal self and the self-presentation strategies used. Along other variables such as relational motives for using social
with choices regarding their own content, social media users media, gender identity, individual traits, culture, group mem-
must also respond to content that others contribute through bership, specific self-presentation content (verbal and visual),
tagging and commenting on user content. Other-generated and feedback from audiences could be incorporated into a
content, mediated by how social media users manage that fuller conceptualization of social media self-presentation.
content, will contribute to the content of one’s self-presenta- Third, the reviewed research spans about 15 years, during
tion. Finally, audience characteristics such as the size and which time social media has changed drastically. It is unclear
diversity of the network, will moderate the relationship be- whether research findings during social media’s early days
tween presentation motives and content (see Figure 1). would still hold true today. As a reminder, this provides more
Traditional theories of self-presentation would benefit support for adopting the affordance framework when re-
from an update for the social media age. The variables re- searching social media, but it is possible that the changing
vealed in this literature review could be incorporated into landscape of social media options and norms of use may
the dramaturgical perspective (Goffman, 1959) and Schlen- cause one to challenge the findings from years ago.
ker’s (1985) theory of self-identification. For example, per- This review synthesizes research on self-presentation in
formances in social media spaces are often marked by social media, specifically channel- and audience-specific
higher amounts of persistence. Therefore, they may carry effects, to inform future research and theory in online self-
more weight than the fleeting performances of face-to-face presentation. The features and uses of social media, as well
impression managers. Additionally, context in social media as its ubiquitous presence in modern life, call for a reexami-
spaces includes much more than the physical and temporal nation and updating of traditional self-presentation theory.
environment that was originally conceptualized; instead, The aim of this paper is to contribute to the growing field by
audience composition and technological affordances play a presenting a model that can be tested quantitatively to fur-
central role in self-presentation in social media. ther uncover the complex processes of self-presentation in
social media.

Acknowledgement

The author would like to thank the editorial staff and reviewers of Review of Communication Research for their thorough
critique. Many thanks as well to colleagues in Writing Boot Camp who provided support and feedback throughout this
project.

Declaration of interest statement: This research received no funding from external sources. There is no conflict of interest,
financial or otherwise, to report.

91 2021, 9, 80-98
Hollenbaugh

References

Anderson, M., & Jiang, J. (2018, November 28). 2. Teens, friendships, and online groups. In Pew Research Center: Internet &
Technology. https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2018/11/28/teens-friendships-and-online-groups/
Audrezet, A., de Kerviler, G., & Moulard, J. G. (2018). Authenticity under threat: When social media influencers need to
go beyond self-presentation. Journal of Business Research. Advance online publication.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.busres.2018.07.008
Barbovschi, M., Balea, B., & Velicu, A. (2018). Peer-ing in the online mirror: Romanian adolescents’ disclosure and mutual
validation in presentations of self on social media. Revista Româna de Sociologie, 29, 269-286.
Bayer, J. B., Triêu, P., & Ellison, N. B. (2020). Social media elements, ecologies, and effects. Annual Review of Psychology, 71,
471-497. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-010419-050944
Bertel, T. F. (2016). ‘Why would you want to know?’: The reluctant use of location sharing via check-ins on Facebook among
Danish youth. Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies, 22(2), 162-176.
https://doi.org/10/1177/1354856514543250
Birnholtz, J., Burke, M., & Steele, A. (2017). Untagging on social media: Who untags, what do they untag, and why? Computers
in Human Behavior, 69, 166-173. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.12.008
Birnholtz, J., Fitzpatrick, C., Handel, M., & Brubaker, J. R. (2014). Identity, identification, and identifiability: The language
of self-presentation on a location-based mobile dating app. Proceedings of ACM MobileHCI, Toronto, ON, Canada:
Association for Computing Machinery.
Blackwell, C., Birnholtz, J., & Abbott, C. (2014). Seeing and being seen: Co-situation and impression formation using Grindr,
a location-aware gay dating app. New Media & Society, 17(7), 1117-1136. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444814521595
Boyd, D. (2007) Why youth <3 social network sites: The role of networked publics in teenage social life. In D. Buckingham
(ed.), Youth Identity and Digital Media (pp. 119-142). Cambridge MA: MIT Press.
Boyd, D. (2011). Social network sites as networked publics: Affordances, dynamics, and implications. In Z. Papacharissi
(Ed.), A networked self: Identity, community, and culture on social network sites (pp. 39-58). New York: Routledge.
Brunswik, E. (1956). Perception and the representative design of psychological experiments. Berkeley, CA: University of California
Press.
Burrow, A. L., & Rainone, N. (2017). How many likes did I get?: Purpose moderates links between positive social media
feedback and self-esteem. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 69, 232–236.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2016.09.005
Carr, C. T., Hayes, R. A., & Sumner, E. M. (2018). Predicting a threshold of perceived Facebook post success via likes and
reactions: A test of explanatory mechanisms. Communication Research Reports, 35(2), 141-151.
https://doi.org/10.1080/08824096.2017.1409618
Chen, A. (2019). From attachment to addiction: The mediating role of need satisfaction on social networking sites. Computers
in Human Behavior, 98, 80-92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.03.034
Child, J. T., Petronio, S., Agyeman-Budu, E. A., & Westermann, D. A. (2011). Blog scrubbing: Exploring triggers that change
privacy rules. Computers in Human Behavior, 27, 2017-2027. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2011.05.009
Choi, T. R., & Sung, Y. (2018). Instagram versus Snapchat: Self-expression and privacy concern on social media. Telematics
and Informatics, 35, 2289-2298. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2018.09.009
Choi, Y. H., & Bazarova, N. N. (2015). Self-disclosure characteristics and motivations in social media: Extending the
functional model to multiple social network sites. Human Communication Research, 41, 480-500.
https://doi.org/10.1111/hcre.12053
Cramer, H., Rost, M, & Holmquist, L. E. (2011). Performing a check-in: Emerging practices, norms and ‘conflicts’ in location-
sharing using Foursquare. Proceedings of ACM MobileHCI, Stockholm, Sweden: Association for Computing Machinery.
Davis, J. L., & Jurgenson, N. (2014). Context collapse: Theorizing context collusions and collisions. Information, Communication
& Society, 17(4), 476-485. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2014.888458

www.rcommunicationr.org 92
 Self-Presentation in Social Media

De Souza e Silva, A. (2013). Location-aware mobile technologies: Historical, social, and spatial approaches. Mobile Media
& Communication, 1(1), 116-121. https://doi.org/10.1177/2050157912459492
DeAndrea, D. C., & Walther, J. B. (2011). Attributions for inconsistencies between online and offline self-presentations.
Communication Research, 38(6), 805-825. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650210385340
Derlega, V. J., Winstead, B. A., & Greene, K. (2008). Self-disclosure and starting a close relationship. In S. Sprecher, A.
Wenzel, & J. Harvey (Eds.), Handbook of relationship initiation (p. 153–174). New York: Psychology Press.
DeVito, M. A., Birnholtz, J., & Hancock, J. T. (2017). Platforms, people, and perception: Using affordances to understand
self-presentation on social media. Proceedings of ACM CSCW ’17 (pp. 740-754). Portland, OR: Association for Computing
Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/2998181.2998192
Duguay, S. (2016). ‘He has a way gayer Facebook than I do’: Investigating sexual identity disclosure and context collapse
on a social networking site. New Media & Society, 18(6), 891-907. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444814549930
Ellison, N. B., Hancock, J. T., & Toma, C. L. (2011). Profile as promise: A framework for conceptualizing veracity in online
dating self-presentations. New Media & Society, 14(1), 45-62. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444811410395
Ellison, N., Heino, R., & Gibbs, J. (2006). Managing impressions online: Self-presentation processes in the online dating
environment. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 11, 415-441. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2006.00020.x
Evans, S. K., Pearce, K. E., Vitak, J., & Treem, J. W. (2017). Explicating affordances: A conceptual framework for
understanding affordances in communication research. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 22(1), 35-52.
https://doi.org/10.1111/jcc4.12180
Facebook. (2020). What names are allowed on Facebook? https://www.facebook.com/help/112146705538576/
Goffman, E. (1959). Presentation of self in everyday life. Garden City, NY: Doubleday.
Guha, S., & Birnholtz, J. (2013). Can you see me now? Location, visibility, and the management of impressions on foursquare.
Proceedings of ACM MobileHCI (pp. 183-192). Munich, Germany: Association for Computing Machinery.
Hearn, A. (2017). Verified: Self-presentation, identity management, and selfhood in the age of big data. Popular Communication,
15(2), 62-77. https://doi.org/10.1080/15405702.2016.1269909
Heston, M., & Birnholtz, J. (2016). (In)visible cities: An exploration of social identity, anonymity, and location-based filtering
on Yik Yak. iConference 2016 Proceedings. https://doi.org/10.9776/16152
Higgins, E. T. (1987). Self-discrepancy: A theory relating self and affect. Psychological Review, 94(3), 319–340.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.94.3.319
Hogan, B. (2010). The presentation of self in the age of social media: Distinguishing performances and exhibitions online.
Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, 30(6), 377-386. https://doi.org/10.1177/0270467610385893
Hollenbaugh, E. E. (2019). Privacy management among social media natives: An exploratory study of Facebook and Snapchat.
Social Media + Society, 5(3), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305119855144
Jyrkiäinen, S. (2016). Online presentation of gendered selves among young women in Egypt. Middle East Journal of Culture
and Communication, 9, 182-198. https://doi.org/10.1163/18739865-00902005
Katz, J. E., & Crocker, E. T. (2015). Selfies and photo messaging as visual conversation: Reports from the United States,
United Kingdom and China. International Journal of Communication, 9, 1861–1872.
Laing, A. (2017). Authors using social media: Layers of identity and the online author community. Publishing Research
Quarterly, 33, 254-267. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12109-017-9524-5
Leary, M. R., & Kowalski, R. M. (1990). Impression management: A literature review and two-component model. Psychological
Bulletin, 107(1), 34-47. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.107.1.34
Leavitt, A. (2015). ‘This is a throwaway account:’ Temporary technical identities and perceptions of anonymity in a massive
online community. Proceedings of ACM CSCW ’15 (pp. 317-327). Vancouver, BC, Canada: Association for Computing
Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/2675133.2675175
Litt, E. (2012). Knock, knock. Who’s there? The imagined audience. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 56(3), 330-345.
https://doi.org/10.1080/08838151.2012.705195

93 2021, 9, 80-98
Hollenbaugh

Litt, E., & Hargittai, E. (2016). The imagined audience on social network sites. Social Media + Society, 2, 1-12.
https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305116633482
Lowe-Calverley, E., & Grieve, R. (2018). Thumbs up: A thematic analysis of image-based posting and liking behaviour on
social media. Telematics and Informatics, 35, 1900-1913. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2018.06.003
Manago, A. M., Taylor, T., & Greenfield, P. M. (2012). Me and my 400 friends: The anatomy of college students’ Facebook
networks, their communication patterns, and well-being. Developmental Psychology, 48(2), 369-380.
https://doi.org/10.1037/a0026338
Marder, B., Joinson, A., Shankar, A., & Thirlaway, K. (2016). Strength matters: Self-presentation to the strongest audience
rather than lowest common denominator when faced with multiple audiences in social network sites. Computers in Human
Behavior, 61, 56-62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.03.005
Marwick, A. E., & boyd, d. (2010). I tweet honestly, I tweet passionately: Twitter users, context collapse, and the imagined
audience. New Media & Society, 13(1), 114-133. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444810365313
Meeus, A., Beullens, K., & Eggermont, S. (2019). Like me (please?): Connecting online self-presentation to pre- and early
adolescents’ self-esteem. New Media & Society, 21, 2386-2403. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444819847447
Meyrowitz, J. (1986). No sense of place: The impact of electronic media on social behavior. New York: Oxford University Press.
Meyrowitz, J. (1994). Medium theory. In D. Crowley & D. Mitchell (Eds.), Communication theory today (pp. 50-77).
Cambridge, England: Polity Press.
Norman, D. A. (1988). The psychology of everyday things. New York: Basic Books.
Ongun, E., & Demirag, A. (2014). An evaluation of Facebook users’ blocking tendencies regarding their privacy and secrecy
settings. Global Media Journal: Turkish Edition, 5(9), 263-279.
Pearce, K. E., & Vitak, J. (2016). Performing honor online: The affordances of social media for surveillance and impression
management in an honor culture. New Media & Society, 18(11), 2595-2612. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444815600279
Pearce, K. A., Vitak, J., & Barta, K. (2018). Socially mediated visibility: Friendship and dissent in authoritarian Azerbaijan.
International Journal of Communication, 12, 1310-1331. 2
Pounders, K., Kowalczyk, C. M., & Stowers, K. (2016). Insight into the motivation of selfie postings: Impression management
and self-esteem. European Journal of Marketing, 50(9-10), 1879-1892. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJM-07-2015-0502
Quinn, K. (2014). An ecological approach to privacy: ‘‘Doing’’ online privacy at midlife. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic
Media, 58(4), 562-580. https://doi.org/10.1080/08838151.2014.966357
Rui, J. R., & Stefanone, M. A. (2013). Strategic image management online. Information, Communication, & Society, 16(8), 1286-
1305. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2013.763834
Saker, M. (2017). Foursquare and identity: Checking-in and presenting the self through location. New Media & Society, 19(6),
934-949. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444815625936
Schlenker, B. R. (1985). Identity and self-identification. In B. R. Schlenker (Ed.), The self and social life (pp. 65-99). New York:
McGraw-Hill.
Schwartz, R., & Halegoua, G. R. (2015). The spatial self: Location-based identity performance on social media. New Media
& Society, 17(10), 1643-1660. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444814531364
Scott, C. R. (1998). To reveal or not to reveal: A theoretical model of anonymous communication. Communication Theory,
8(4), 381–407. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2885.1998.tb00226.x
Smith, A., & Anderson, M. (2018, March). Social media use in 2018. Pew Research Center.
http://www.pewinternet.org/2018/03/01/social-media-use-in-2018/
Smith, L. R., & Sanderson, J. (2015). I’m going to Instagram it! An analysis of athlete self-presentation on Instagram. Journal
of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 59(2), 342-358. https://doi.org/10.1080/08838151.2015.1029125
Stanyer, J. (2008). Elected representatives, online self-presentation, and the personal vote: Party, personality, and webstyles
in the United States and United Kingdom. Information, Communication, & Society, 11(3), 414-432.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13691180802025681
Storsul, T. (2014). Deliberation or self-presentation? Young people, politics, and social media. Nordicom Review, 35(2), 17-28.

www.rcommunicationr.org 94
 Self-Presentation in Social Media

Suler, J. (2004). The online disinhibition effect. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 7(3), 321-326.
Sundar, S. S., & Limperos, A. M. (2013). Uses and grats 2.0: New gratifications for new media. Journal of Broadcasting &
Electronic Media, 57(4), 504-525. https://doi.org/10.1080/08838151.2013.845827
Swann, W. B., Jr. (1983). Self-verification: Bringing social reality into harmony with the self. Social Psychological Perspectives
on the Self. In J. Suls & A. G. Greenwald (Eds.), Psychological perspectives on the self (Vol. 2, pp. 33-66). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Taylor, P. (2014). More than half of Millenials have shared a ‘selfie.’ Pew Research Center. http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-
tank/2014/03/04/more-than-half-of-millennials-have-shared-a-selfie/
Toma, C. L., Hancock, J. T., & Ellison, N. B. (2008). Separating fact from fiction: An examination of deceptive self-
presentation in online dating profiles. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34(8), 1023-1036.
https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0146167208318067
Turkle, S. (1997). Life on the screen: Identity in the age of the Internet. New York: Simon and Schuster.
Valkenburg, P. M., Peter, J., & Schouten, A. P. (2006). Friend networking sites and their relationship to adolescents’ well-
being and social self-esteem. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 9, 584-590. https://doi.org/10.1089/cpb.2006.9.584
Velten, J. C., Arif, R. & Moehring, D. (2017). Managing disclosure through social media: How Snapchat is shaking boundaries
of privacy perceptions. The Journal of Social Media in Society, 6(1), 220-250.
Vitak, J. (2012). The impact of context collapse and privacy on social network site disclosures. Journal of Broadcasting &
Electronic Media, 56(4), 451-470. https://doi.org/10.1080/08838151.2012.732140
Walther, J. B. (1996). Computer-mediated communication: Impersonal, interpersonal, and hyperpersonal interaction.
Communication Research, 23(1), 3-43. https://doi.org/10.1177/009365096023001001
Walther, J. B., Van Der Heide, B., Hamel, L. M., & Shulman, H. C. (2009). Self-generated versus other-generated statements
and impressions in computer-mediated communication: A test of warranting theory using Facebook. Communication
Research, 36(2), 229-253. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650208330251
Walther, J. B., Van Der Heide, V., Kim, S.-Y., Westerman, D., & Tong, S. T. (2008). The role of friends’ appearance and
behavior on evaluations of individuals on Facebook: Are we known by the company we keep? Human Communication
Research, 34, 28-49. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.2007.00312.x
Waltorp, K. (2013). Public/private negotiations in the media uses of young Muslim women in Copenhagen: Gendered social
control and the technology-enabled moral laboratories of a multicultural city. The International Communication Gazette,
75(5-6), 555-572. https://doi.org/10.1177/1748048513491912

95 2021, 9, 80-98
Hollenbaugh

Appendix. Research Databases (back to text)

Academic Search Complete Consumer Health Complete - EBSCOhost

Academic Search Premier Criminal Justice Abstracts with Full Text
Academic Search Ultimate eBook Collection (EBSCOhost)
AgeLine EconLit
Agricola Education Full Text (H.W. Wilson)
AHFS Consumer Medication Information Education Research Complete
Alt HealthWatch Energy & Power Source
America: History & Life Entrepreneurial Studies Source
American Antiquarian Society (AAS) Historical Environment Complete
Periodicals Collection: Series 1 ERIC
American Antiquarian Society (AAS) Historical Essay and General Literature Index (H.W. Wilson)
Periodicals Collection: Series 2 European Views of the Americas: 1493 to 1750
American Antiquarian Society (AAS) Historical Family Studies Abstracts
Periodicals Collection: Series 3 Film & Television Literature Index with Full Text
American Antiquarian Society (AAS) Historical Food Science Source
Periodicals Collection: Series 4 Fuente Académica
American Antiquarian Society (AAS) Historical Funk & Wagnalls New World Encyclopedia
Periodicals Collection: Series 5 Garden, Landscape & Horticulture Index
Anthropology Plus Gender Studies Database
APA PsycInfo GeoRef
Applied Science & Technology Full Text (H.W. Wilson) GeoRef In Process
Art & Architecture Complete GreenFILE
Art Full Text (H.W. Wilson) Health and Psychosocial Instruments
Art Index Retrospective (H.W. Wilson) Health Source - Consumer Edition
Associates Programs Source Health Source: Nursing/Academic Edition
Atla Religion Database Historical Abstracts
Avery Index to Architectural Periodicals History of Science, Technology & Medicine
Bibliography of Asian Studies Hobbies & Crafts Reference Center
Bibliography of Native North Americans Home Improvement Reference Center
Biography Reference Bank (H.W. Wilson) Hospitality & Tourism Complete
Biological & Agricultural Index Plus (H.W. Wilson) Human Resources Abstracts
Book Review Digest Plus (H.W. Wilson) Humanities Abstracts (H.W. Wilson)
Book Review Digest Retrospective: 1903-1982 (H.W. Humanities International Complete
Wilson) Index to 19th-Century American Art Periodicals
Business Abstracts with Full Text (H.W. Wilson) Inspec Archive - Science Abstracts 1898-1968
Business Source Complete International Bibliography of Theatre & Dance with Full
Business Source Premier Text
Business Source Ultimate International Political Science Abstracts
Caribbean Search International Security & Counter Terrorism Reference
Central & Eastern European Academic Source Center
Chicano Database Jewish Studies Source
CINAHL Plus with Full Text Forbes Archive
Communication & Mass Media Complete Legal Collection
Bloomberg Businessweek Archive LGBTQ+ Source
Communication Abstracts Fortune Magazine Archive
Computer Source Library Literature & Information Science Full Text (H.W.
Computers & Applied Sciences Complete Wilson)

www.rcommunicationr.org 96
 Self-Presentation in Social Media

Library, Information Science & Technology Abstracts Small Business Reference Center
with Full Text SocINDEX with Full Text
Literary Reference Center Sociological Collection
Literary Reference Center Plus SPORTDiscus with Full Text
Literary Reference eBook Collection Teacher Reference Center
MAS Reference eBook Collection Textile Technology Complete
MAS Ultra - School Edition TOPICsearch
MasterFILE Complete Urban Studies Abstracts
MasterFILE Premier People Magazine Archive
MasterFILE Reference eBook Collection Vente et Gestion
MathSciNet via EBSCOhost Vocational and Career Collection
MedicLatina Vocational Studies Premier
MEDLINE Women’s Studies International
MEDLINE Complete The Nation Archive
MEDLINE with Full Text The National Review Archive
Mental Measurements Yearbook with Tests in Print The New Republic Archive
Middle Eastern & Central Asian Studies Applied Science & Business Periodicals Retrospective:
Middle Search Plus 1913-1983 (H.W. Wilson)
Humanities Full Text (H.W. Wilson) Arte Público Hispanic Historical Collection: Series 1
Middle Search Reference eBook Collection Arte Público Hispanic Historical Collection: Series 2
MLA Directory of Periodicals The Atlantic Magazine Archive
MLA International Bibliography Business Periodicals Index Retrospective: 1913-1982
Music Index (H.W. Wilson)
National Criminal Justice Reference Service Abstracts Ebony Magazine Archive
Newspaper Source Education Index Retrospective: 1929-1983 (H.W. Wilson)
OpenDissertations Frick Art Reference Library Periodicals Index
Peace Research Abstracts Humanities Index Retrospective: 1907-1984 (H.W. Wilson)
Life Magazine Archive Index to Legal Periodicals Retrospective: 1908-1981 (H.W.
Philosophers Index with Full Text Wilson)
Play Index (H.W. Wilson) Library Literature & Information Science Retrospective:
Points of View Reference Center 1905-1983 (H.W. Wilson)
Political Science Complete Social Sciences Index Retrospective: 1907-1983 (H.W.
Primary Search Wilson)
Primary Search Reference eBook Collection African American Historical Serials Collection
Professional Development Collection
Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection
Public Affairs Index
Race Relations Abstracts
Readers’ Guide Full Text Mega (H.W. Wilson)
Readers’ Guide Retrospective: 1890-1982 (H.W. Wilson)
Regional Business News
Regional Business News Plus
Religion and Philosophy Collection
RILM Abstracts of Music Literature (1967 to present)
Risk Management Reference Center
Russian Academy of Sciences Bibliographies
Science Reference Center
Science Reference eBook Collection
Shock & Vibration Digest
Short Story Index (H.W. Wilson)

97 2021, 9, 80-98
Hollenbaugh Self-Presentation in Social Media

Copyrights and Repositories

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-3.0 Unported License.

This license allows you to download this work and share it with others as long as you credit the author and the journal. You
cannot use it commercially without the written permission of the author and the journal (“Review of Communication
Research”).

Attribution
You must attribute the work to the author and mention the journal with a full citation, whenever a fragment or the full text
of this paper is being copied, distributed or made accessible publicly by any means.

Commercial use
The licensor permits others to copy, distribute, display, and perform the work for non-commercial purposes only, unless you
get the written permission of the author and the journal.

The above rules are crucial and bound to the general license agreement that you can read at:
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/

Corresponding author
Erin E. Hollenbaugh
Kent State University at Stark
6000 Frank Ave. NW
North Canton, OH 44720, USA
ehollen2@kent.edu
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6648-2765

Attached is a list of permanent repositories where you can find the articles published by RCR:
Academia.edu @ http://independent.academia.edu/ReviewofCommunicationResearch
Internet Archive @ http://archive.org (collection “community texts”)
Social Science Open Access Repository, SSOAR @ http://www.ssoar.info/en/home.html

Review of Communication Research 98 2021, 9, 80-98