Chapter 14

Unrealistic Beauty Ideals: Artificial Intelligence

and Consumers’ Self-Image Perceptions

Feyza Nur Özkan1

Abstract
Digital transformation and the rapid enhancement of artificial intelligence (AI)
technologies cause unprecedented changes in the marketing environment.
As the technology evolved and AI tools were diversified, AI became more
effective in facilitating consumers’ lives and was adopted quickly by large
masses. While this technology offers numerous opportunities, it also poses
a serious threat to consumers’ well-being by shaping society’s beauty ideals.
People judge others according to their appearance, and beautiful-looking
people have a competitive advantage. Thus, beauty is perceived as important
and highly demanded by consumers due to its influential power. Although
beauty perceptions of consumers were culture-dependent and constantly
changed throughout history, they have become similar nowadays, with the
increase in communication and the effects of globalization.
The unrealistic and unattainable beauty ideals shaped and disseminated by AI
may damage consumers’ self-image perceptions, fill them up with insecurities,
and eventually result in serious health and consumption-related problems.
Therefore, this chapter aims to explain AI’s role in shaping beauty ideals
and AI’s adverse effects on consumers’ self-image perceptions and intends
to contribute to the literature on the dark side of AI in consumers’ beauty
and self-image perceptions context. This study is descriptive in nature and is
guided by the self-theory and social comparison theory. The present study
also discusses AI’s health-related and consumption-related effects and the
mindful use of AI for consumer well-being and building an inclusive society.

1 Ph.D., Istanbul University, School of Business, [email protected],

ORCID: 0000-0003-1346-3963

https://doi.org/10.58830/ozgur.pub710.c3031
239
240 | Unrealistic Beauty Ideals: Artificial Intelligence and Consumers’ Self-Image Perceptions

1. Introduction
Digitalization and the advent of artificial intelligence (AI) irreversibly
changed how consumers live and perceive the world. This paradigm shift
caused remarkable changes in consumer behavior and the marketing
landscape. AI has gradually integrated into consumers’ lives and finds
a place in almost every sphere of life with social media, chatbots, voice
assistants, recommendation systems, and Internet of Things (IoT) devices
(Barari et al., 2024). As AI technologies evolved and were widely adopted
by consumers, their role in enhancing customer experience (Grewal et al.,
2023) was discovered by the companies, and more engaging AI technologies
such as virtual reality (VR) try-on technologies and augmented reality (AR)
face filters were introduced. As digital transformation and AI evolve, the
technologies they incorporate offer numerous opportunities in the marketing
environment for consumers, companies, and society. However, AI also has
a dark side that leads to adverse, harmful, or unintended outcomes for the
actors in the marketing environment.
One of AI’s significant risks is its potential to negatively affect consumers’
self-image perceptions by shaping beauty ideals. AI enables consumers to
create and enhance visuals with a few clicks and companies to offer more
personalized and engaging customer experiences (Ameen et al., 2021).
The image editing tools for self-presentation in the digital world have been
diversified and enhanced with the power of AI and quickly adopted by
consumers who desire a perfect appearance. However, constant exposure to
AI-generated flawless faces and perfect-looking bodies may promote hyper-
idealized beauty standards and distort consumers’ self-image perceptions by
triggering social comparisons.
Desire for beauty and interest in beautiful people is a worldwide and
transhistorical phenomenon. Therefore, consumers’ desire for a perfect
appearance and their effort to conform to society’s beauty expectations
is not new. Beauty ideals were culture-specific before globalization and
the widespread use of web-based technologies. However, increased
communication and worldwide adoption of communication technologies
have removed the geographical and cultural barriers, and consumers’
perceptions of beauty have become similar. Consumers’ beauty perceptions are
experiential and influenced by the environment (Dimitrov & Kroumpouzos,
2023). Recent reports demonstrated that adult internet users’ average time
spent online is 6 hours and 38 minutes each day, and they spend 2 hours and
21 minutes of this time only on social media (We Are Social & Meltwater,
2025). Thus, consumers are exposed to beauty content daily on the internet
 Feyza Nur Özkan | 241

and social media for a considerable amount of time, which is more than
enough to shape and change their perceptions of beauty. Related literature
demonstrates that consumers’ exposure to appearance-oriented content is
damaging (Yan & Bissell, 2014) and may cause negative health-related and
consumption-related consequences.
AI poses a serious threat to the well-being of consumers by generating
and enhancing idealized beauty visuals that may fill consumers up with
insecurities. Although consumers’ beauty and self-image perceptions in the
social media context attracted considerable scholarly attention (e.g., Ando
et al., 2021; Fioravanti et al., 2022; Laughter et al., 2023; Xie, 2024),
research investigating AI’s effect on consumers’ self-image perceptions is
limited. However, the influence of emerging technologies on consumers’
beauty perceptions is a prominent research theme in health sciences and
marketing (Singer & Papadopoulos, 2024). Therefore, AI’s role in shaping
beauty ideals deserves more attention in today’s digital landscape.
This chapter aims to explain AI’s role in shaping beauty ideals and its
adverse effects on consumers’ self-image perceptions in light of self-theory,
social comparison theory, and previous study findings. In addition, the
present study also discusses AI’s health-related and consumption-related
effects and the mindful use of AI for consumer well-being and building an
inclusive society.

2. The Evolution of Beauty Ideals in the Digital Age

Beauty is a complex concept. Due to its subjective nature, no commonly
accepted definition exists and is still discussed from philosophical, historical,
biological, and social perspectives (Wong et al., 2021). Some scholars argue
that it is easier to feel and recognize rather than to describe or define it (Alam
& Dover, 2001; Dayan, 2011). Although no clear definition of beauty
exists, its effects on our lives are undeniable. People tend to judge others
according to their appearance. This phenomenon is known as beauty bias, an
attributional bias that indicates positive perceptions toward attractive people
rather than unattractive ones (Struckman-Johnson & Struckman-Johnson,
1994). Consumers’ beauty perceptions not only affect mate selection but
also social interactions and self-esteem (Singer & Papadopoulos, 2024).
Beautiful people face fewer difficulties in life compared to ordinary people.
For example, they are treated better, employed with higher salaries, and
get even less severe punishments than unattractive people, even if they are
in the same position or have similar qualifications (Frederick et al., 2015).
Therefore, it is unsurprising that consumers try to achieve better looks and
conform to society’s beauty perceptions and expectations.
242 | Unrealistic Beauty Ideals: Artificial Intelligence and Consumers’ Self-Image Perceptions

According to Georgievskaya et al. (2025), beauty is the combination of

attributes that make a person subjectively perceived as aesthetically appealing
in a given cultural environment. However, beauty standards have constantly
changed throughout history. Early Greeks defined aesthetic perfection
with numeric symmetries and proportions (Alam & Dover, 2001). Mayan
culture linked beauty to food resources and tried to change their hair and
facial structures to look like corn (Frederick et al., 2015). Some cultures
valued body fat, while others valued thinness. While pale skin is considered
an essential beauty standard in Asian culture, and therefore, consumers are
heavily invested in skin-lightening products and medications (Dimitrov &
Kroumpouzos, 2023), solarium, skin bronzers, and sun tanning products and
services are quite popular and highly demanded in other cultures. Although
there were specific differences in beauty perceptions in different cultures in
history, global consumer culture has emerged with the irresistible effect of
globalization (Cleveland & Laroche, 2007), and the differences in beauty
perceptions have blurred. Global consumer culture creates global consumer
segments that assign the same or similar meanings to certain things (such as
beauty), and differences coming from culture become less important (Alden
et al., 1999; Keillor et al., 2001). Therefore, traditional cultural beauty
ideals have transformed into international norms through globalization.
These beauty standards in mass culture promoted flawless skin, symmetrical
faces, slim bodies, youthfulness, and Western looks (Georgievskaya et al.,
2025; Grech et al., 2024).
Alongside globalization and global consumer culture, digital technologies
have also altered how we perceive the world. Media plays a significant role in
this process and acts as a tool for the dissemination of certain beauty ideals
throughout the world (Yan & Bissell, 2014). Before the rise of the internet,
traditional media forms were dominantly shaping consumers’ beauty ideals
with celebrities in advertisements, movies, and TV series. The thin ideal
was promoted at that time, and below-average weighted female bodies were
portrayed in traditional media (Lewallen & Behm-Morawitz, 2016).
After the widespread use of the internet and the popularization of social
media, consumers become content creators and producers of images of their
own lives. Until the twentieth century, beauty was considered a distinctive
characteristic of a closed, prosperous elite beyond ordinary people’s
reach. However, consumers now have unlimited access to endless ideas to
develop tastes, opportunities to be beautiful, and building communities to
demonstrate their perceptions of beauty (Kuipers, 2022). This shift caused
social democratization, and beauty was also democratized. Body positivity
and naturalism have gained momentum, and consumers even criticize brands
 Feyza Nur Özkan | 243

for using unrealistically perfect-looking models in their advertisements.

Leading fashion and personal care brands realized this movement and went
one step forward by promoting natural women in their advertisements and
launching natural beauty campaigns (Mabry-Flynn & Champlin, 2018).
Then, natural beauty trends went viral on social media, and something went
wrong. For example, “no-makeup makeup” and “clean girl” trends took
social media by storm. These trends seem like minimalist beauty trends,
which are effortless and easy to reach for everyone at first glance. However,
consumers who follow these trends need to spend remarkable amounts of
money on expensive new clothes, cosmetic products, decorative objects, etc.
Besides, following these beauty trends demands too much time, which is also
not even possible for the majority of working women. As we know, trends
come and go; they are only popular for a finite period. Although trends are
subject to change, social media’s effect on consumers’ beauty perceptions
stays the same. Thus, even though social media has a prominent role in
democratizing beauty, it remains a powerful source of appearance pressure
and perpetuates certain beauty ideals simultaneously (Bell et al., 2022).
Digitalization, internet adoption, and social media use have revolutionized
consumers’ perception and presentation of beauty. When AI was introduced
and gained popularity, consumers increasingly integrated it into their daily
lives, especially to make their lives easier. Companies also started to use AI
when they realized its essential role in shaping customer experience (Ameen
et al., 2021). However, despite numerous advantages, AI poses significant
risks for shaping consumers’ perceptions of beauty and promoting unrealistic
beauty ideals, worse than ever in history.

3. AI’s Role in Shaping Beauty Ideals

AI’s role in shaping beauty ideals can be viewed from three angles:
consumer - AI interactions, AI in company-consumer interactions, and
algorithmic bias in AI. Consumers and companies may integrate AI into
their digital activities with different motives, yet they both contribute to
creating and disseminating certain beauty ideals shaped by AI.
Consumer - AI interactions
Social media connected consumers all over the world. Consumers
willingly engage in social media and generate content with rational and
emotional motives of knowledge-sharing, advocacy, social connection, and
self-expression (Krishnamurthy & Dou, 2008). In visual user-generated
content, aesthetic concerns arise, and consumers want to leave a good
impression on their social connections (Ayar et al., 2025). Consumers’ desire
244 | Unrealistic Beauty Ideals: Artificial Intelligence and Consumers’ Self-Image Perceptions

to look attractive led them to use image editing tools to beautify their virtual
appearance. They used Photoshop at first, but as technology evolved, the
tools for altering images became more complex and powerful. Face filters and
VR apps have come into play. Identifying altered images with Photoshop
was not difficult for trained eyes; however, when AI was involved, it almost
became impossible to distinguish whether the content was authentic, AI-
touched, or AI-generated by the naked eye (Hashemi et al., 2024).
Consumers may use AI to generate and enhance visual content on social
media. AR face filters and VR beauty applications are AI technologies that
enable consumers to change their appearance in videos and photographs.
These AI-based technologies can be used for makeup, hair color change,
face and body touch-ups, beautification such as skin smoothing, skin tone
correction, eye and teeth whitening, slimming waist, enlarging breasts,
filling lips, etc. Large masses have quickly adopted the aforementioned
AI-based technologies, and consumers were increasingly bombarded with
more idealized and unrealistic images in social media. Although beauty
and body image-related digital activities such as image editing tools enable
consumers to alter their faces with just a few clicks, to conform to beauty
ideals of society with minimum effort (Castillo-Hermosilla et al., 2023),
to generate content for perfectionist self-presentation, constant exposure to
this kind of beauty content on social media may trigger consumers’ social
comparisons and appearance concerns (Boursier et al., 2020). In addition,
constant exposure to visual contents containing altered images with AI
blurred consumers’ perceptions of what is normal, good enough, or perfect
(MacCallum & Widdows, 2018). As consumers get used to these images,
what was exceptional and outstanding is perceived as normal, and what used
to be normal is now perceived as substandard (Kuipers, 2022).
Beauty filters negatively affect consumers’ well-being. Prior to the
widespread use of AI-face filters, consumers desired to have an appearance
like celebrities. However, there is a shift in the desire for an ideal look
from celebrities to one’s filtered self (Castillo-Hermosilla et al., 2023).
Consumers are now dreaming of resembling and looking like their filtered
appearance. This phenomenon was defined and conceptualized as Snapchat
Dysmorphia, which causes consumers to lose perspectives on their actual
appearance and poses significant risks to consumers’ mental health (Ramphul
& Mejias, 2018; Abbas & Dodeen, 2022). Figure 1 demonstrates how far
AI retouching apps can change a person’s appearance.
 Feyza Nur Özkan | 245

Figure 1: Real/AI-filtered face comparison

Source: Dove (2021)

AI in company-consumer interactions
Companies may also use AI-generated content in digital marketing
communications due to its high potential to attract consumers’ interest and
cost-effectiveness. However, using AI-generated flawless faces and perfect-
looking bodies in brand communications may promote hyper-idealized
beauty standards. Companies that aim to enhance customer experience
adopted and offered VR try-on technologies, VR beauty applications, virtual
models and influencers, AR mirrors, and AR live streaming technologies.
VR try-on technologies help consumers to visualize products in a real-world
setting. It enables consumers to try makeup (see Figure 2), contact lenses,
nail polish, jewelry, and clothes-like products virtually before purchasing.
This technology even lets consumers visualize how their appearance
will change after undergoing specific plastic surgery with the AI plastic
surgery simulator. Although virtual try-on technologies improve customer
engagement and shopping satisfaction (Ajiga et al., 2024), they may also
negatively affect their perceptions of self-image.
246 | Unrealistic Beauty Ideals: Artificial Intelligence and Consumers’ Self-Image Perceptions

Figure 2: Virtual makeup try-on technology

Source: Androic (2023)

Another AI-enabled technology is virtual models and influencers.

Companies may want to employ virtual models and influencers to represent
broader consumer segments at lower costs. For example, Levi Strauss &
Co (2023) announced their partnership with Lalaland.ai. This company
specializes in creating customized AI-generated hyper-realistic models of
every body type, size, age and skin tone. One of these AI-generated virtual
models can be seen in Figure 3 as an example.

Figure 3: An AI-generated virtual model (Levi Strauss & Co. / Lalaland.ai)

Source: Levi Strauss & Co (2023)
 Feyza Nur Özkan | 247

Prada is another company that uses virtual models in digital marketing

communications such as Rethink Reality: Prada Candy (Prada, 2021).
Prada employed Candy (see Figure 4), an AI-generated virtual model, as
an ambassador of their “Prada Candy” fragrance. The previous ambassador
of this fragrance was a real human being, a French actress, Léa Seydoux, in
2011. As time passed, the fragrance and its target consumer group (young
women) stayed the same. However, the majority of young women are tech-
savvy Gen Z nowadays. Thus, Prada decided to change the ambassador
with a virtual model and successfully reached its target consumers (Pesonen,
2022).

Figure 4: An AI-generated virtual model (Rethink Reality: Prada Candy)

Source: Prada (2021)

LG also uses AI-based technologies. The company has its own virtual
influencer named Reah Keem, LG was first introduced her to the public in
2021 (LG, 2021). Reah identified herself as the first virtual artist in Korea
and made even her debut as a singer in 2022 (LG, 2022).
248 | Unrealistic Beauty Ideals: Artificial Intelligence and Consumers’ Self-Image Perceptions

Figure 5: A virtual influencer (Reah Keem, LG)

Source: LG (2022)

Although using AI-generated virtual models and influencers has numerous

advantages for companies, such as enhanced customer experience, better
representation of some consumer groups, cost-effectiveness, and attracting
the attention of especially young consumers, its adverse effects should also
be considered. Even though AI models and influencers are not real humans,
it is nearly impossible to differentiate from real people, especially hyper
realistic AI models (see Figure 3). Young consumers find AI models and
influencers more relatable (Pesonen, 2022), which means they will compare
themselves with these models, and this comparison may fill them up with
insecurities, and distort their self-image perceptions. Because real humans
cannot have the perfect look that virtual models and influencers always have.
AI-based technologies are not limited to VR try-on technologies, VR
beauty applications, virtual models and influencers, AR mirrors, and AR live
streaming. Some companies even use AI skin analysis to offer personalized
cosmetic and skincare recommendations tailored to the individual skin
concerns of consumers. AI skin analysis includes image processing
algorithms and deep learning models that use previously collected consumer
data for training. Algorithm bias-related issues raise concerns about the
underrepresentation of specific consumer groups and marginalize their
skin conditions, appearance, and ethnicity-specific differences (Grech et
al., 2024). This kind of AI-based technology also promotes skin-related
beauty trends in social media, such as “glass skin,” which is actually a term
used to describe glass-like smooth, flawless, clear, poreless, and shiny skin.
 Feyza Nur Özkan | 249

Glass skin is hard to achieve beauty ideal that also demands a considerable
amount of time and money. Consumers trying to achieve and maintain this
look must invest in a vast amount of skincare products and follow specific
skincare routines, which takes a lot of time every day. Another risk of this
kind of skin-related beauty trend is promoting a youthful appearance among
consumers. Unrealistic expectations regarding youthful appearances may
distort consumers’ aging-related perceptions and prevent embracing the
natural beauty of women of all ages.
Algorithmic bias in AI
Algorithmic bias in AI is also a significant factor in shaping beauty ideals.
AI biases related to beauty may arise from algorithmic design, inadequate
training, or biased datasets (Grech et al., 2024). Algorithmic bias occurs
when an algorithm produces outputs that benefit or disadvantage certain
individuals or a group of consumers without justified reasoning (Kordzadeh
& Ghasemaghaei, 2022). Although recommendation systems are essential
tools for enhancing customer experience in a digital environment (Shokeen
& Rana, 2020), AI algorithms may reinforce social biases that already exist
in society (O’neil, 2016). AI algorithms learn from data. If the data used in
learning an algorithm was lacking cultural diversity, the algorithm cannot
generate suggestions including all aspects of different cultures. This may
result in the marginalization of diverse beauty representations and reinforce
harmful stereotypes. In addition, the algorithm also learns from consumers’
behavior (Sethi & Gujral, 2022). For example, recommendation systems in
social media generate content offers according to consumers’ user profile
based on their browsing behavior. If the learning data of the algorithm does
not include people who have no hair, then content offers generated by this
algorithm do not include images of hairless people.
AI algorithms are engagement-focused and designed to attract consumers’
interest. Therefore, when the algorithm is fed by similar visuals, it becomes
to recommend similar visual content over time. Then, overspecialization
may occur, and consumers become constantly exposed to similar content
that lacks diversity (Lashkari & Sharma, 2023). Accordingly, algorithmic
bias in AI may disseminate certain beauty trends and cause the idealization of
certain face and body characteristics. For example, if a consumer is interested
in makeup videos and visuals, the social media algorithm will constantly
generate makeup-related content suggestions. When the consumer keeps
engaging in suggested content, suggestions will become more particular as a
specific makeup trend over time. Another example is when the AI algorithm
is learned from the user profile as the consumer likes to see the content
250 | Unrealistic Beauty Ideals: Artificial Intelligence and Consumers’ Self-Image Perceptions

include people who have beautified and rejuvenated faces with aesthetic
surgery, then all the suggested content will include people who underwent
similar aesthetic surgeries and have similar face and body characteristics.
As exposure to those contents gets higher, consumers’ perceptions of what
is normal, good enough, or perfect may become blurred (MacCallum &
Widdows, 2018), and consumers may perceive these beauty ideals as
attainable and normal, and feel obliged to follow these aesthetic trends to
conform society’s beauty ideals.

4. AI’s Effects on Consumers’ Self-Image Perceptions

AI offers numerous advantages for companies and consumers; however,
using AI-based technologies and constant exposure to AI-generated
content, especially appearance-oriented content, may distort consumers’
perceptions of self-image. Although the present study is not an empirical
study relying on its very own data, this paper analyzes and discusses the
AI’s effects on consumers’ self-image perceptions in light of the self-theory,
social comparison theory, and the previous study findings. Therefore, this
section provides theoretical underpinnings of AI’s effects on consumers’ self-
image perceptions. In this vein, self-theory and social comparison theory are
defined and discussed in detail.

4.1. Self-Theory
Self-theory is a personality theory mainly focusing on the real self and
ideal self (Rogers, 1959). According to theory, self is people’s perceptions
related to their own characteristics, their perceptions of the relationships
with other people and life, and values attached to all these perceptions. The
ideal self is a self-concept to which a person attaches the highest value and
wants to achieve. Self-concept is a multi-dimensional concept in nature
that has various facets. The real self, defined as the actual or objective self,
indicates who the person really is; self-image, as the subjective self, refers to
how the person perceives herself/himself; the ideal self is self-actualization,
who the person would like to be; social self, defined as the way the person
thinks others regard him/her (Onkvisit & Shaw, 1987). Therefore, we can
define self-image as who consumers perceive themselves they are, and the
ideal self as who consumers really want to be.
Self-theory is a widely used theory to explain consumer behavior in the
marketing literature (e.g., Onkvisit & Shaw, 1987; Ekinci & Riley, 2003;
Kressmann et al., 2006; He & Mukherjee, 2007). Marketing research focuses
mostly on the actual self and ideal self, especially self-image congruence,
which means the cognitive match between consumers’ self-concepts (e.g.,
 Feyza Nur Özkan | 251

actual self and ideal self) (Hosany & Martin, 2012). Incongruence occurs
if a discrepancy develops between the actual and ideal self. This state
is associated with tension and internal confusion, resulting in neurotic
behaviors (Rogers, 1959). Similarly, Higgins (1987) defines this concept as
self-discrepancy, which occurs when consumers compare different self-states
and find discrepancies between the two. According to him, three self-states
exist: actual self, ideal self, and ought self. Ought self indicates the attributes
a person thinks he/she is obliged to have. These self-concepts would be the
person’s own perspective or the perspectives of significant others (Vartanian,
2012).
According to self-discrepancy, six types of self-concepts could be
experienced: actual/own, actual/other, ideal/own, ideal/other, ought/
own, and ought/other (Higgins, 1987). These self-state representations
are important due to their motivational significance. When this theory is
applied to consumers’ beauty and body image perceptions context, actual/
own indicates consumers’ own perceptions of their body, ideal/own refers to
how consumers think their body would ideally like to be, ideal/own indicates
consumers’ internalization of society’s beauty ideals. Consumers’ discrepancy
perceptions between these self-states may cause serious problems such as
dissatisfaction, depression, anxiety, and guilt (Vartanian, 2012). According
to MacCallum and Widdows (2018), if the discrepancy between the actual
self and the ideal self occurs, consumers feel disappointment and sadness. In
addition, the discrepancy between the actual self and the ought self leads to
anxiety and guilt.
Appearance-oriented content may affect consumers’ ideal self-perceptions
and lead to appearance-changing behaviors such as eating disorders by
causing actual-ideal discrepancy (Grogan, 2007). In addition, exposure
to idealized beauty images may also heighten the discrepancy between the
actual and the ought self and may cause restricted eating in public, to be
perceived as a person who is trying to conform to society’s appearance-
related expectations (Hefner et al., 2014; MacCallum & Widdows,
2018). Consumers’ food choices may also be affected. In order to give the
impression to other people as someone trying to achieve a healthy, fit, and
thin appearance, consumers may prefer lower calorie foods in the presence of
others. In addition, perceived self-discrepancy between the actual and ideal
appearance may cause serious health concerns such as disordered eating,
depression, body surveillance, and body dysmorphic disorder (Castillo-
Hermosilla et al., 2023).
252 | Unrealistic Beauty Ideals: Artificial Intelligence and Consumers’ Self-Image Perceptions

4.2. Social Comparison Theory

Social comparison theory focuses on the idea that people evaluate their
abilities and opinions according to outside images (Festinger, 1954). As the
name suggests, social comparison theory indicates an inner drive of people
to evaluate and understand themselves in comparison with similar others in
a social environment. In today’s digital age, this comparison is stronger than
ever with the widespread use of social media platforms and the increasing
use of AI. Prior to the advent and adoption of web-based technologies,
consumers’ social surroundings were limited to friends, colleagues,
neighbors, and the people they met physically. However, when social
media rises, consumers are suddenly exposed to people’s lives, appearances,
experiences, and thoughts, even from the distant corners of the world. Then,
AI came into our lives, and social comparison extends to virtual humans
who do not even exist.
Comparison motives of consumers include evaluation, improvement, and
enhancement (Gibbons & Buunk, 1999). Social comparison theory helps us
understand the motivations of consumers’ self-evaluation and improvement
and how these motivations shape consumer behavior (Caliskan et al.,
2024). According to the theory, comparisons can be made in upward and
downward directions (Wills, 1981). The upward comparison refers to
consumers’ comparison of themselves with superior others; however, the
downward comparison indicates comparison with inferiors. AI-generated
beauty images and beauty-related content cause upward comparison because
these contents are entirely of perfect-looking images that promote and
disseminate unrealistic and unattainable beauty ideals. Upward comparison
of consumers may result in inadequacy, and envy (Caliskan et al., 2024),
and body dissatisfaction when the comparison is made with idealized media
images (Tiggemann & Polivy, 2010).
According to Wood (1996), social comparison does not have to be
careful or even conscious thought. Comparisons can be made with an image,
a person, or a group of people in relation to the self. Therefore, consumers
may unconsciously make social comparisons when constantly exposed to AI
beauty content on social media. People do not tend to compare themselves
with others who have distinctively different abilities or opinions, according
to Festinger (1954). When this theory is applied to body image perceptions
and ideal beauty context, people do not usually compare themselves with
supermodels because the difference is extremely divergent from their own.
However, a friend using AI filters, a virtual influencer, or an AI-generated
better version of himself/herself can be easily subjected to comparison.
 Feyza Nur Özkan | 253

Comparisons may also occur when the attractions of the compared groups
are strong. Another reason for comparisons is consumers’ desire to stay
as a member of a specific group (Festinger, 1954). When considering
the advantages of being a member of an attractive group and the adverse
effects of not conforming to beauty ideals, comparison is almost inevitable,
especially for young women (Yan & Bissell, 2014).
Social comparison research in consumers’ beauty perception context
demonstrates that women’s self-image perceptions negatively change when
they perceive the comparison target as extremely attractive (Birkeland et al.,
2005; Brown et al., 1992). According to Yan and Bissell (2014), constant
exposure to appearance-oriented content, such as extremely thin and
unrealistically perfect-looking bodies, is even more destructive for young
women. This kind of content may lower consumers’ self-esteem and cause
body image dissatisfaction, eating disorders, and depression (Harrison &
Cantor, 1997; Lavine et al., 1999).

5. AI’s Consumption-Related Effects

AI’s adverse effects on consumers’ self-image perceptions may cause
serious health problems as discussed in the previous sections. In addition,
AI’s adverse effects on consumers’ self-image perceptions may also have
consumption-related effects. Social comparison theory suggests that
consumers try to eliminate the perceived discrepancy when a difference
between desired others and perceived self is recognized (Yan & Bissell,
2014). Mandel et al. (2017) introduced compensatory consumer behavior
model to explain consumer behaviors in regulating self-discrepancies.
The compensatory consumer behavior model suggests direct resolution,
symbolic self-completion, dissociation, escapism, and fluid compensation
as consumers’ strategies for coping with self-discrepancies. In addition to
these strategies, this model also suggests that consumption may reduce self-
discrepancies.
AI-enhanced visuals include face and body touch-ups, such as face
filters changing face features and putting desired makeup on consumers’
faces. When consumers are exposed to these AI-enhanced visuals of others
without any disclosure of AI use, they cannot define whether the visual
is real or AI-enhanced. If AI-generated visuals are known to be artificial,
consumers would no longer perceive the image as a comparison target.
Therefore, awareness of digital enhancement is expected to cause less social
comparisons and less body dissatisfaction (MacCallum & Widdows, 2018).
Otherwise, consumers may perceive the content as real and feel insecure
254 | Unrealistic Beauty Ideals: Artificial Intelligence and Consumers’ Self-Image Perceptions

about their appearance. In order to reduce this self-discrepancy, consumers’

demand for cosmetics, skincare, and beauty products is increasing (Fardouly
et al., 2015; Grech et al., 2024; Singer & Papadopoulos, 2024). To reach
the desired appearance, consumers’ demand for fitness foods, beauty and
dietary supplements, and even aesthetic surgery heightens (Yan & Bissell,
2014; Nobile et al., 2023; Krywuczky & Kleijnen, 2024). Although
increased demand for beauty products is favorable for the beauty industry,
it has detrimental effects on consumers and society. It raises concerns about
health issues related to excessive use of skincare or cosmetic products and
appearance-related concerns due to the excessive demand for plastic surgery
for similar esthetic procedures that transform people into look-alike masses.

6. Conclusion
AI has an undeniably significant role in shaping beauty ideals in today’s
digital age. Even though AI offers countless benefits, there is a dark side of
AI that involves risks. AI’s role in shaping beauty ideals can be threefold:
consumer – AI interactions, AI in company-consumer interactions,
and algorithmic bias in AI. AR face filters, VR beauty applications, VR
try-on technologies, virtual models and influencers, AR mirrors, AR
livestreaming technologies, AI skin analysis, and algorithmic bias constitute
the tools, technologies, and characteristics of AI shaping, perpetuating, and
disseminating beauty ideals.
Consumers’ discrepancy between the actual self and the ideal self increases
when they are constantly exposed to AI-generated beauty content. While
these contents damage their self- image perceptions, they also promote
almost perfect and unattainable beauty ideals. Even though social comparison
theory suggests that when a comparison target is considered irrelevant to the
present status, it will not affect the self (Strahan et al., 2006), consumers’
perceived difference is not that high from the comparison target when AI
is involved. Constant exposure to AI-generated or AI-enhanced visuals
causes constant observation of numerous comparison targets, normalizes
the perfect-looking bodies, and makes them seem attainable over time. In
addition, AI itself also decreases perceived differences from the comparison
target because the comparison target is not usually a supermodel; instead,
a friend using AI filters, or even consumers’ an AI-powered better version
of themselves. Therefore, beauty content’s adverse effects on consumers are
more serious and dangerous than ever before.
The detrimental effects of AI-generated or AI-enhanced visual content
on consumers are not limited to the distortion of self-image perceptions.
 Feyza Nur Özkan | 255

It also raises serious health and consumption-related concerns. Health-

related effects include eating disorders, restricted eating in public,
body dissatisfaction, body surveillance, body dysmorphic disorder, and
depression. Besides, consumption-related effects include increasing demand
for cosmetics, skincare, beauty products, fitness foods and products, beauty
and dietary supplements, and even aesthetic surgery.
Even though serious risks are involved, AI is a widely used technology in
almost every sphere of life, and we should find a way to minimize the risks
while enjoying its advantages. Consumers and companies may integrate AI
for their digital activities with different motives; however, considering its
consequences is the responsibility of every actor in the marketing environment
for the welfare of society. Although AI offers various tools and technologies
to make life easier for everyone, responsible use and implementation are
key for consumer protection and preventing possible harm. Transparency
is also important. Consumers should know whether AI is used to generate
or enhance visual content. Awareness of digital enhancement is expected
to prevent consumers from unnecessary and irrelevant social comparisons
to achieve unattainable and unrealistic beauty ideals. In addition, diversity
in beauty should be protected and encouraged for a more inclusive society.
Broadening our perspectives of beauty by embracing the beauty of all
ages, all body shapes, all skin types, and colors would help to build a more
empathetic world.
256 | Unrealistic Beauty Ideals: Artificial Intelligence and Consumers’ Self-Image Perceptions

References
Abbas, L., & Dodeen, H. (2022). Body dysmorphic features among Snapchat
users of “Beauty-Retouching of Selfies” and its relationship with quality
of life. Media Asia, 49(3), 196-212.
Ajiga, D. I., Ndubuisi, N. L., Asuzu, O. F., Owolabi, O. R., Tubokirifuruar, T.
S., & Adeleye, R. A. (2024). AI-driven predictive analytics in retail: A re-
view of emerging trends and customer engagement strategies. Internati-
onal Journal of Management & Entrepreneurship Research, 6(2), 307-321.
Alam, M., & Dover, J. S. (2001). On beauty: Evolution, psychosocial con-
siderations, and surgical enhancement. Archives of Dermatology, 137(6),
795-807.
Alden, D. L., Steenkamp, J. B. E., & Batra, R. (1999). Brand positioning th-
rough advertising in Asia, North America, and Europe: The role of glo-
bal consumer culture. Journal of Marketing, 63(1), 75-87.
Ameen, N., Tarhini, A., Reppel, A., & Anand, A. (2021). Customer experien-
ces in the age of artificial intelligence. Computers in Human Behavior, 114,
106548.
Ando, K., Giorgianni, F. E., Danthinne, E. S., & Rodgers, R. F. (2021). Bea-
uty ideals, social media, and body positivity: A qualitative investigation
of influences on body image among young women in Japan. Body Image,
38, 358-369.
Androic, I. (2023). How virtual makeover technology helps brands sell re-
al-world makeup. Retrieved February 24, 2025 from https://visagetech-
nologies.com/virtual-makeover-technology/
Ayar, D., Aksu, Ç., Polat, F., & Elkoca, A. (2025). The effects of popularity
perceptions and social appearance anxiety on the desire of young people
to have aesthetic procedures on social media. Current Psychology, 1-10.
Barari, M., Casper Ferm, L. E., Quach, S., Thaichon, P., & Ngo, L. (2024).
The dark side of artificial intelligence in marketing: Meta-analytics re-
view. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 42(7), 1234-1256.
Bell, B. T., Taylor, C., Paddock, D., & Bates, A. (2022). Digital bodies: A cont-
rolled evaluation of a brief classroom-based intervention for reducing ne-
gative body image among adolescents in the digital age. British Journal of
Educational Psychology, 92(1), 280-298.
Birkeland, R., Thompson, J. K., Herbozo, S., Roehrig, M., Cafri, G., & Van
den Berg, P. (2005). Media exposure, mood, and body image dissatisfac-
tion: An experimental test of person versus product priming. Body Image,
2(1), 53-61.
Boursier, V., Gioia, F., & Griffiths, M. D. (2020). Do selfie-expectancies and
social appearance anxiety predict adolescents’ problematic social media
use? Computers in Human Behavior, 110, 106395.
 Feyza Nur Özkan | 257

Brown, J. D., Novick, N. J., Lord, K. A., & Richards, J. M. (1992). When Gul-
liver travels: Social context, psychological closeness, and self-appraisals.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62(5), 717-729.
Caliskan, F., Idug, Y., Uvet, H., Gligor, N., & Kayaalp, A. (2024). Social com-
parison theory: A review and future directions. Psychology & Marketing,
41(11), 2823-2840.
Castillo-Hermosilla, M. P., Tayebi-Jazayeri, H., & Williams, V. N. (2023). Bre-
aking the filtered lens: A feminist examination of beauty ideals in aug-
mented reality filters. In EAI International Conference on AI for People,
Democratizing AI (pp. 95-101). Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland.
Cleveland, M., & Laroche, M. (2007). Acculturation to the global consumer
culture: Scale development and research paradigm. Journal of Business Re-
search, 60(3), 249-259.
Dayan, S. H. (2011). What is beauty, and why do we care so much about it?
Archives of Facial Plastic Surgery, 13(1), 66-67.
Dimitrov, D., & Kroumpouzos, G. (2023). Beauty perception: A historical and
contemporary review. Clinics in Dermatology, 41(1), 33-40.
Dove. (2025). The Selfie Talk: Social media & self-esteem. Retrieved February
25, 2025 from https://www.dove.com/us/en/campaigns/purpose/thesel-
fietalk.html
Ekinci, Y., & Riley, M. (2003). An investigation of self-concept: Actual and ide-
al self-congruence compared in the context of service evaluation. Journal
of Retailing and Consumer Services, 10(4), 201-214.
Fardouly, J., Diedrichs, P. C., Vartanian, L. R., & Halliwell, E. (2015). Social
comparisons on social media: The impact of Facebook on young wo-
men’s body image concerns and mood. Body Image, 13, 38-45.
Festinger, L. (1954). A theory of social comparison processes. Human Relati-
ons, 7(2), 117-140.
Fioravanti, G., Bocci Benucci, S., Ceragioli, G., & Casale, S. (2022). How
exposure to beauty ideals on social networking sites influences body ima-
ge: A systematic review of experimental studies. Adolescent Research Re-
view, 7, 419-458.
Frederick, D., Forbes, M., Jenkins, B., Reynolds, T., & Walters, T. (2015).
Beauty standards. The International Encyclopedia of Human Sexuality, 1,
113-196.
Georgievskaya, A., Tlyachev, T., Danko, D., Chekanov, K., & Corstjens, H.
(2025). How artificial intelligence adopts human biases: The case of cos-
metic skincare industry. AI and Ethics, 5, 105-115.
Gibbons, F. X., & Buunk, B. P. (1999). Individual differences in social compa-
rison: Development of a scale of social comparison orientation. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 76(1), 129-142.
258 | Unrealistic Beauty Ideals: Artificial Intelligence and Consumers’ Self-Image Perceptions

Grech, V. S., Kefala, V., & Rallis, E. (2024). Cosmetology in the era of artificial
intelligence. Cosmetics, 11(4), 135.
Grewal, D., Benoit, S., Noble, S. M., Guha, A., Ahlbom, C. P., & Nordfält, J.
(2023). Leveraging in-store technology and AI: Increasing customer and
employee efficiency and enhancing their experiences. Journal of Retailing,
99(4), 487-504.
Grogan, S. (2007). Body image: Understanding body dissatisfaction in men, women
and children (2nd ed.). Hove: Routledge.
Harrison, K., & Cantor, J. (1997). The relationship between media consumpti-
on and eating disorders. Journal of Communication, 47(1), 40-67.
Hashemi, A., Shi, W., & Corriveau, J. P. (2024). AI-generated or AI touch-up?
Identifying AI contribution in text data. International Journal of Data
Science and Analytics, 1-12.
He, H., & Mukherjee, A. (2007). I am, ergo I shop: Does store image congru-
ity explain shopping behaviour of Chinese consumers? Journal of Marke-
ting Management, 23(5-6), 443-460.
Hefner, V., Woodward, K., Figge, L., Bevan, J. L., Santora, N., & Baloch, S.
(2014). The influence of television and film viewing on midlife women’s
body image, disordered eating, and food choice. Media Psychology, 17(2),
185-207.
Higgins, E. T. (1987). Self-discrepancy: A theory relating self and affect. Psycho-
logical Review, 94(3), 319-340.
Hosany, S., & Martin, D. (2012). Self-image congruence in consumer behavi-
or. Journal of Business Research, 65(5), 685-691.
Keillor, B. D., D’Amico, M., & Horton, V. (2001). Global consumer tenden-
cies. Psychology & Marketing, 18(1), 1-19.
Kordzadeh, N., & Ghasemaghaei, M. (2022). Algorithmic bias: Review, sy-
nthesis, and future research directions. European Journal of Information
Systems, 31(3), 388-409.
Kressmann, F., Sirgy, M. J., Herrmann, A., Huber, F., Huber, S., & Lee, D.
J. (2006). Direct and indirect effects of self-image congruence on brand
loyalty. Journal of Business Research, 59(9), 955-964.
Krishnamurthy, S., & Dou, W. (2008). Note from special issue editors: Adver-
tising with user-generated content: A framework and research agenda.
Journal of Interactive Advertising, 8(2), 1-4.
Krywuczky, F., & Kleijnen, M. (2024). Consumer decision-making in cosmetic
surgery: An interdisciplinary review identifying key challenges and impli-
cations for marketing theory. Psychology & Marketing, 41(12), 3182-3201.
 Feyza Nur Özkan | 259

Kuipers, G. (2022). The expanding beauty regime: Or, why it has become
so important to look good. Critical Studies in Fashion & Beauty, 13(2),
207-228.
Lashkari, S., & Sharma, S. (2023). Recommender systems and artificial intelli-
gence in digital marketing. In 2022 OPJU International Technology Con-
ference on Emerging Technologies for Sustainable Development (OTCON)
(pp. 1-8). IEEE.
Laughter, M. R., Anderson, J. B., Maymone, M. B., & Kroumpouzos, G.
(2023). Psychology of aesthetics: Beauty, social media, and body dys-
morphic disorder. Clinics in Dermatology, 41(1), 28-32.
Lavine, H., Sweeney, D., & Wagner, S. H. (1999). Depicting women as sex ob-
jects in television advertising: Effects on body dissatisfaction. Personality
and Social Psychology Bulletin, 25(8), 1049-1058.
Levi Strauss & Co. (2023). LS&Co. Partners with Lalaland.ai. Retrieved
February 25, 2025 from https://www.levistrauss.com/2023/03/22/
lsco-partners-with-lalaland-ai/
Lewallen, J., & Behm-Morawitz, E. (2016). Pinterest or Thinterest?: Social
comparison and body image on social media. Social Media + Society, 2(1),
1-9.
LG. (2021). Getting real with virtual influencer Reah Keem. Retrieved
February 25, 2025 from https://www.lgnewsroom.com/2021/01/
getting-real-with-virtual-influencer-reah-keem/
LG. (2022). Virtual artist Reah Keem ready to take the stage. Retrieved
February 25, 2025 from https://www.lgnewsroom.com/2022/01/
virtual-artist-reah-keem-ready-to-take-the-stage/
Mabry-Flynn, A., & Champlin, S. (2018). Leave a comment: Consumer respon-
ses to advertising featuring “real” women. In Mediating Misogyny: Gen-
der, Technology, and Harassment (pp. 229-245). Springer.
MacCallum, F., & Widdows, H. (2018). Altered images: Understanding the
influence of unrealistic images and beauty aspirations. Health Care Analy-
sis, 26, 235-245.
Mandel, N., Rucker, D. D., Levav, J., & Galinsky, A. D. (2017). The compen-
satory consumer behavior model: How self-discrepancies drive consumer
behavior. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 27(1), 133-146.
Nobile, V., Schiano, I., Germani, L., Cestone, E., Navarro, P., Jones, J., &
Caturla, N. (2023). Skin anti-aging efficacy of a four-botanical blend
dietary ingredient: A randomized, double blind, clinical study. Cosmetics,
10(1), 16.
O’Neil, C. (2016). Weapons of math destruction: How big data increases inequality
and threatens democracy. Crown Publishing Group.
260 | Unrealistic Beauty Ideals: Artificial Intelligence and Consumers’ Self-Image Perceptions

Onkvisit, S., & Shaw, J. (1987). Self-concept and image congruence: Some re-
search and managerial implications. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 4(1),
13-23.
Pesonen, L. (2022). How Prada Candy and its digital muse is changing the
fashion and beauty landscape. Retrieved February 25, 2025 from htt-
ps://www.voguescandinavia.com/articles/how-prada-candy-and-its-digi-
tal-muse-is-changing-the-fashion-and-beauty-landscape
Prada. (2021). Rethink Reality: Prada Candy. Retrieved February 25, 2025
from https://www.prada.com/mc/en/pradasphere/fragrances/pra-
da-candy/rethink-reality-prada-candy.html
Ramphul K. & Mejias S. G. (2018). Is “Snapchat Dysmorphia” a Real Issue?.
Cureus, 10(3), e2263.
Rogers, C. R. (1959). A theory of therapy, personality, and interpersonal re-
lationships: As developed in the client-centered framework. In S. Koch
(Ed.), Psychology: A study of a science (Vol. 3, pp. 184-256). New York:
McGraw-Hill.
Sethi, V., & Gujral, R. K. (2022). Survey of different recommendation systems
to improve the marketing strategies on e-commerce. In 2022 Internatio-
nal Conference on Machine Learning, Big Data, Cloud and Parallel Compu-
ting (COM-IT-CON) (Vol. 1, pp. 119-125). IEEE.
Shokeen, J., & Rana, C. (2020). Social recommender systems: Techniques, do-
mains, metrics, datasets and future scope. Journal of Intelligent Informati-
on Systems, 54(3), 633-667.
Singer, R., & Papadopoulos, T. (2024). There is no universal standard of bea-
uty. Aesthetic Plastic Surgery, 48(24), 5273-5282.
Strahan, E. J., Wilson, A. E., Cressman, K. E., & Buote, V. M. (2006). Com-
paring to perfection: How cultural norms for appearance affect social
comparisons and self-image. Body Image, 3(3), 211-227.
Struckman-Johnson, C., & Struckman-Johnson, D. (1994). Men’s reactions to
hypothetical female sexual advances: A beauty bias in response to sexual
coercion. Sex Roles, 31, 387-405.
Tiggemann, M., & Polivy, J. (2010). Upward and downward: Social compari-
son processing of thin idealized media images. Psychology of Women Qu-
arterly, 34(3), 356-364.
Vartanian, L. R. (2012). Self-discrepancy theory and body image. In T. F. Cash
(Ed.), Encyclopedia of body image and human appearance (Vol. 2, pp. 711-
717). Elsevier Academic Press.
We Are Social & Meltwater. (2025). Digital 2025 Global Overview Report. Retrie-
ved February 24, 2025 from https://wearesocial.com/uk/blog/2025/02/
digital-2025-the-essential-guide-to-the-global-state-of-digital/
 Feyza Nur Özkan | 261

Wills, T. A. (1981). Downward comparison principles in social psychology.

Psychological Bulletin, 90(2), 245-271.
Wong, C. H., Wu, W. T., & Mendelson, B. (2021). Invited discussion on:
What is beauty? Aesthetic Plastic Surgery, 45(5), 2177-2179.
Wood, J. V. (1996). What is social comparison and how should we study it?
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22(5), 520-537.
Xie, Z. (2024). The influence of social media on perception of body image and
beauty standards on young people. Transactions on Social Science, Educati-
on and Humanities Research, 5, 143-148.
Yan, Y., & Bissell, K. (2014). The globalization of beauty: How is ideal beauty
influenced by globally published fashion and beauty magazines? Journal
of Intercultural Communication Research, 43(3), 194-214.
262 | Unrealistic Beauty Ideals: Artificial Intelligence and Consumers’ Self-Image Perceptions