How spotting digitally altered ads on social media affects brand sentiment

Governments and regulators increasingly scrutinize the digital environments where young people spend their time. A primary concern is the prevalence of digitally altered images on social media platforms like Instagram. These enhanced visuals often promote unrealistic beauty standards and blur the line between reality and advertising. To address this, countries such as Norway have enacted legislation requiring influencers to apply specific labels to sponsored content that features retouched bodies or faces.

The intent behind these laws is to alert consumers to digital manipulation and reduce potential harm. However, it remains unclear whether these labels effectively alert young users or change how they view the brands involved. A study published in Acta Psychologica investigates this dynamic. The research explores whether mandatory disclosure labels actually help adolescents identify edited photos and how that recognition shapes their trust in the advertiser.

Investigating the Impact of Disclosures

Psychology of Selling

Sign up for our free weekly newsletter for the latest insights.

Name

Email

Meda Mucundorfeanu and Delia C. Balaban, researchers from the Department of Communication, PR and Advertising at Babeș-Bolyai University in Romania, led this investigation. They sought to determine if identifying a photo as “retouched” triggers a defensive reaction in adolescent viewers. Their work relies on a concept known as the Persuasion Knowledge Model.

This model suggests that when people realize an advertiser is using a tactic to influence them, they activate a mental defense. They may become skeptical or resistant to the message. The researchers wanted to know if a disclosure label acts as a trigger for this skepticism. Specifically, they examined if spotting a digital edit leads adolescents to infer “manipulative intent,” or the feeling that the advertiser is trying to trick them.

The study focused on adolescents aged 15 to 18. This age group is significant because they possess developing critical thinking skills but remain highly susceptible to peer influence and social media trends. The researchers aimed to understand if recognized manipulation leads to a chain of events that damages the brand’s reputation.

Experimental Design and Methodology

To test their hypotheses, the researchers designed a between-subjects experiment involving 148 adolescents. The participants were all active Instagram users. The team created a realistic simulation using images from a genuine social media influencer with a significant following.

The researchers selected photos promoting CeraVe skincare products. They manipulated these images using Adobe Photoshop to enhance the influencer’s physical appearance, aligning the photos with idealized beauty standards. The participants were randomly assigned to one of three groups to view these posts.

The first group served as a control and viewed the original, unretouched images without any warning labels. The second group viewed the digitally enhanced images but saw no disclosure label. The third group viewed the same digitally enhanced images, but these included a visible stamp in the upper corner reading “Retouched person.” This design mimicked the specific labeling requirements mandated by Norwegian law.

After viewing the posts, the participants completed a survey. This questionnaire measured whether they noticed the digital manipulation and if they felt the advertiser was trying to manipulate them. It also assessed their attitude toward the brand, their intention to purchase the product, and their willingness to share the post.

Outcomes and Analysis

The analysis yielded results that challenged some common assumptions about the effectiveness of warning labels. The researchers found that the presence of the “Retouched person” label did not significantly improve the adolescents’ ability to recognize that the photo was edited. Participants in the group with the disclosure label were not statistically more likely to spot the manipulation than those who saw the retouched photo without the label.

However, the study identified a clear psychological process once a participant believed an image was altered. When adolescents recognized digital manipulation, regardless of whether a label was present, they were more likely to believe the advertiser had manipulative intent. This perception of manipulation then linked to a specific negative outcome.

The data showed that as adolescents inferred manipulative intent, their attitude toward the brand declined. They viewed the brand as less attractive or likable. Interestingly, this negative chain of reactions did not significantly reduce their intention to buy the product or their willingness to share the post. The skepticism damaged their opinion of the brand’s image but did not necessarily stop their consumer behavior in the short term.

A notable finding emerged regarding the group that saw retouched images without a label. When these participants detected the editing on their own, they reported the strongest feelings of manipulative intent. The researchers suggest that detecting concealed retouching signals unfairness to the viewer. This triggers a stronger defensive response than when the editing is transparently disclosed.

Implications for Business Strategy

These findings offer specific insights for brands and influencers targeting younger demographics. The study suggests that hiding digital enhancements is a risky strategy. If an audience detects retouching that has been concealed, the resulting feeling of deception can drive down brand sentiment more severely than if the editing were disclosed.

Authenticity appears to be a safer route for brand equity. Since the disclosure labels themselves did not guarantee that users would notice the editing, businesses cannot rely solely on legal compliance to manage consumer perception. The researchers imply that minimizing digital alteration altogether may be the most effective way to avoid triggering inferences of manipulative intent.

Directions for Future Inquiry

This study opens several new avenues for research in consumer psychology and marketing. The current findings are based on a single exposure to a specific skincare brand. Future investigations could examine whether repeated exposure to disclosure labels over time trains adolescents to spot editing more effectively.

Additionally, the study utilized a well-known brand, which may have carried pre-existing consumer bias. Researchers could replicate this experiment with fictitious brands to isolate the effect of the manipulation more precisely. Finally, eye-tracking technology could be employed in future studies. This would determine if users are ignoring the disclosure stamps entirely or if they see them but fail to process their meaning.