COMM 3200

Mihir Chauhan

Final Paper

Finstagrams: A New Trend In Online Visual Self-Presentation

Introduction:

“This is SO on brand”, a comment read on my friend’s Instagram photo of her on a white

bicycle against a brick wall. With a furrowed brow, I scroll through her feed, full of pastel earth

tones and contrasting neutral apparel. Last month, the same friend contemplated uploading a

hilarious photo of her mother dressed as a Sim - but to a completely different profile she had

created. It was then that I discovered Finstagrams. A Finstagram is a ‘fake’ Instagram account

for posting content that users don’t want on their main profiles. With expectations to curate

perfect visual self-images on Instagram, young adults are creating ‘fake’ accounts as spaces to

present uninhibited content to more intimate audiences with minimal effort.

Surprisingly, creating Finstagrams is a rapidly growing trend amongst young adults that

places it at the bleeding edge of the ever-evolving behaviors around online self-presentation.

With online self-presentation acting as a significant contributor to young adults’ time, identities

and self-esteems, it is important that we understand the motivations and implications of these

new and seemingly irrational behaviors.

Literature Review:

Ideas about self-presentation trace back to Goffman’s (1959) theories, which describe

how individuals perform roles in their day to day lives in order to project certain desired images

of themselves onto the people around them. He proposed that every interaction is a performance

with ‘given’ and ‘given off’ sign activities in self-presentation. ‘Given’ cues include

straightforward communication such as verbal exchanges, whereas ‘given off’ signs are more

complex non-verbal cues such as facial expressions, gestures and body language. These theories

are highly applicable to the digital world, where the stage has simply shifted from face-to-face

communication to online communication.

When it comes to self-presentation through modern online platforms, Herring &

Kapizdic’s ​“Teens, Gender, and Self-Presentation in Social Media” synthesizes several studies

conducted in the United States to more closely examine teenagers’ social media use through the

construction of online profiles, visual self-presentation, truthfulness and profile visibility.

Herring & Kapidzic describe a shift from the early days of the internet where anonymity,

experimentation and the freedom to adopt any identity were valued. She explains that new social

media platforms such as Facebook encourage their users to upload truthful information about

themselves through pictures, usernames, interests and content sharing. Although this limits

potential experimentation with online identity, teenagers and young adults still have the ability to

curate and manipulate online impressions of themselves that they wish to project onto their

connections. They do so, for example, by uploading select images to represent a certain brand or

set of tastes, or acquiring large numbers of ‘friends’ whom they may not know.
 Another notable study by Peluchette and Karl (2008) found that girls and boys differ in

terms of the content they post to their social media accounts, and that young adults overall have

the tendency to use social media primarily as a means for attracting and forming relationships

with peers and are not concerned about building a professional personal image. In terms of visual

presentation, this idea is built upon by Manago et al., (2008) who found that teenagers’ foremost

criterion for selecting profile pictures is a belief that they appear attractive in them. Their study

also showed that girls place more emphasis on selecting pictures than boys. Furthermore, studies

have shown that images selected for online profiles are stereotypically gendered ones of strong

men and attractive women. The ‘self-sexualization’ in online visual presentations also suggests

the rise of a more general trend of self-commodification according to Siibak (2010). Donnelly

(2011) also find that this occurs unconsciously, perhaps as a result of internalization of media

images that teens are constantly exposed to in their day-to-day lives. This hypothesis was further

supported by Kapidzic (2011) who found a positive correlation between internalization of ideas

about stereotypical looks through media messages and the tendency to choose seductive profile

pictures. Visual self-presentation through photographs is another area that has been studied in

greater detail. Zhao et al (2008) explain in reference to Facebook that behaviors exhibited in

uploaded photos constitute identity claims as much as verbal statements about oneself.

Photographic elements like posture, gaze, clothing, expression, style and distance from the

camera all provide identity cues. All of these ideas suggest that young adults’ and teens’ curation

of the self image to the public is an integral part of their online social media experiences.

With the trend for creating desirable online profiles, it comes as no surprise that teens

provide false information on social media sites (Lenhart & Madden, 2007). The misinformation
provided ties in closely with stereotypical gender images, with boys pretending to be more

macho and girls pretending to be older and more beautiful. Peluchette & Karl (2008) found that

girls tended to post ‘cute’ photos while boys’ photos contained more self-promotional content

and references to alcohol. Moreover, false information about personality traits were also present,

with girls describing themselves as ‘kind’ or ‘smart’ being more likely to present themselves

online as ‘funny’ or ‘social’. Girls with low self esteem were also seen to present themselves as

‘sexy’ or ‘crazy’ (Carmon, 2010).

Herring and Kapizdic more generally argue that social media sites and profiles serve as

reference points in the process of social identity development for teens and young adults.

Observing others’ profiles give teens an idea of what is socially appropriate to present, thereby

giving them cues for what to present on their own profiles (boyd, 2007). This leads not only to

gendered self-presentations but also feelings of inadequacy and depression (O’Keefe et al.,

2011). Self-commodification is heightened when the value of online content can be quantified

through feedback such as likes and comments. Negative psychological effects arise from

comparing appearances and quantified self-presentations.

Research surrounding online self-presentation is on Instagram in particular is fairly

sparse due to its relative novelty and rapid transformations as a social media platform. In

"Self-presentation and Social Media: A Qualitative Examination of the Use of Instagram by

Amateur NPC Female Figure Competitors"​, Lupinetti (2015) relates Goffman’s principles to

Instagram. She explains that the platform gives very large audiences access to individuals’ online

profiles, without knowing the individuals outside of that specific context. She also argues that

Instagram ‘performers’ occasionally display Goffman’s ‘out-of-character outbursts’ that viewers

then see, leading them to question the performer’s authenticity and motives. Performers thus

must maintain their in-character presentations by ‘conscious or subconscious regulation’.

Observers on the other hand see parts of performers’ personal lives that they want projected, and

remain unexposed to information asynchronous with their Instagram reputation that performers

withhold.

When it comes to privacy and withholding information, studies carried out in Peluchette

& Karl’s (2008) study show that respondents were most comfortable giving their friends, family

and classmates access to their profiles and were neutral to providing access to employers and

strangers. A significant number of respondents also claimed to have content on their profiles that

they would be uncomfortable with employers seeing. Their sentiments can be seen as valid, as a

study by Sherman (2013) uncovered that these content habits can cause problems for teens

transitioning to the job market, with a study finding that 1 in 10 young job applicants were

rejected on the basis of inappropriate social media content including provocative or alcohol and

drug-related photos.

Lastly, it is important to note the prevalence of platforms such as Instagram in today’s

day and age. A 2014 Pew Study showed that half of American teens use Instagram, a typical teen

has 150 followers, and 25% of American teens are ‘constantly online’.

Data Selection

It is clear that there is a great deal of importance placed on online visual self-presentation

by teens and young adults, and the social norms and attitudes that drive online behaviors are

constantly evolving along with social media platforms. An understudied area is the curation of
content under the context collapse of platforms such as Instagram. With audiences containing

everyone from friends and family to strangers and employers, young adults are careful in

choosing who sees what content. ‘Finstagrams’, or ‘fake Instagrams’ are an interesting new trend

that young adults use in order to moderate content while fulfilling their projections of their

desired self images. This paper aims to address the following Research Questions:

1. Can the ownership of a fake Instagram account be predicted by gender and/or

introversion?

2. What motivates young adults to create fake Instagram accounts?

3. What are the key similarities or differences in visual self-presentation between

real and fake Instagram accounts?

Method

To collect data to answer these questions, I conducted 2 studies (see appendix) - one

more quantitative and the other more qualitative. The first was a broad study targeted at 20

random male and 20 random female Instagram account owners. The study consisted of two

questions, and its purpose was to find out whether or not gender or extroversion predicts the

ownership of a Finsta. In order to measure extroversion, I used bipolar analysis with a 10 point

scale where 1 is ‘Introverted’ and 10 is ‘Extroverted’. Respondents would have to choose a

number on this scale that they believe they fit best. I used a scale instead of just two choices to

account for people who are ambiverts or do not fully identify with either extreme. For gender,

although a similar scale or spectrum would be ideal, I decided to use Male, Female and Other as
the two options for simplifying analysis. I distributed the study via public Facebook and

GroupMe groups and capped responses after 20 males and females responded.

The second study involved a detailed interview protocol, and was targeted at owners of

Finstas. Interview questions were designed in a way that impressed the least scrutiny upon

respondents, as discussing rationales behind self-presentation behaviors and ‘secrets of

performance’ could be a sensitive and private topic. Most questions were framed in a way to

compare information about their Finstas to their real Instagram accounts, in hopes of uncovering

more information and diffusing tension about talking about fake accounts that could be more

personal. Furthermore, the questions were asked in a casual way and the order was not strictly

adhered to, in attempts to make the interviews as conversational as possible. The questions

revolved around the motivations behind creating a Finsta, and the kind of content posted on

them. If respondents gave me permission, I would browse through or be walked through these

accounts with the respondents. Those who chose not to disclose their profiles were given broader

questions about the content in their Finstas including the usage of filters and most/least liked

posts. Another key area the questions addressed was the number and nature of followers they had

on their Finstas, and how this related to their real Instagrams.

Results

The results of the first survey shed some light on Research Question 1, as it showed that

gender can be considered a predictor of Finsta ownership. 65% of the female respondents had a

fake Instagram account while only 15% of the male respondents did. This shows a very gendered

trend for Finsta ownership, which can to an extent be explained by existing research and data
from the data from second survey. Additionally, this survey showed that there is no correlation

between extroversion and Finsta ownership. Finsta owners had an average extroversion score of

4.9375 and non-owners had an average score of 5.2917.

The second survey provided far richer data about the details behind Finsta habits in order

to answer Research Questions 2 and 3. The majority of motivations behind Finsta creation were

evenly split between following trends and wanting to post more personal content for close family

and friends. One respondent said:

“I wanted to post like, funny, random, more personal things to show my close friends”

While others explained motivations like:

“Everyone else was making one so I said why not”

“I was bored over summer and my best friend Kyla had one”

In terms of privacy and followers, respondents across the board stated that their Finstas

are private, with the majority of respondents also claiming that their real Instagrams are private.

Respondents’ Finstas on average tended to have approximately 1/6th as many followers as their

corresponding real accounts, resulting in between 1/10 and 1/3 as many likes per post on

average. Furthermore, Finsta audiences consisted mainly of close friends and cousins, with a

minority of respondents stating their Finsta followings included some ‘fringe friends’ and

acquaintances. None of the respondents had strangers in their lists of Finsta followers.

Responses to questions about content, quality and frequency of posting varied slightly

amongst respondents, with the common trend that real accounts were more carefully and

selectively constructed. Finstas consisted of a range of subjects from self-deprecating humor to

strange, humorous moments to illegal substances. The majority of respondents said they did not

use filters on their Finsta posts. As some respondents said:

“My Finsta is for funny and weird stuff, but my real insta is for pictures of nature and

just higher quality pictures in general, as well as good pictures of my friends and I.”

“Finstas are complaining about life or pictures of me drunk with some type of caption.”

“My real insta is good high quality filtered photos, and finstas are bad/ funny photos or

personal things.”

Finally, Finsta post frequencies were seen to be much lower (1-2 times a month) than real posts

(4-7 times a month).

Discussion

The motivations behind creating fake accounts ties in with the types of content on fake

accounts and the audiences following them. Real Instagram accounts are carefully curated to

portray a certain image, brand or lifestyle to their audiences. Meanwhile, the ‘bad’ and ‘funny’

photos that are very much a part of posters’ personalities may not fit in with the level of quality

they desire to project to large audiences, who may not know much about them past the context of

Instagram. These ‘lower quality’ images would be seen as ‘out of character outbursts’ (Goffman,

1959) to larger audiences and thus need a more intimate space and audience to be projected

upon. Indeed, it makes sense that these audiences are close friends and family who know more

about the Finsta owners’ lives and are less likely to be surprised by an asynchrony between fake

and real Instagram posts.

Other significant motivations, such as following in the footsteps of peers can be backed

by boyd’s (2007) research that shows how teens look at their friends’ profiles for cues on what is
socially acceptable. The spread of Finstas and their similarity in content certainly could be

attributed to the spread of ideas about what is socially acceptable to share with a large audience

versus an intimate one. As one respondent mentioned:

“Basically my real Insta is where I post things that I consider to be worth sharing with

more people”

The finding that girls are more likely to own Finstas can also be supported by past

research, which shows that girls place higher importance than boys on selecting pictures in

which they are attractive. Additionally, given that the primary criterion for photo selection is

self-assessed attractiveness, real Instagram accounts are likely to require great amounts of effort

to construct. Finstas act as easygoing, intimate spaces that require low effort to maintain while

still providing the ability to visually self-present and are thus perhaps more appealing to girls,

who are more selective with photos on their main accounts. Moreover, girls could be more

attracted to Finstas since boys are already post more references to alcohol etc. (​Peluchette &

Karl, 2008), that girls won’t post on their real accounts, and create Finstas specifically for.

Conclusion

It is clear that visually oriented social media platforms like Instagram are not going

anywhere in the foreseeable future, which raises concerns about the pressures and social norms

around posting images and appearing desirable online. Given the growing trend of Instagram

users creating perfect online profiles and maintaining a high quality image feed to present their

personal brands, the use of fake accounts for posting uninhibited content only seems like it can

grow.
 Research has shown that making comparisons to peers’ profiles under the lens of

self-commodification can be detrimental to mental health, but Finstagram accounts seem to be a

small antidote by enabling young adults to post without caring about how good they look.

Finstagram accounts also seem to bridge the gap between projected online images and actual

personalities and lived experiences, and go against the notions that Instagram accounts portray

fake versions of people. For now, we know for certain that young adults cater their online

presence to different audiences in drastically different ways. In the future, perhaps the tables will

turn and Finstagram accounts will be seen as ‘real’ due to their higher levels of authenticity.
Appendix

Survey

1. What is your gender?

2. Where do you think you fit on a scale of 1 (introvert) to 10 (extrovert)?

Interview Protocol

1. What made you start a finsta?

2. Is it private or public? Is your real insta private or public?

3. What kind of content do you have on your finsta vs your real insta?

4. Do you ever use filters on finstas posts?

5. How many followers do you have on your finata vs your real insta?

6. Roughly how often do you post on your finsta vs your real insta?

7. You get ___ times as many likes on finsta posts than on real instas on average

8. What's in your most liked finsta?

9. What's in your least liked finsta?

10. Who are your followers on your finsta? (Friends, relatives, strangers etc?)
Works Cited

1. boyd, d. (2007). Why youth heart social network sites: The role of networked publics in

teenage social life, in: Buckingham, D. (Ed.). ​Youth, Identity and Digital Media​. MIT

Press, Cambridge, MA, pp. 119–142.

2. Carmon, I. (2010, November 5). What Facebook does to teenage girls. Jezebel. Retrieved

May 18, 2017 from http://jezebel.com/5682488/what-does-facebook-do-to-teenage-girls

3. Goffman, E. (1978). ​The presentation of self in everyday life​ (p. 56). Harmondsworth.

4. Herring, S. C., & Kapidzic, S. (2015). Teens, Gender, and Self-Presentation in Social

Media. ​International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences,​146-152.

5. Lenhart, Amanda, Pew Research Center. (2015). “Teen, Social Media and Technology

Overview 2015”

6. Lupinetti, Victoria Michelle. (2015). "Self-presentation and Social Media: A Qualitative

Examination of the Use of Instagram by Amateur NPC Female Figure Competitors".

Master's Theses. Paper 4550.

7. Manago, A. M., Graham, M. B., Greenfield, P. M., & Salimkhan, G. (2008).

Self-presentation and gender on MySpace. ​Journal of Applied Developmental

Psychology,​ ​29​(6), 446-458. doi:10.1016/j.appdev.2008.07.001

8. Peluchette, J., & Karl, K. (2008). Social Networking Profiles: An Examination of Student

Attitudes Regarding Use and Appropriateness of Content. ​CyberPsychology & Behavior,

11​(1), 95-97.

9. Sherman, E. (2013). 1 in 10 young job hunters rejected because of their social media.

AOL News. Retrieved May 18, 2017, from

 http://jobs.aol.com/articles/2013/06/04/applicants-rejected-social-media-on-deviceresearc

h/

10. Siibak, A. (2010). Constructing masculinity on a social networking site. ​Young,18​(4),

403-425.

11. Zhao, S., Grasmuck, S., & Martin, J. (2008). Identity construction on Facebook: Digital

empowerment in anchored relationships. ​Computers in Human Behavior, ​24​(5),

1816-1836.