Viewing appearance-focused TikTok videos was associated with an increased self-objectification in women, as well as changes in mood, according to a new study.

Viewing “thinspiration” content on TikTok increased self-objectification and worsened mood, whereas viewing body-positive content also increased self-objectification but was linked to more positive mood.

“The findings therefore suggest at least a short-term benefit of body-positive content on social media, even when users are faced with content promoting thin or fit ideals,” lead author Samantha M. Jones, a PhD candidate at Western University in London, Ontario, Canada, told Medscape Medical News.

Self-objectification occurs when people feel their value is determined by their appearance, viewing themselves and their bodies as objects. There are two types: “state” and “trait.”

“State” refers to the thoughts people are having in the moment — in this study, the extent to which they’re thinking about their appearance. “Trait” refers to people’s tendency to have these thoughts throughout their daily lives — that is, valuing their appearance over other aspects of themselves.

Viewing TikTok videos had an impact on both state and trait self-objectification in the study, which was published online in PLOS One.

Overall, “Women experienced negative emotions when viewing social media videos that idealize thinness,” the authors wrote, and those who tended to value their appearance over their other qualities “were especially vulnerable to negative mood after viewing thin-ideal videos.”

‘Disengage From Content That’s Distressing’

Researchers used a within-subjects experimental design to examine momentary differences in self-objectification and mood among 323 women and feminine-identifying people, mostly college age, across five categories of TikTok videos: thinspiration, which depicts a thin-ideal and promotes weight loss; fitspiration, which contains fat-loss promotion messages; body positivity content, which promotes body acceptance and challenging thin/fit ideals; general positive; and neutral.

Participants first completed a survey on their general disposition to self-objectify and then viewed a randomized set of 20 TikTok videos. After each video, they reported their mood and momentary (state) levels of self-objectification.

Trait self-objectification was measured using the 14-item Self-Objectification Beliefs and Behaviors Scale. Participants responded to each item (eg, “[m]y physical appearance is more important than my physical abilities”) using a 5-point Likert Scale ranging from (1) strongly disagree to (5) strongly agree.

Using two slider bars, participants indicated how each video made them feel with regard to (1) positive/good feeling and (2) negative/bad feeling. Each slider bar ranged from 0 (“not at all”) to 100 (“extremely”).

To measure state self-objectification, participants answered the following three questions using a 5-point Likert scale ranging from (1) “not at all” to (5) “extremely”: (1) To what extent does this video make you think about the things you do like about your body? (2) To what extent does this video make you think about the things you do not like about your body? (3) To what extent does this video make you think about your skills, abilities, and talents?

Among the findings:

• Individuals with a greater tendency to self-objectify reported more state self-objectification after viewing thinspiration and body-positive content and were more vulnerable to increases in negative mood after viewing thinspiration.
• Body-positive content was associated with increased positive mood, and increased self-objectification after viewing body-positive content strengthened this positive mood effect.
• Compared with neutral videos, thinspiration and fitspiration videos were both associated with increased negative mood and decreased positive mood.
• Neither trait nor state self-objectification predicted worse mood after fitspiration content, unlike thinspiration. “One possibility is that the dual focus of appearance and skill-building [in fitness videos] may limit appearance-focused comparisons, buffering the link between self-objectification and negative mood when viewing this content,” Jones said.
• Trait self-objectification had no effect on positive mood across video categories.

“These results shed light on the conflicting effects of self-objectification on social media induced mood and self-objectification,” the authors concluded.

Jones recommended that individuals who might experience negative emotions while scrolling through social media be intentional with their use. “Many social media platforms involve an infinitely scrollable feed of content, often presented through recommendations,” she said. “It is important to engage with content that serves one’s needs, whether that be boosting positive emotions, seeking information, or connecting with others.”

“Users should try to disengage with content that is distressing,” she said, “whether that is scrolling past these types of posts, or blocking content creators or keywords and hashtags.”

For parents, educators, or clinicians navigating this topic with children and teens, she pointed to resources from Children and Screens: Institute of Digital Media and Child Development.

‘Thinking About Your Body More Positively Is Still Thinking About Your Body’

Robyn Pashby, PhD, research assistant professor of psychology at F. Edward Hébert School of Medicine at Uniformed Services University in Bethesda, Maryland, and member of the National Board of Directors at Obesity Action Coalition, said, “[t]he findings make intuitive sense to me. What is particularly interesting is that it separates how content makes us feel from what it causes us to focus on.”

“Body-positive content may feel affirming and improve mood while still directing attention toward the body and appearance,” Pashby, who was not involved in the study, told Medscape Medical News. “I don’t necessarily see those findings as contradictory. Thinking about your body more positively is still thinking about your body.”

Among her concerns about the study is the fact that it measured immediate responses to TikTok videos, not the effects of repeated exposure over time. “In real-life scenarios,” she said, “this type of exposure is very often chronic and repetitive, and we cannot extrapolate from these data exactly how results would change based on the effects of living with an algorithmically curated feed over months or even years.”

She also noted that the sample was “quite young and largely average-bodied,” so she urged caution before generalizing the findings to people across the lifespan or across a broader range of body sizes.

Rather than prescribing specific feeds for patients to watch, she suggested that clinicians ask patients direct questions. “We routinely ask about sleep, eating, physical activity, and other behaviors that affect health,” she said. “Asking, ‘What does your social media feed make you think and feel about your body?’ can be an equally useful clinical question.”

Follow-ups could include whether patients felt better or worse afterward, whether the content increased self-criticism or comparison, and “how much mental space is your body taking up during or after your scrolling.”

She encouraged clinicians to steer patients toward content unrelated to appearance, such as content about relationships, humor, skills, or creativity, which “expands rather than narrows” their sense of self.

“The opposite of negative body image isn’t necessarily thinking positively about your body all the time,” she said. “Sometimes it’s simply getting to think about everything else.”

No funding was provided for the study. Jones and Pashby reported no conflicts of interest.

Marilynn Larkin, MA, is an award-winning medical writer and editor based in New York City whose work has appeared in numerous publications, including Medscape Medical News and its sister publication MDedge, The Lancet (where she was a contributing editor), and Reuters Health.