ASSOCIATION FOR CONSUMER RESEARCH
Labovitz School of Business & Economics, University of Minnesota Duluth, 11 E. Superior Street, Suite 210, Duluth, MN 55802
Social Comparison of Less Than Ideal Images in Television Advertising: an Exploratory Study of Masculine Gender Identity
Neil Alperstein, Loyola University Maryland, USA
Research suggests that comparing oneself to ideal images in advertising may result in dissatisfaction, however, there is little research
to support our understanding of what happens when comparison is made to less than ideal images. This paper is an exploratory study
of social comparisons by male consumers of less than ideal images in television advertising, including those of cavemen, men
depicted as wolves, and men humiliated in public. The study finds social comparisons were self-enhancing, but comparisons were
more complex than theory has suggested. This result is a reflection of shifting social norms regarding masculine gender identity.
[to cite]:
Neil Alperstein (2011) ,"Social Comparison of Less Than Ideal Images in Television Advertising: an Exploratory Study of
Masculine Gender Identity", in E - European Advances in Consumer Research Volume 9, eds. Alan Bradshaw, Chris Hackley,
and Pauline Maclaran, Duluth, MN : Association for Consumer Research, Pages: 341-346.
[url]:
http://www.acrwebsite.org/volumes/1006745/eacr/vol9/E-09
[copyright notice]:
This work is copyrighted by The Association for Consumer Research. For permission to copy or use this work in whole or in
part, please contact the Copyright Clearance Center at http://www.copyright.com/.
Social Comparison of Less Than Ideal Images in Television Advertising: An Exploratory
Study of Masculine Gender Identity
Neil Alperstein, Loyola University, USA
There is a growing body of research regarding women and
men that supports “the belief that advertising imagery may have
broad social consequences” (Gulas and McKeage 2000, 17). The
objectification of females has been the focus of much research that
arose out of concern for the depiction of ultra-thin models that might
encourage anorexia among females, however, the emergence of
research regarding masculine gender identity with particular emphasis on comparison to ideal male body image and its relationship
to advertising is more recent (Pope, Phillips, and Olivardia 2000).
The ideal male image as portrayed in the media has traditionally been associated with power and independence, among other
qualities. For example, Aubrey and Taylor describe the ideal male
as portrayed in magazines as “muscular, wealthy, and prestigious”
(2009, 29). Such attributes regarding size and muscularity go beyond
the media as standards including rugged individualism, adventurous spirit, risk taking, displays of physical prowess, and having a
high degree of personal autonomy are ascribed to successful males
(Kimmel 1996).
Agliata and Tantleff-Dunn (2004) report that men became
depressed and dissatisfied with their bodies when exposed to
advertisements depicting muscular idealized male images. Such
findings assume that the ideal muscular image of contemporary
masculinity is one that males desire to emulate, but perhaps cannot.
The presence of attractive male models, sports figures and celebrities in advertisements represents this societal ideal. However, what
happens when less than ideal images, like the cavemen who appear
in a long-running U.S. advertising campaign, are represented? If
looking at unattainable idealized images is depressing, then looking
at less than ideal images should be uplifting or at least provide relief
regarding the feeling of having to live up to the idealized other. In
this article, I present research into the impact on male consumers
of advertising that presents less than ideal images of masculinity
in television advertising. I seek to investigate the ways in which
males compare themselves to images in advertising of cavemen,
wolves and men publicly humiliated with their pants down. This
research contributes to our understanding of the role of advertising
in contemporary society with particular regard for the impact it has
on masculine gender identity.
Multifarious Representations of Masculine Gender Identity
Alperstein (2006) posits that less than ideal images began
to proliferate in US and UK advertising during the mid-1990s, a
trend that may be rooted in societal changes regarding men’s roles.
Traditional masculinity, represented by images of muscularity and
strength, gave way to a more volatile gender identity that wavers
between the traditional and the new. Barbara Ehrenreich describes
in The Hearts of Men (1983) how the ideology of man as breadwinner shifted toward a newer consumer role that in some respects
serves as an emancipatory fantasy. Holt and Thompson refer to
such fantasies as “pleasurable tensions” (2004, 426). Advertising,
as a symbolic form of consumption serves to feed such fantasies
or tensions by representing shifting norms. As a reflection of a
changing symbolic meaning system men are beckoned to utilize
advertising as one means to manage their identity. Patterson and
Elliot suggest identity management, and in that the inversion of the
male gaze, provokes the following psychological reflection: “when
the gaze is turned on itself, men are more likely to move through
a range of responses such as rejection, identification and desire”
(2002, 241). Schroeder and Zwick counter that the gaze has not so
much become inverted but rather expanded [sic] (2004).
As several standards regarding masculine gender identity coexist, it is likely that advertisers will push boundaries in order to
develop creative deviations that invite elaborations on the part of
male consumers. In this way Schroeder and Zwick conclude that
advertising representations may be analyzed at the intersection of
representational conventions, changing definitions of target markets,
and cultural politics of gender (2004, 29). Such representational
complexity renders masculine gender identity problematic, as male
consumers must work through various images that range from the
ideal, which traditionally constituted its strength and thus legitimized
its hegemonic status, to the less than ideal, which may be indicative
of an acutely troubled psychology of the male.
Social Comparison
What I have set out to do in this study is investigate how
male consumers of advertising compare themselves to less than
ideal images of masculinity. Such consumer responses fit within
the rubric of social comparison, a field of research that examines
psychological phenomena initiated by the presence of at least one
“other” (Staple and Blanton 2007, 2). The other to which Staple and
Blanton refer can be “actual, imagined, or even implied,” making
consumer responses to images of masculinity in advertising a prime
arena in which to see this theory at work (2007, 1).
Much research has taken place since Festinger (1954) developed
the theory of social comparison that described comparing oneself
to another as a basic human need. Over the years, the theory has
been expanded and revised to go beyond self evaluation to include
self improvement or enhancement, varying degrees of interest
regarding social comparison among individuals, and consideration
of an individual’s social environment (Wood 1989). With regard to
the latter, social comparisons are influenced by social environment
when one makes upward (someone who is better off), downward
(someone worse off) or lateral comparisons (someone like me).
Considering an idealized image—celebrity or sports figure—prevalent in advertising, one would expect that comparisons would be
made in the upward direction, although it is clearly possible that
the consumer will evaluate the idealized image as one that is unattainable (Hirschman and Thompson 1997). Viewing images of
those less fortunate, however, directs comparison downward, leading consumers to feel superior to others (Dreze and Nunes 2009).
Complexity grows when one considers that a viewer could evaluate
an image of an inferior other as beneath him or worse off then him,
and therefore the evaluation might be self-enhancing. Depending on
the ways in which individuals construe the comparison, there may
be strong identification with the objectified other, in which case
the comparison may be downward, perhaps threatening self-esteem
or upward depending on the context of consumption. Generally,
however, research has found that “downward comparisons tend to be
self-enhancing while upward comparison are generally threatening
to well-being and self-esteem” (Lyubomirsky and Ross 1997, 1141).
The social costs extracted through the social comparison
of advertising images among females have been demonstrated,
however, a full understanding of the impact of advertising images
among males has yet to emerge (Richins 1991; Martin and Gentry
1997). Research has indicated that cross-sex comparisons are an
important part of the social comparison equation, for example when
341
European Advances in Consumer Research
Volume 9, © 2011
342 / Social Comparison of Less Than Ideal Images in Television Advertising: An Exploratory Study of Masculine Gender Identity
Figure 1
The Six Television Commercials
Adidas
Budweiser
Pepsi
GEICO auto insurance
Honda Pilot
Quiznos
a male looks at the advertising image of a very attractive female and
evaluates her as someone with whom he would have no chance of
developing a relationship, perhaps threatening his self esteem (Aubrey and Taylor 2009). There is, however, no research that focuses
specifically on downward comparisons to less than ideal images of
males in advertising. The current study is conducted with the goal
of describing and explaining how males use less than ideal images
from television advertising for social comparison and in the process
to negotiate their masculinity. It is intended to complement other
research that has focused on idealized advertising imagery with
interest in the construction of masculine gender identity. Specifically, the research addresses the following questions:
1.
How do men compare themselves to the representation of
less than ideal images in television advertising, particularly
when they are portrayed as cavemen, wolves or in other
socially embarrassing ways?
2. How do men negotiate the meanings of those less than
ideal images given their complex and contradictory
nature?
METHODOLOGY
In-depth interviews were conducted with twelve respondents;
each interview lasted approximately one hour. The respondents
were a purposive sample of undergraduate male college students
ranging in age between 18-22 years who were recruited based on
having no special interest in advertising or marketing. A purposive
sample such as this is deemed appropriate for an exploratory study
of responses to television advertising because of this cohort’s
involvement in brands. Peterson’s study of the use of college students in social science research found that college students were
“slightly but consistently more homogeneous (less variable) than
those of nonstudent subjects” (2001, 458). The interviews were
digitally recorded and later transcribed for analysis. Expanding
European Advances in Consumer Research (Volume 9) / 343
on the procedure advocated by Mick and Buhl (1992), informants
were provided the opportunity to respond to six advertisements in a
way they might derive meaning from viewing television advertisements in real viewing settings, but was not meant to mimic actual
television viewing (Figure 1).
The advertisements featured products that ranged from auto
insurance and fast food to beer and soft drinks, the messages of
which were directed toward male consumers. Respondents were
asked about their general reactions to the commercials in order
to elicit their understanding of the advertiser’s message and their
interpretation of the message, with particular interest in the ways
in which respondents compared themselves to the key images in
the commercials. Additional questions related to the respondents’
generalized attitudes toward advertising, and there were questions
regarding the respondents’ self-perception with particular regard
for body consciousness.
The questions were similar to those utilized by Mick and Politi
(1998) and replicated in Phillips’ (1997) study. Similar to previous
research, the objective was to elicit the “meanings of visual advertising images” (Phillips 1997, 79). While these previous studies were
not concerned with gendered interpretations, gendered meanings are
the interest of this present study. Therefore, additional questions were
developed in order to ascertain dimensions of social comparisons.
Analysis follows the approach taken by Elliot and Elliot (2005)
in their study of the idealized images of male body in advertising,
which is based on pattern coding techniques. Such techniques,
which were developed by Miles and Huberman, look for recurring
themes that are explanatory in nature, what the researchers refer to
as “repeatable regularities” (1994, 69). Analyzing emergent patterns allows the researcher to describe and explain the phenomenon
under study in order to provide greater understanding of some of
the ways in which social comparison theory may be applied to the
interpretations of television advertising by male viewers.
FINDINGS
Emergent Themes
Awareness of the “everyman” or average quality of the key
figure. Respondents overwhelmingly expressed their awareness
and understanding of the average qualities of the key figures in the
advertisements they viewed. This was something to be celebrated and
appreciated. Reflecting on the Pepsi commercial featuring comedian
Dave Chappelle, who in the context of the commercial is stripped
of his pants by an errant vacuum cleaner, respondents expressed
their awareness of the contradiction between the character’s average
physical qualities and his social role in the commercial.
I wouldn’t say he’s muscular (speaking of Dave Chappelle).
He’s relatively skinny and he looked like he’s about average
height. He’s not like a completely attractive person. And
he’s not handsome the way a male model would be. He’s
recognizable…a lot of people know him. He looks like he’s in
an everyday situation. For a lot of commercials there are super
models and you’re sitting there saying ‘ Oh, not everybody
looks like that,’ so it’s good to see a normal average looking
guy drinking Pepsi, so people can relate to it.
In a long-running campaign for GEICO auto insurance that features
cavemen to illustrate how easy their online service is to use, one
respondent commented:
Other than their faces, I’d say they looked like normal males.
They looked lean and average size, around 6 ft. I’d say. I
think the fact that from the neck down they looked completely
normal, like a normal man, and then up there was the really
ugly face...the beards and really long hair.
In addition to cavemen, men are depicted in the advertisements as lower animals such as wolves, as was the case with the
commercial for the Honda Pilot, featuring a man who demonstrated
wolf-like behavior. Respondents focused on his behavior and
physical appearance.
The man in the Honda commercial looked average…flabby. I
wouldn’t say his body mass index is over 30, not obese. He’s
bald. I remember that. He was out of the shower shaking water
off his head. He had a little bit of a gut, but nothing you can’t
hide under two shirts…just the average middle aged father
with a family of four.
He has a good family. A nice house. A great car–a Honda. A
reliable car. He didn’t have rippling muscles. He didn’t have
a six pack of abs. It’s a nice change, because I don’t have to
be reminded like every time I buy underwear that I don’t look
like that. I think it makes me more acceptable.
In reference to the average qualities of the character in the Honda
commercial, one respondent reported:
The family goes camping every weekend. That’s not something an upper class family would likely do. Middle of the
road as they come. Just Johnny next door. Let’s call him Joe
the Plumber. Very middle America. I’m as middle of the road
as they come. So, I guess I do relate to the guy in that way.
Identification with aspects of the key figure’s lifestyle in the
commercial–Breaking free. Although respondents may not have
desired to look like the less than ideal images displayed in the commercials, they repeatedly expressed an appreciation for aspects of
their lifestyle: eating in nice restaurants; dressing in nice clothing;
and, enjoying the freedom that being a wild animal brings. In particular, the notion of breaking free repeatedly came up in responses
to the commercial for the Honda Pilot identified above.
It does show that middle class is cool or okay. Acceptable. But
the chance to break free, to be wild…It was almost as if Honda
Pilot was an escape route from living your life.
I think it all comes back to that guy letting loose. Although we
may have the nine to five job. Because we have medical and
dental benefits. Because he has a wife and two kids to take
care of. Responsibilities like that. There’s always a part of you
that is relieved when you have the chance to break free. Let
loose. Not be confined.
I look back at my nieces and see they don’t have a care in the
world and that guy in the commercial (wolf-man) he didn’t
have a care in the world, which is awesome. I wish everybody
could be like that. At the same time, I don’t want to be bald. I
don’t want to have a gut. I don’t want to have to be taken care
of exclusively by my wife because I don’t know how to interact with people. The carefree attitude is kind of nice though.
Additionally as one respondent noted in response to viewing the
cavemen in the GEICO insurance commercial: “I may not want to
look like him, but I sure would like to dress like him or live like
him or date girls like him.”
344 / Social Comparison of Less Than Ideal Images in Television Advertising: An Exploratory Study of Masculine Gender Identity
Dissociation from the key image in the commercial. As the
procedure allowed for an initial selection from the six commercials
that the respondents chose to discuss, invariably respondents chose
the Adidas commercial featuring David Beckham. On the surface
it might be assumed that as a sports icon David Beckham would be
counted among idealized images, but in this particular commercial
that is part of Adidas’ “Impossible is Nothing” campaign, Beckham
is offered up as a sort of everyman, a late bloomer who suffered
greatly prior to his emergence as a world-class footballer. While
respondents were quite aware of Beckham, his prowess on the field,
and his antics off the field, they also appreciated his average size and
the casual apparel he was wearing. He was the most normal looking
of the key images from the advertisements. In this way, the Adidas
commercial served as a safe harbor for respondents who didn’t want
to, at least initially and of their own accord, compare themselves
to the other less than ideal images in the study. In selecting David
Beckham respondents were dissociating themselves from images
of wolf men, cavemen and images of humiliation.
It has been pointed out that respondents wanted to dissociate
themselves from physical attributes of several of the key characters,
but not necessarily aspects of their lifestyle. As the physical attributes
were so closely connected to the lifestyle depicted, it was evident
that a more complex process of interpreting the mixed signals the
advertisements sent was being utilized. For example, as was the
case of the cavemen, respondents could appreciate their dress and
aspects of their lifestyle, but not their facial features, which were
incongruent with the former. In comparison, a respondent said in
reference to the caveman, “I’m a hairy person. But I wouldn’t want
to be like him.”
I actually kind of feel bad for the cavemen. The ad is kind of
making fun of them, saying that we as people think of cavemen
as simple-minded…they invented the wheel! But other than
that they didn’t do that much for us. You can’t help but feel
bad for them. It says that cavemen are not smart.
I think women would like it because there it is–a man being
stupid. The woman (in the Honda commercial) is taking the
authority in the relationship. Guys laugh because it’s funny
to see guys act like animals. And I think that’s why it’s effective. It’s a vehicle that’s useable (practical). Families have
pets. The purpose was the guy was almost like the pet in the
family. He was shaking off after the shower like a dog. He
was chasing animals. When you hear the cat on the DVD, he
excitedly looks around.
In reference to the Honda commercial, one respondent said:
I suppose there’s not much he can do about it (his looks). I
don’t know how much judgment I can pass on how satisfied
he is with his looks. If I were him, I would not be (satisfied).
Respondents consistently referred to the cavemen, wolves and
images of humiliated males as dumb or stupid, unlike themselves.
While they may have found appreciation in some particular aspect
of the key image’s lifestyle, respondents often asserted they would
not want to be in that position socially, be physically like that, or
be as irrational in their own behavior. In other words, while the
respondent might report that he is attracted to the opposite sex and
therefore can appreciate how the caveman “gets the girl” in the
Budweiser beer commercial, and because he likes to drink beer,
he can appreciate the attraction to the beverage being advertised,
respondents consistently said, “I’m glad I’m not like him.” Except
for the image of David Beckham, these images are perceived to be
physically unattractive, there is no desire to be like them and little
desire to emulate them in most respects, except when it comes to
lifestyle. It is through the food they eat, the girls that are attracted
to them, the clothes they wear, and the freedom to be who they are
that respondents find significance; otherwise respondents dissociated
themselves from their physical attributes and public manners. When
it comes to social roles and relationships, respondents reported less
than ideal characters were not successful–they did not meet societal
expectations based on traditional masculinity. Respondents were
glad to be who they are, as the images reinforced that things could
be much worse for them.
DISCUSSION
The respondents in this study, after viewing the six commercials and measuring themselves against the less than ideal images
displayed, felt that things could be much worse. In other words, the
key figures in the commercials set the bar so low as to provide space
in which these respondents found comfort. When they compared
themselves to the physical grotesqueness, public exposure, and lack
of manners portrayed by key figures in the commercials, respondents
felt a strong sense of relief that this was happening to them, not me.
Not only do such commercials provide comic relief for the viewer,
but also as respondents internalize those images, they are granted
a form of recompense for what may be lacking in their own lives.
Respondents may not “get the girl” or have big muscles, but they can
laugh at those who have even less. To experience schadenfreude is
not only pleasurable, it is a payoff that advertisers provide to males
who gravitate toward such depictions. Social comparison theory is
useful in describing the kind of self-enhancement that respondents
experienced. Newer configurations of social comparison theory
suggest that individuals would evaluate those less fortunate than
themselves in a way that would have upward impact on their own
self-esteem (Taylor and Lobel 1989). However, the three themes
that emerged in the study suggest that the route to self-enhancement
was not as straightforward as the theory suggests, as respondents
provided complex readings of the less than ideal images and the
social situations depicted in the advertisements. Respondents may
not have wanted to look like those depicted in this set of advertisements, but they like to eat well and enjoy the fantasy of uninhibited
freedom that beckons them.
Less than ideal images in advertising counter-balance traditional
constructions of masculinity that operate in everyday life, making
interpretation of those images tenable. To make sense of the less
than ideal image, the viewer must understand the implausibility
of the visual depiction; all of the respondents understood that the
depiction of men as cavemen, wolves and in other situations that
expose them to embarrassment are presented with a sense of humor.
But the visual/verbal combination provides an opportunity for
further elaboration. “The point is not that each message recipient
will make all of these inferences, but that the advertiser’s choice
of a message that signifies the opposite of what it at first appears to
signify has a destabilizing effect that liberates a variety of meanings
for consideration” (McQuarrie and Mick 1996, 443). Within this
rhetorical complexity the viewer replaces the meaning conventionally linked to the visual/verbal expression—men lack intelligence or
men have not evolved—with a meaning that is more in comparison
with the individual’s own evaluation of himself. The multifarious
ways in which advertising depicts masculinity that range from
idealized images to less than ideal images work to destabilize and
unsettle potential meanings for males who compare themselves to
those images. Therefore, advertisements require work on the part
of the male viewer: move in the direction of the less than ideal
European Advances in Consumer Research (Volume 9) / 345
image, for example, empathizing with his low status and lack of
respect; isolate and identify with only one aspect of the less than
ideal image, discarding or partially disassociating himself from that
aspect of the image he finds distasteful; or, reject the image as he
finds comfort in the fact that the image and the situation in which
the less than ideal character finds himself is not me.
Alperstein (2006) described the repeated depiction since the mid
1990s both in U.S. and UK television advertising of less than ideal
images as a rhetorical technique that advertisers use to contain and
control male consumers. One must consider not only the presence
of such rhetorical figures, but their repeated appearances in television advertising. In this way the more male consumers encounter
the figure the more effective advertisements are at dislodging the
self. In other words, the motivation toward “reading” the rhetorical
figures is the little effort it takes to process the metaphor. Additionally, there is pleasure to be had in processing the advertisement’s
content and in that its incongruity or deviation. It would, therefore,
make sense that when it comes to products for whom males make
up the dominant market segment that the utilization of a less than
ideal image within a campaign and across campaigns may serve the
purpose of metaphorically “spreading the word” about masculinity–an unintended consequence of advertising. The fluidity of male
gender identity is made increasingly possible due to the multifarious
ways in which males are visualized in television advertising and the
ways in which males compare themselves to those images. Ritson
and Elliot maintain that “cultural meaning is constantly in transit
and the symbolic meanings of advertising are transported from
culture, invested into the advertising text, extracted from that text
by interpretation and then finally reapplied to the cultural world
through the metaphoric sense making of the interpreter” (1999, 273).
Changes in society including the fashionable male and the
stay-at-home dad are among the reasons advertisers construct as
Hanke suggested a hegemonic masculinity that naturalizes “social
and historical relations of power and privilege” (1998, 185). Hanke
does suggest that studies of masculinity need to consider how that
masculinity connects to “lived forms of patriarchy within everyday
life” (1998, 186). Other research (Barthel 1988 and Clarke 1995)
extends our understanding of advertising’s image of a “new man”
and a “gayification” within advertising. Males depicted as less
than ideal may not be such an odd representation when considered
within the concept of an ambiguous, vague or ambivalent masculine identity as a potentially effective communicative device of
advertisers. The mixing of idealized images and less than ideal
images, along with other representations, opens up masculinity
to multiple ways in which males subjectively interpret and thus
compare themselves to images depicted in advertising. As such,
the category, masculinity, is not one thing. As is the case with race
and class, masculine gender identity may not be defined simply as
that which is not feminine as masculine gender identity takes on
various other cultural meanings and significance.
Limitations and Future Research
The present study is limited to college-age males who represent masculinity at a crossroads: these males have the privilege of
living in a relatively homogeneous setting that is extremely social,
while not in a life stage where presentation of self in the workplace
greatly matters. Extending the research to consider somewhat older
respondents may yield different results. The open ended nature of
the in-depth interviews was helpful in delving deeper into respondents thoughts and feelings; future research may build on these
findings to develop a survey instrument that may be applied to a
larger sample. Future research might further benefit from applying social comparison theory to social networking on the Internet
as it relates to the development of masculine gender identity. As
one respondent reported that he spends so much time in front of
his computer that his social network has become so artificial as to
make it unnecessary to care what others think as he rarely presents
himself in public. As masculine gender identity shifts between
the traditional and newer constructions, it is important to look at
the multifarious ways advertising re-presents masculinity to male
consumers and the ways in which they respond to those images,
idealized ones and those that are less than ideal.
REFERENCES
Agliata, Daniel and Stacey Tangleff-Dunn (2004), “The Impact
of Media Exposure on Males’ Body Image,” Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 23:1, 7-22.
Alperstein, Neil (2006), “Disciplining the Carnivore: Pop
Primitivism in Contemporary Advertising,” in Proceedings
Gender, Marketing and Consumer Behavior 8th Annual Conference, 134-149. www.acrwebsite.org/.../CP%20paper%20
12%20Neil%20M%20Alperstein.pdf
Barthel, Diane (1988), Putting on Appearances: Gender and
Advertising, Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
Clarke, Danae (1995), “Commodity Lesbianism,” in Gender,
Race and Class in Media, Ed. G. Dines and J. Humez, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 142-151.
Dreze, Xavier and Joseph Nunes (2009), “Feeling Superior: The
Impact of Loyalty Program Structure on Consumers’ Perceptions of Status,” Journal of Consumer Research, 35 (April)
890-905.
Ehrenreich, Barbara (1984), The Hearts of Men: American
Dreams and the Flight from Commitment, Garden City, NJ:
Anchor Press/Doubleday.
Elliot, Richard, and Nick Jankel Elliott (2003), “Using Ethnography in Strategic Consumer Research,” Qualitative Market
Research 6:4, 215-223.
Festinger, Leon (1954), “A Theory of Social Comparison Processes,” Human Relations, 7, 117–140.
Gulas, Charles and Kim McKeage (2000), “Extending Social
Comparison: An Examination of the Unintended Consequences of Idealized Advertising Imagery,” Journal of Advertising, XXIX(2), 17-28.
Hanke, Robert (1998), “Theorizing Masculinity with/in the
Media,” Communication Theory, 8 (2), 183-203.
Hirschman, Elizabeth and Craig Thompson (1997), “Why Media
Matter: Toward a Richer Understanding of Consumers’
Relationships with Advertising and Mass Media,” Journal of
Advertising, 26:1, 44-60.
Holt, Douglas and Craig Thompson (2004), “Man-of-Action
Heroes: The Pursuit of Heroic Masculinity in Everyday Consumption,” Journal of Consumer Research, 31 (September),
425-440.
Kimmel, Michael (1996), Manhood in America: A Cultural History, New York: Free Press.
Lyubomirsky, Sonja, and Ross Lee (1999), “Changes in Attractiveness of Elected, Rejected, and Precluded Alternatives: A
Comparison of Happy and Unhappy Individuals,” Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 76, 988-1007.
Martin, Mary and James Gentry (1997), “Stuck in the Model
Trap: The Effects of Beautiful Models in Ads on Female PreAdolescents and Adolescents,” The Journal of Advertising, 2
(Summer), 19-33.
McQuarrie, Edward and David Glen Mick (1999), “Visual
Rhetoric in Advertising: Text-Interpretive, Experimental, and
Reader-Response Analyses,” Journal of Consumer Research,
346 / Social Comparison of Less Than Ideal Images in Television Advertising: An Exploratory Study of Masculine Gender Identity
26 (1), 37-54.
McQuarrie, Edward and David Mick (1996), “Figures of
Rhetoric in Advertising Language,” Journal of Consumer
Research, 22:4, 424-438.
Mick, David and Claus Buhl (1992), “A Meaning-Based Model
of Advertising Experiences,” Journal of Consumer Research,
19, 317-338.
Mick, David and Laura Politi (1989), “Consumers’ Interpretations of Advertising Imagery: A Visit to the Hell of Connotation,” in Interpretive Consumer Research, Ed. Elizabeth C.
Hirschman, Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Research,
85-96.
Miles, Matthew and A. Michael Huberman, (1994), Qualitative
Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook, Thousand Oaks,
Calif.: Sage.
Patterson, Maurice and Richard Elliott (2002), “Negotiating
Masculinities: Advertising and the Inversion of the Males
Gaze,” Consumption Markets and Culture, 5:3, 231-246.
Phillips, Barbara (1997), “Thinking into It: Consumer Interpretation of Complex Advertising Images,” Journal of Advertising,
26(2) 77-87.
Pope, Harrison, Katharine Phillips, and Roberto Olivardia
(2000), “The Adonis Complex: The Secret Crisis of Male
Body Image as Seen Through Action Toys,” International
Journal of Eating Disorders, 26(1), 65-72.
Ritson, Mark and Marsha Richins (1991), “Social Comparison
and the Idealized Images of Advertising,” Journal of Consumer Research, 18, 71-83.
Ritson, Mark and Richard Elliot (1999), “The Social Uses of Advertising: An Ethnographic Study of Adolescent Audiences,”
Journal of Consumer Research, 26:3, 260-277.
Schroeder, Jonathan and Detlev Zwick (2004), “Mirrors of Masculinity: Representation and Identity in Advertising Images,”
Consumption, Markets and Culture, 7:1, 21-52.
Stapel, Diederik and Hart Blanton (2007), Social Comparison
Theories, New York: Psychology Press.
Taylor, Shelley and Marci Lobel (1989), “Social Comparison
Activity Under Threat: Downward Evaluation and Upward
Contacts,” Psychological Review, 96:4 569-575.
Wood, Joanne V. (1989), “Theory and Research Concerning
Social Comparisons of Personal Attributes,” Psychological
Bulletin, 106(2), 231-248.