Photo filters not only make you more beautiful, but also smarter and more trustworthy

by time news

On social networks, people want to look attractive and edit their ‌photos with beauty filters. As a study shows, they also acquire inner values. Experts call for ethical guidelines and there will be an age limit in Australia in‌ the future.

A ‍good external appearance attracts people,no matter ​how good or bad the internal values ​​​are. And that’s why beauty filters have a huge impact: When portraits are​ edited ⁢using‌ artificial​ intelligence,the faces depicted appear more ‌attractive to viewers,a recent study shows.

But the ​filters have an even greater effect, ⁤the Spanish researchers found:⁣ the‌ beautified‍ face also makes a person appear much more intelligent, trustworthy, ‌sociable and happier. At least that’s how others​ perceive it, as the British‍ Academy of Sciences now perceives it,”Royal society“, is the name ‌of the published study.

Beauty filters are widespread in the digital world and play an significant role in beauty standards and the perception of beauty today, writes the research team⁤ led by Aditya Gulati and Nuria Oliver from the University of Alicante. For the current one Study The team then presented portraits of 462 men ⁣and women to 2,748 people and rated them on seven characteristics. Test subjects were shown a ⁢version of each of them in selected sets of images: the⁤ original portrait or ‌with a filter.

The information that half of the images had been edited was hidden. And irrespective‍ of their age, gender, ethnicity or personal preferences, almost all viewers found the AI-manipulated faces more attractive. But it also ‍turned out that naturally⁣ lovely people had less ⁣to​ gain from filters then unattractive people.

The age of ​the viewer played a​ role in rating how intelligent, trustworthy and happy a person appeared. In general, young people are perceived as more attractive than‍ middle-aged​ or older people, with and without filters,⁢ as already shown ⁤in ‍previous studies. Thanks to‌ artificial intelligence, younger ‍people now appear even more sociable, while‌ older people are more intelligent and trustworthy.

Because such image changes have a large impact, scientists and psychologists⁤ are critical of their use. The authors of the study note that such manipulations “blur‌ the line between reality and artificiality.” Those ⁤who use such‍ filters frequently enough present​ themselves in an ‍idealized and ⁤unrealistic way. This raises, among othre things, the ⁢question of what is truly authentic about digital self-portrayal. And where honesty remains. The discrepancy between real and filtered images can undermine​ personal⁤ authenticity and contribute to a false sense of ​identity.

“beauty filters feed our sense of⁤ beauty with unrealistically ‍beautified faces, which causes ⁢the prototype to move further and further away⁤ from ⁢real faces,”⁣ says Helmut Leder, professor of ‌general and cognitive psychology at ‍the University⁢ of⁣ Vienna, where he founded the research attention ⁣to ⁤empirical aesthetics in 2004 is justified. “In the long term this means that real faces⁤ are judged to be less and less attractive ⁤and that the standards that a face must meet for a face⁣ to be‌ considered ‌beautiful are almost unrealistically high,” Leder points out.

not only are other faces perceived as less attractive,‌ but also one’s own.“When it comes⁤ to yourself,⁢ this can obviously also have consequences on your self-image,” says Leder. And‌ self-confidence depends on it. The filters coudl also lead to more frequent cosmetic surgery. This is also why Spanish researchers are calling for ‍more transparency and ethical⁤ guidelines for the use of beauty filters. Especially when ​people could be influenced in‍ their decision-making by ⁤images filtered without their ⁢knowledge.

social media could ’cause social harm’

To protect children and young people​ in particular from the influence⁢ of social media, Australian politicians, for example, rely on strict rules. On Wednesday, deputies voted by a⁤ large majority in favor ‍of the bill votedwhich sets a minimum age for the first time: the use of platforms such ‍as facebook, Instagram, X, tiktok and⁤ Snapchat would only be permitted ​from the age of ⁣16; Exceptions are made for gaming and video platforms as well as ⁢messaging services.

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese described Instagram and Co. as a “scourge” ‌and said that social ‌media could “cause social harm”. Before the vote in Parliament, he again promoted the plans and asked parents‍ to support them.⁣ Social media is not ⁤only a “platform for ​peer pressure” but also fuels fears and attracts⁤ scammers.

The new law on the upper age ‌limit was​ approved on Thursday.This⁣ means providers must take⁢ “appropriate measures” to prevent younger children and teenagers under 16 from creating‍ accounts. They ⁢have one year to do so before ‍having to pay million-dollar fines. The adoption was preceded by heated debates.​ The Senate meeting lasted until ⁢just before midnight local time. The decision was made almost⁢ an hour​ before the official end of Australia’s parliamentary year.

The text⁣ was updated on 28 November after the Australian Senate passed the law.

with ‌dpa, AFP and ⁣Reuters

How do beauty filters affect mental health adn self-esteem among social media users?

Title: The Allure of Beauty Filters: an Interview with‌ Dr.⁣ Aditya Gulati

Time.news Editor (TNE): Welcome, Dr. Gulati, and thank you for joining us‌ today! Your recent study on⁤ beauty filters has sparked quite a conversation about their impact ⁣on societal perceptions.Let’s dive right in. Can you share what motivated you and⁤ your team to conduct this‍ research?

Dr. Aditya Gulati (AG): Thank you for having me! Our motivation stemmed ‍from the increasing prevalence of beauty filters on social media and the pervasive culture⁣ of appearance-focused judgments. we wanted to understand how these filters not only change perceptions of attractiveness but also how they ⁢affect perceptions of intelligence and trustworthiness.

TNE: That’s captivating. Your study included over 2,700 participants evaluating images of nearly 500 individuals—what were some of the key findings that surprised you the most?

AG: One of the most surprising results was the extent to which ⁣AI-altered faces were perceived as more intelligent and trustworthy across most demographics. Irrespective of the viewers’ backgrounds, altered images⁤ consistently received higher ratings in these ⁤characteristics. It ⁣challenged our assumptions about how ⁤far appearance⁤ can influence deeper judgments about a person’s qualities.

TNE: It​ seems that beauty filters do more than just enhance appearance! How do these findings relate to⁣ the current beauty standards that⁣ dominate social media ⁣platforms?

AG: Absolutely. Our findings ⁣imply that beauty filters risk setting⁢ an unrealistic ⁤standard for attractiveness. When individuals rely heavily on these tools, they may ⁣unwittingly promote an ideal that is unattainable for the majority. This ⁤can⁣ lead to a cycle were people ⁤feel pressured to conform to a digital version of beauty—a phenomenon especially pronounced among younger users.

TNE: Given these⁤ notable implications, it seems crucial to discuss the ethical considerations surrounding the use of beauty filters. Can you elaborate on the calls for ethical guidelines you mentioned in your research?

AG: yes, there’s a growing consensus among psychologists and scientists that ethical guidelines are necessary to mitigate the⁣ negative impacts of beauty filters. These ‌could include age restrictions on filter usage, transparency ‍about which images have ⁤been altered, and fostering media literacy among young users. Ultimately,we must strive to maintain a clear ⁤distinction between our ⁢digital selves and reality.

TNE: Speaking of age restrictions, you mentioned potential changes‌ in legislation, such as an age ⁤limit for⁢ using these filters in ⁣Australia. How might such regulations impact the use of beauty filters globally?

AG: Implementing age restrictions could serve ‍as a precedent⁢ for othre countries. It could encourage discussions around the ⁤mental health⁣ effects of beauty standards and lead ⁤to similar measures elsewhere. While cultural contexts vary, establishing guidelines ⁣could empower younger users to develop a healthier ⁣relationship with their ⁣online identities.

TNE: As we navigate an increasingly digital​ world, it’s vital to address these issues. What practical steps can individuals take to cultivate a positive self-image despite the allure of filters?

AG: Individuals ​can ⁤start by being mindful of their‍ media consumption and the impact it⁣ has on​ their self-esteem. Engaging⁤ with unfiltered content, promoting authenticity, and supporting campaigns that celebrate natural beauty can also be empowering. Social media platforms can play a key role by making‌ algorithmic shifts that ‍prioritize diverse representations of beauty over filtered images.

TNE: Dr. ⁤gulati, ‌thank you for your insights.This⁤ discussion opens the⁢ door to broader⁢ conversations about identity, ethics, and mental health in the digital ⁣age. We appreciate your time and expertise!

AG: Thank you! It’s been a pleasure talking about these critically important issues. I hope we can continue to find solutions that encourage authenticity​ in our online interactions.

You may also like

Leave a Comment