IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/jconrs/v45y2018i1p126-147..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Beauty, Effort, and Misrepresentation: How Beauty Work Affects Judgments of Moral Character and Consumer Preferences

Author

Listed:
  • Adriana Samper
  • Linyun W Yang
  • Michelle E Daniels
  • Eileen FischerEditor
  • Leonard LeeAssociate Editor

Abstract

Women engage in a variety of beauty practices, or “beauty work,” to enhance their physical appearance, such as applying cosmetics, tanning, or exercising. Although the rewards of physical attractiveness are well documented, perceptions of both the women who engage in efforts to enhance their appearance and the high-effort beauty products marketed to them are not well understood. Across seven studies, we demonstrate that consumers judge women who engage in certain types of extensive beauty work as possessing poorer moral character. These judgments occur only for effortful beauty work perceived as transformative (significantly altering appearance) and transient (lasting a relatively short time), such that they emerge within cosmetics and tanning, yet not skincare or exercise. This effect is mediated by the perception that putting high effort into one’s appearance signals a willingness to misrepresent one’s true self, and translates into lower purchase intentions for higher-effort cosmetics. We identify several boundary conditions, including the attractiveness of the woman performing the beauty work and whether the effort is attributed to external norms or causes. In examining how beauty work elicits moral judgments, we also shed light on why effortful cosmetic use is viewed negatively, yet effortful products continue to be commercially successful.

Suggested Citation

  • Adriana Samper & Linyun W Yang & Michelle E Daniels & Eileen FischerEditor & Leonard LeeAssociate Editor, 2018. "Beauty, Effort, and Misrepresentation: How Beauty Work Affects Judgments of Moral Character and Consumer Preferences," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 45(1), pages 126-147.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:jconrs:v:45:y:2018:i:1:p:126-147.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/jcr/ucx116
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Rosanna K. Smith & Elham Yazdani & Pengyuan Wang & Saber Soleymani & Lan Anh N. Ton, 2022. "The cost of looking natural: Why the no-makeup movement may fail to discourage cosmetic use," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 50(2), pages 324-337, March.
    2. Lv, Xingyang & Liang, Yuqing & Luo, Jia & Liu, Yue, 2022. "Icing on the cake or gilding the lily? The impact of high-modified model images on purchase intention," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    3. Du, Ninghua & Song, Fei & Cadsby, C. Bram, 2022. "You cannot judge a book by its cover: Evidence from a laboratory experiment on recognizing generosity from facial information," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 100(C).
    4. Ninghua Du & Fei Song & C. Bram Cadsby, 2020. "You Cannot Judge a Book by Its Cover: Evidence from a Laboratory Experiment on Recognizing Generosity from Facial Information," Working Papers 2007, University of Guelph, Department of Economics and Finance.
    5. Rachel Lau & Brooke Krause, 2022. "Preferences for perceived attractiveness in modern dance," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 46(3), pages 483-517, September.
    6. Uzma Khan & Ajay Kalra, 2022. "It’s Good to Be Different: How Diversity Impacts Judgments of Moral Behavior [Nonprofits Are Seen as Warm and For-Profits as Competent: Firm Stereotypes Matter]," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 49(2), pages 177-201.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:jconrs:v:45:y:2018:i:1:p:126-147.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/jcr .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.