Abstract
Instagram serves as a powerful instrument for youth socialization, self-expression, and self-performance in visual online spaces. Using social semiotics and multimodal discourse analysis, this study examines the potential ideological meanings and implications of selfie-shooting and sharing on Instagram on young adults’ self-concept. A corpus of 110 questionnaires, including almost 85 captioned selfies, was surveyed as multimodal utterances. In doing so, this study argues that selfies can create young adults’ split-selves while constructing their multiple personas in visual online spaces. This marks the significance of viewing selfie-creators not only as authors of their selfies, but rather as viewers of a three-fold self: an ideal-self, a projected-self, and an internal-self, to negotiate social and power relationships, while (re)positioning observer-observed roles. This study claims originality in unraveling how young adults use visual and textual mediated communication to represent and perform their split-selves. It suggests that selfie-shooting-sharing has become a key self-performance tactic and behavior in online cultures. Therefore, young adults deploy selfies and captions to posit a redefinition of certain social values, such as aesthetics and freedom, while deploying their selfies and captions. Challenging certain orthodox social allegiances, they conceive wildness, messiness, and exuberance as emerging neo-aesthetics components of appeal. This study contributes to the literature on personal visual communication with insights on how Egyptian young adults perform their self-concept via the semiotic practice of selfie-shooting-sharing.
Research funding: The author received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Conflict of interest statement: The author declare no potential conflicts of interest concerning the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
References
Alhabash, Saleem & Mengyan Ma. 2017. A tale of four platforms: Motivations and uses of Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and Snapchat among college students? Social Media + Society 3(1). 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305117691544.Search in Google Scholar
Avedissian, Karena. 2016. Clerics, weightlifters, and politicians: Ramzan Kadyrov’s Instagram as an official project of Chechen memory and identity production. Caucasus Survey 4(1). 20–43. https://doi.org/10.1080/23761199.2015.1119998.Search in Google Scholar
Barthes, Roland. 1977. Image, music, text. London: Fontana.Search in Google Scholar
Barthes, Roland. 1977 [1961]. The photographic message. Image, music, text, 15–31. New York: Hill and Wang.Search in Google Scholar
Barthes, Roland. 1977 [1964]. Rhetoric of the image. Image, music, text, 32–51. New York: Hill and Wang.Search in Google Scholar
Barthes, Roland. 1980/2008. A Câmara Clara: Nota sobre a Fotografia. Lisboa: Edições.Search in Google Scholar
Bazarova, Natalya & Yoon Hyung Choi. 2014. Self-disclosure in social media: Extending functional approach to disclosure motivations and characteristics on social network sites. Journal of Communication 64(1). 635–657. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12106.Search in Google Scholar
Biolcati, Roberta & Stefano Passini. 2018. Narcissism and self-esteem: Different motivations for selfie posting behaviors. Cogent Psychology 5(1). 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311908.2018.1437012.Search in Google Scholar
Bouvier, Gwen. 2012. How Facebook users select identity categories for self-presentation. Journal of Multicultural Discourses 7(1). 37–57. https://doi.org/10.1080/17447143.2011.652781.Search in Google Scholar
Caldeira, Sofia. 2016. Identities in flux: An analysis to photographic self-representation on Instagram. Observatorio (OBS*) 10(3). 135–158. https://doi.org/10.15847/obsobs10320161031.Search in Google Scholar
Chandler, Lisa & Debra Livingston. 2016. Reframing the authentic: Photography, mobile technologies and the visual language of digital imperfection. In Michael Heitkemper-Yates & Katarzyna Kaczmarczyk (eds.), Learning to see: The meanings, modes and methods of visual literacy, 227–245. Queensland: Brill, University of the Sunshine Coast.10.1163/9781848883024_019Search in Google Scholar
Coleman, Rebecca. 2009. The becoming of bodies: Girls, images, experience. Manchester: Manchester University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Cooley, Charles Horton. 1902. The looking-glass self, 179–185. In Human nature and the social order. New York: Scribner’s.10.32376/3f8575cb.73d69f51Search in Google Scholar
Eckel, Julia, Jens Ruchatz & Sabine Wirth. 2018. The selfie as image (and) practice: Approaching digital self-photography. In Julia Eckel, Jens Ruchatz & Sabine Wirth (eds.), Exploring the selfie: Historical, theoretical, and analytical approaches to digital self-photography, 1–23. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan.10.1007/978-3-319-57949-8_1Search in Google Scholar
Eisenlauer, Volker. 2013. A critical hypertext analysis of social media: The true colors of Facebook. Bloomsbury, London: A & C Black.Search in Google Scholar
Eler, Alicia. 2013. Take a good look at your selfie. Hyperallergic [Blog post]. Available at: http://hyperallergic.com/73389/take-a-good-look-at-yourselfie/.Search in Google Scholar
Elinzano, Maureen Grace. 2018. But first let me take a selfie: A content analysis of female and male celebrity selfie on Instagram. Provo, USA: Brigham Young University, Communications Field Master’s thesis.Search in Google Scholar
Emmott, Catherine. 2002. “Split selves” in fiction and in medical “life stories”. Cognitive linguistic theory and narrative practice. In Elena Semino & Jonathan Culpeper (eds.), Cognitive stylistics: Language and cognition in text analysis, 333. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing.10.4324/9781003060789-27Search in Google Scholar
Enli, Gunn Sara & Nancy Thumim. 2012. Socializing and self-representation online: Exploring Facebook. Observatorio (OBS*) 6(1). 87–105.Search in Google Scholar
Fairclough, Norman. 2003. Analyzing discourse: Textual analysis for social research. London and New York: Routledge.10.4324/9780203697078Search in Google Scholar
Feng, Dezheng & Kay O’Halloran. 2013. The visual representation of metaphor: A social semiotic approach. Review of Cognitive Linguistics. Published under the auspices of the Spanish Cognitive Linguistics Association 11(2). 320–335. https://doi.org/10.1075/rcl.11.2.07fen.Search in Google Scholar
Gill, Rosalind. 2008. Empowerment/sexism: Figuring female sexual agency in contemporary advertising. Feminism & Psychology 18(1). 35–60. https://doi.org/10.1177/0959353507084950.Search in Google Scholar
Goffman, Erving. 1959. The presentation of self in everyday life. New York: Doubleday-Anchor.Search in Google Scholar
Gosling, Samuel, Sei Jin Ko, Thomas Mannarelli & Margaret Morris. 2002. A room with a cue: Personality judgments based on offices and bedrooms. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 82(3). 379–398. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.82.3.379.Search in Google Scholar
Güdekli, İ. Ayşad & Nur Cemelelioglu Altın. 2018. Selfie motivations of generation Y in Turkey within visual sharing culture context. Uluslararası Kültürel ve Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi (UKSAD) 4(1). 304–325.Search in Google Scholar
Halliday, Michael Alexander Kirkwood. 1978. Language as social semiotic: The sociological interpretation of language and meaning. London: Edward Arnold.Search in Google Scholar
Hirdman, Anja. 2010. Vision and intimacy: Gendered communication online. Nordicom Review 31(1). 3–13. https://doi.org/10.1515/nor-2017-0117.Search in Google Scholar
Hochman, Nadav & Lev Manovich. 2013. Zooming into an Instagram city: Reading the local through social media. First Monday 18(7).10.5210/fm.v18i7.4711Search in Google Scholar
Hong, Seoyeon, Mi Jahng, Namyeon Lee & Kevin Wise. 2020. Do you filter who you are?: Excessive self-presentation, social cues, and user evaluations of Instagram selfies. Computers in Human Behavior 104. 106–159. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.106159.Search in Google Scholar
Instagram. 2019. Instagram statistics. Available at: http://instagram.com/press/.Search in Google Scholar
Jewitt, Carey & Rumiko Oyama. 2001. Visual meaning: A social semiotic approach. In Theo Van Leeuwen & Carey Jewitt (eds.), The handbook of visual analysis, 134–156. London: SAGE.10.4135/9780857020062.n7Search in Google Scholar
Kedzior, Richard, Douglas Allen & Jonathan Schroeder. 2016. The selfie phenomenon – consumer identities in the social media marketplace. European Journal of Marketing 50(10). 1767–1772. https://doi.org/10.1108/ejm-06-2016-0363.Search in Google Scholar
Kress, Gunther. 2000. Multimodality: Challenges to thinking about language. TESOL Quarterly 34(2). 337–340. https://doi.org/10.2307/3587959.Search in Google Scholar
Kress, Gunther. 2010. Multimodality: A social semiotic approach to contemporary communication. London: Routledge.Search in Google Scholar
Kress, Gunther & Theo Van Leeuwen. 2001. Multimodal discourse: The modes and media of contemporary communication. London: Edward Arnold.Search in Google Scholar
Kress, Gunther & Theo Van Leeuwen. 2006. Reading images: The grammar of visual design, 2nd ed. London: Routledge.10.4324/9780203619728Search in Google Scholar
Liu, Jing. 2013. Visual images interpretive strategies in multimodal texts. Journal of Language Teaching and Research 4(6). 1259–1263. https://doi.org/10.4304/jltr.4.6.1259-1263.Search in Google Scholar
Lüders, Marika, Lin Prøitz & Terje Rasmussen. 2010. Emerging personal media genres. New Media & Society 12(6). 947–963. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444809352203.Search in Google Scholar
Machin, David. 2004. Building the world’s visual language: The increasing global importance of image banks in corporate media. Visual Communication 3(3). 316–336. https://doi.org/10.1177/1470357204045785.Search in Google Scholar
Machin, David. 2011. Introduction to multimodal analysis. London: Bloomsbury Academic.Search in Google Scholar
Machin, David. 2016. The need for a social and affordance-driven multimodal critical discourse studies. Discourse & Society 27(3). 322–334. https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926516630903.Search in Google Scholar
Machin, David & Theo Van Leeuwen. 2007. Global media discourse: A critical introduction. London and New York: Routledge.10.4324/9780203007471Search in Google Scholar
Macken-Horarik, Mary. 2004. Interacting with the multimodal text: Reflections on image and verbiage in art express. Visual Communication 3(1). 5–26. https://doi.org/10.1177/1470357204039596.Search in Google Scholar
Manovich, Lev. 2017. Instagram and contemporary image Publication: http://lab.culturalanalytics.info/p/publications.html. Available at: http://manovich.net/index.php/projects/instagram-and-contemporary-image.Search in Google Scholar
Mendelson, Andrew & Zizi Papacharissi. 2011. Look at us: Collective narcissism in college student facebook photo galleries. In Zizi Papacharissi (ed.), A networked self identity, community, and culture on social network sites. New York and London: Routledge.Search in Google Scholar
Musse, Mariana Ferraz. 2016. Photography on Instagram: Self-representation, identities and new ways of sociability. Barcelona, Spain: Pompeu Fabra University Unpublished PhD thesis.Search in Google Scholar
Naumann, Laura, Simine Vazire, Peter Rentfrow & Samuel Gosling. 2009. Personality judgments based on physical appearance. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 35(12). 1661–1671. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167209346309.Search in Google Scholar
Nesvadba, Noe. 2017. The presentation of self in the digital world: Goffman and the study of women’s self portrayal on Instagram through selfies. UK: University of Loughborough Unpublished master’s thesis in Digital Media and Society.Search in Google Scholar
Nir, Claudi. 2012. Identity construction on Facebook. Dun Laoghaire, Ireland: The Institute of Art, Design, and Technology, Dun Laoghaire School of Creative Arts Doctoral dissertation.Search in Google Scholar
Psychology and Mental Health. 2018. What is psychological splitting and how you may be using it without even knowing. Available at: https://www.learning-mind.com/psychological-splitting/.Search in Google Scholar
Pew Research Centre. 2019. Social media factsheet. https://www.pewinternet.org/fact-sheet/social-media/ (accessed 31 April 2019).Search in Google Scholar
Qiu, Lin, Jiahui Lu, Shanshan Yang, Weina Qu & Tingshao Zhu. 2015. What does your selfie say about you? Computers in Human Behavior 52(1). 443–449. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.06.032.Search in Google Scholar
Rettberg, Jill. 2014. Seeing ourselves through technology: How we use selfies, blogs, and wearable devices to see and shape ourselves. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.10.1057/9781137476661Search in Google Scholar
Ritchie, Jane & Liz Spencer. 1994. Qualitative data analysis for applied policy research. In Alan Bryman & Robert G. Burgess (eds.), Analyzing qualitative data, 173–194. London: Routledge.10.4324/9780203413081_chapter_9Search in Google Scholar
Sacks, Harvey. 1992. Lectures on conversation (Vol I & II). Oxford, UK: Blackwell.Search in Google Scholar
Salim, Frensen, Wahyu Rahardjo, Titah Tanaya & Rahmah Qurani. 2017. Are self-presentation of Instagram users influenced by friendship-contingent self-esteem and fear of missing out. Makara Hubs Asia 21. 70–82. https://doi.org/10.7454/mssh.v21i2.3502.Search in Google Scholar
Selfie. 2013. In oxforddictionaries.com. http://www.oxforddictionaries.com (accessed March 2019).Search in Google Scholar
Schwarz, Ori. 2010. On friendship, boobs and the logic of the cataloge: Online self-portraits as a means for the exchange of capital. Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies 16(2). 163–183. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354856509357582.Search in Google Scholar
Serafinelli, Elisa. 2018. Digital life on Instagram: New social communication of photography. Emerald.10.1108/9781787564954Search in Google Scholar
Serafini, Frank. 2012. Reading multimodal texts in the 21st century. Research in the Schools 19(1). 26–32.Search in Google Scholar
Shapiro, Michael. 1988. The politics of representation: Writing practices in biography, photography, and policy analysis. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.Search in Google Scholar
Sorokowski, Piotr, Agnieszka Sorokowska, Anna Oleskiewicz, Tomasz Frackowiak, Anna Huk & Katarzyna Pisanski. 2015. Selfie posting behaviors are associated with narcissism among men. Personality and Individual Differences 85(1). 123–127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2015.05.004.Search in Google Scholar
Stern, Susannah. 2008. Producing sites, exploring identities: Youth online authorship. In David Buckingham (ed.), Youth, identity, and digital media. Cambridge: The MIT Press.Search in Google Scholar
Stokes, Jennifer & Bianca Price. 2017. Social media, visual culture and contemporary identity. Proceedings of the 11th international multi-conference on society, cybernetics and informatics (IMSCI 2017). South Australia, Australia: UniSA College, University of South Australia Adelaide.Search in Google Scholar
Szurawitzki, Michael. 2012. How to analyze the language of social networking sites – an analysis model. In The proceedings of the 24th Scandinavian conference of linguistics, 355–363.Search in Google Scholar
Tap, Pierre & Florence Sordes-Ader. 2012. Soi, identités et adaptation. In Cyril Tarquinio & Elisabeth Spitz (eds.), Psychologie de l’adaptation, 145–172. Bruxelles: De Boeck.Search in Google Scholar
Tajfel, Henri & John Turner. 1986. The social identity theory of intergroup behavior. In Stephen Worchel & William G. Austin (eds.), Psychology of intergroup relations. Chicago: Nelson-Hall.10.4324/9780203505984-16Search in Google Scholar
Tifentale, Alise & Lev Manovich. 2015. Selfiecity: Exploring photography and self-fashioning in social media. In David Berry & Michael Dieter (eds.), Postdigital aesthetics, 109–122. London: Palgrave Macmillan.10.1057/9781137437204_9Search in Google Scholar
Tiidenberg, Katrin. 2018. Selfies: Why we love (and hate) them. UK: Emerald Publishing Limited.10.1108/9781787543577Search in Google Scholar
Tiidenberg, Katrin & Edgar Gómez Cruz. 2015. Selfies, image and the re-making of the body. Body & Society 21(4). 77–102. https://doi.org/10.1177/1357034x15592465.Search in Google Scholar
Van Dijck, José. 2008. Digital photography: Communication, identity, memory. Visual Communication 7(1). 57–76. https://doi.org/10.1177/1470357207084865.Search in Google Scholar
Van Leeuwen, Theo. 2013. Critical analysis of multimodal discourse. In Carol A. Chapelle (ed.), The encyclopedia of applied linguistics, 1–5. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.10.1002/9781405198431.wbeal0269Search in Google Scholar
Verdina, Zane. 2013. A Picture is Worth a Thousand Words: Storytelling with Instagram. Antwerp, Belgium: Universiteit Antwerpen Unpublished master’s thesis in Communicatiewetenschappen Strategische Communicatie.Search in Google Scholar
Veum, Aslaug & Linda Victoria Moland Undrum. 2018. The selfie as a global discourse. Discourse & Society 29(1). 86–103. https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926517725979.Search in Google Scholar
Wadjih, Dima. 2015. Self-representation Instagram, identity, and memory. The Medium Communications Journal 2.Search in Google Scholar
Weber, Sandra & Mitchell, Claudia. 2008. Imaging, keyboarding, and posting identities: Young people and new media technologies. In David Buckingham (ed.), Youth, identity, and digital media, 25–48. Cambridge: The MIT Press.Search in Google Scholar
Williamson, Patricia, Trey Stohlman & Heather Polinsky. 2017. Me, my selfie and I: A survey of self-disclosure motivations on social media. IAFOR Journal of Cultural Studies 2(2). 71–85. https://doi.org/10.22492/ijcs.2.2.05.Search in Google Scholar
Zappavigna, Michele & Sumin Zhao. 2017. Selfies in ‘mommyblogging’: An emerging visual genre. Discourse, Context & Media 20. 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dcm.2017.05.005.Search in Google Scholar
Zhao, Sumin & Michele Zappavigna. 2018a. The interplay of (semiotic) technologies and genre: The case of the selfie. Social Semiotics 28(5). 665–682. https://doi.org/10.1080/10350330.2018.1504724.Search in Google Scholar
Zhao, Sumin & Michele Zappavigna. 2018b. Beyond the self: Intersubjectivity and the social semiotic interpretation of the selfie. New Media & Society 20(5). 1735–1754.10.1177/1461444817706074Search in Google Scholar
© 2021 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
