Using a Photo-Elicitation Procedure to Examine Consumers’ Motivations to Post Visual Brand-Related User-Generated Content

Abstract

The recent popularity of visual social media has seen a parallel increase in the amount of visual brand-related user-generated content (Br-UGC). This brand-related content created by consumers can have a significant influence on brand outcomes. Yet little is known about why consumers post visual Br-UGC. Current research examines consumers’ motivations to post visual Br-UGC by departing from research on textual Br-UGC and research on visual content posting on Instagram. Moreover, we compare motivations to post branded selfies (e.g., pictures that feature the brand and the social media user together) to motivations to post other visual Br-UGC. Photo-elicitation interviews with 30 (M_age = 21.77, SD_age = 2.71, 83.3% women) participants revealed that consumers use brands as subtle cues to express their (ideal) online identities. Notably, this finding is present for both branded selfies as well as pictures without a person present. Other important motivations include social interaction, aesthetics (i.e., whether the picture is beautiful), and empowerment. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.

Keywords:

• Instagram
• photo elicitation
• uses and gratifications
• visual Br-UGC

With more than 1 billion users worldwide, Instagram is one of the most popular social network sites of this time (Instagram 2023). Users upload 100 million new pictures and videos to the platform every day (Omnicore Agency 2020), sharing their daily lives and experiences. Because of this popularity, Instagram is developing into an important player in the marketing field (Gensler et al. 2013). Recently, it was found that 60% of Instagram users say they discover new products on Instagram (Instagram 2023). There are various ways to encounter brands on Instagram, for example, by advertisements that are displayed in the app (Instagram 2023) or by following influencers, who are paid to advertise products in their posts (De Veirman, Cauberghe, and Hudders 2017). However, a third and underexamined form of brand representation on Instagram is content posted by consumers: visual brand-related user-generated content (Br-UGC).

Posting visual Br-UGC entails consumers of a product sharing online their experiences with or opinions on a brand via pictures on social media (Kim and Johnson 2016). This information, provided by fellow consumers, can influence consumer responses such as brand attitude and purchase intention even more than marketer-generated content (MGC), as Br-UGC is considered by consumers to be more trustworthy than MGC (Goh, Heng, and Lin 2013; Mayrhofer et al. 2020). A common type of visual Br-UGC is a branded selfie, where consumers depict themselves together with the brand (Hartmann et al. 2021). This type of content is of special interest as it allows viewers to judge the facial expressions of the selfie subjects. Seeing an individual pictured appearing happy with a product can in turn influence the viewers’ own perceptions of the brand (Nanne, Antheunis, and Van Noort 2021). Because of the beneficial effects that characterize Br-UGC, advertisers are eager to activate consumers to post branded selfies. When advertisers know what motivates consumers to create this specific content type, they can specifically adjust their campaigns to address these motivations and consequently maximize advertising outcomes. Yet little is known about consumers’ underlying motivations to post visual Br-UGC.

To examine consumers’ motivations to post visual Br-UGC, two lines of research can be identified. On one hand, there is a line of research on consumers’ motivations to post Br-UGC on nonvisual platforms, such as through online reviews (e.g., Buzeta, De Pelsmacker, and Dens 2020; Muntinga, Moorman, and Smit 2011). On the other hand, there is a line of research on motivations to post regular visual content, for example, a selfie (e.g., Daxböck et al. 2021; Sung et al. 2016). Both lines of research depart from uses and gratifications theory (UGT; Katz, Blumler, and Gurevitch 1974), yet the gratifications that are sought in nonvisual Br-UGC and visual social media platforms are expected to be different because of the different nature of the media outlets. Specifically, posting nonvisual Br-UGC is often more brand focused, whereas posting regular content to visual social media platforms is often more self-focused.

The current research departs from both research streams examining motivations to post nonvisual Br-UGC and motivations to post nonbranded visual content to examine the underlying motivations that drive the posting of visual Br-UGC and how these differ from motivations to post nonbranded visual content. Moreover, this research examines consumers’ motivations to post branded selfies, because this specific content type can yield even more persuasive effects (Nanne, Antheunis, and Van Noort 2021). Results can extend the applicability of UGT to posting visual Br-UGC by verifying which motivations are still applicable and identifying possible new motivations in this context. Moreover, advertisers can use these insights to design UGC campaigns more effectively, by designing their campaigns in such a way that they align with the motives of users and hence stimulate consumers to post visual Br-UGC, which will likely result in advertisers gaining more insight into the role visual Br-UGC plays in shaping their brand image.

Theoretical Framework

Uses and Gratifications

According to UGT consumers have specific needs that they want to fulfill by using media and choose the medium that is most suitable to gratify their needs (Katz, Blumler, and Gurevitch 1974). For example, someone who wants to find information about a recent event turns to the news, whereas someone who wants to relax after a long day turns to an entertaining television show. UGT hence considers users active and goal oriented in their media usage (Katz, Blumler, and Gurevitch 1974): They actively choose media to gratify their needs. Though the original UGT was criticized because it did not include concrete definitions of the central concepts in the theory (i.e., what exactly are uses and gratifications; Rubin 2009), UGT has proved a relevant framework for many media motivation studies conducted over the years (Lazarsfeld 1940; McQuail, Blumler, and Brown 1972). Most influential in this respect is the classification of McQuail (1983) who further strengthened its central concepts by identifying four basic motivations for media usage: personal identity, entertainment, social interaction and integration, and information.

Personal identity refers to motivations in which the self is central, for example, when consumers want to learn something about themselves. Entertainment is focused on passing time and having fun. The category social interaction and integration centralizes contact with other people. Finally, information is focused on staying up to date and receiving information about the environment (McQuail 1983).

These motivations were formulated in a time when social media did not yet exist, but they are still a popular framework to guide social media and advertising research today (e.g., Dolan et al. 2016; Kamboj 2019; Mejía-Trejo 2021). However, with the rise of social media, the kinds of media that users can choose to gratify their needs have greatly expanded. In the current media landscape, users can choose not only to turn to traditional media outlets but also to scroll through Instagram or to make a TikTok video to gratify their needs. Because of these new possibilities, the gratifications that people aim to obtain through social media use might be different compared to gratifications recognized from traditional media use. This research therefore aims to gain deeper insights into UGT in the context of social media use.

Consumers’ Motivations to Post Visual Br-UGC

As opposed to more traditional media such as television or radio, social media allow users not only to consume content but also to post content (Muntinga, Moorman, and Smit 2011). Posting to social media allows consumers to create their own content and share this self-created content with other consumers. It is considered the most active form of social media use above consuming (i.e., merely reading or watching content) and contributing (i.e., reacting to content posted by others; Muntinga, Moorman, and Smit 2011). The kind of gratifications sought with this active form of social media use might differ from gratifications sought in traditional media outlets or might be driven by different submotivations. For example, consumers can post to social media to voice their opinions or to share information with other people instead of merely seeking information.

Moreover, consumers can use social media to post about brands (e.g., Muntinga, Moorman, and Smit 2011; McLaughlin and Haverila 2023; Pelletier et al. 2020). In terms of UGT, the posting of branded content to social media can be used to obtain various gratifications. For example, through the posting of visual Br-UGC consumers might be able to express their personal identities or interact with other people about the brand. In addition, the possibility of posting about brands puts consumers in an active role in the media field, being able to provide feedback directly to a brand or advertiser (Gensler et al. 2013), which opens up new possibilities to get in touch with the brand.

In the literature, we distinguish two lines of research that apply UGT to posting content to social media. The first research line focuses on the use of social media to post nonbranded content to visual social media platforms, such as Instagram (e.g., Sung et al. 2016). The second research line focuses on posting branded written content, such as blogs or reviews (e.g., Muntinga, Moorman, and Smit 2011). We use both research lines as starting points to examine the motivations to post visual Br-UGC.

Motivations to Post Nonbranded Visual Content to Social Media

In line with traditional UGT research, entertainment and social interaction and integration are frequent uses that people aim to gratify by posting nonbranded visual content to social media (Alhabash and Ma 2017; Jun 2022). However, in posting visual content to social media, some new motivations also have been identified in addition to the four motivations of McQuail (1983). A common motivation for posting pictures to Instagram is self-expression (Lee et al. 2015). Individuals use visual social media as a platform to show the world who they are and to shape their online identities. A second important reason for users to share their lives online is to use the posts as keepsakes for themselves (i.e., archiving; Sung et al. 2016). They use the platforms like an online photo album—mainly to look back at themselves rather than for others to see (Sung et al. 2016).

Motivation to Post Br-UGC to Nonvisual Platforms

Next to posting nonbranded content to Instagram there is also research focusing on posting brand-related content to nonvisual platforms such as X, formerly known as Twitter (e.g., Muntinga, Moorman, and Smit 2011). The gratifications sought when posting written branded social media content are different from visual social media content because visual social media platforms such as Instagram may be driven by more self-centered motivations than other platforms (Daxböck et al. 2021). This is because the visual nature of the platform offers more options for showing the world who the users are (e.g., by posting photos of themselves) than written content outlets. For nonvisual branded content, personal identity can still be a motivation, but this is mostly focused on identity in relation to the brand (Muntinga, Moorman, and Smit 2011). The motivations are therefore more brand centered. Next to motivations that were previously identified in traditional UGT research (McQuail 1983), Muntinga, Moorman, and Smit (2011) identified two new motivations for posting branded social media content: empowerment and remuneration.

Consumers motivated by empowerment use social media to have a voice and influence other people or companies (Muntinga, Moorman, and Smit 2011), for example, by telling other consumers which products to buy. Consumers even consider this a form of altruism: They post information about brands to provide a service to other people (Yen and Tang 2015).

A second motivation that people can have to post Br-UGC is remuneration (Muntinga, Moorman, and Smit 2011). According to this motivation, people post content to gain incentives (e.g., winning a prize).

Formulating Research Questions

When comparing the previously identified motivations for the posting of brand-related content in nonvisual platforms (e.g., Muntinga, Moorman, and Smit 2011) and the motivations for the creation of visual nonbranded content to social media (e.g., Sung et al. 2016) we conclude that motivations to post content on visual platforms tend to be more self-centered. This raises the question whether brand-related visual pictures are also posted for self-centered reasons or whether brand-related reasons such as empowerment also play a role in this process. Moreover, there may be new motivations for this type of content that have not been identified previously. The first and second research questions read:

RQ1: Which motivations do consumers have to post visual Br-UGC?

RQ2: Do motivations consumers have to post visual Br-UGC differ from motivations to post visual nonbranded content?

Consumers’ Motivations to Post Branded Selfies

Gaining insight into the motivations consumers have when posting visual Br-UGC is especially relevant for a specific kind of visual Br-UGC: the branded selfie. Selfies serve as an important form of online self-presentation (Bij de Vaate et al. 2018). People use selfies to express who they are, to find their place in online communities, and to remember experiences (Etgar and Amichai-Hamburger 2017). Moreover, because an individual has full control over which pictures appear online and how these pictures look (e.g., by using filters) selfies are an effective way to shape online identities (Fox and Vendemia 2016). Because of this focus on self-presentation, we argue that motivations to post selfies might be even more self-centered than motivations to create other types of pictures. When taking a selfie, consumers may be more focused on how they come across personally without thinking about brands that may be visible in the picture.

Even though brands might not be the point of interest in branded selfies, this type of picture can have an important influence on what other consumers think about a brand. Photos with faces in them automatically draw attention (Young and Bruce 2011). Moreover, the facial expression of the person in the picture can be interpreted as information about the brand via the spillover effect (Howard and Gengler 2001). For example, when someone looks very happy with a product, viewers can attribute this happiness to the brand that is being portrayed and may adjust their own brand attitude accordingly.

As these branded selfies can have bigger consequences for the brand than other visual Br-UGC types, it is important to know if motivations to post branded selfies are different from brand-only pictures:

RQ3: Do motivations consumers have to post branded selfies differ from motivations to post brand-only pictures?

Materials and Methods

Design

To examine consumers’ motivations to post visual Br-UGC we conducted semistructured interviews among frequent posters of visual Br-UGC using a photo-elicitation procedure (Harper 1986). With photo elicitation, interviewer and interviewee talk jointly about the pictures that the interviewee created (Harper 1986), which helps participants remember information (Bates et al. 2017). The interviews were conducted by three researchers. A training session with all interviewers ensured that each interviewer used the same strategy. The research ethics and data management committee of Tilburg School of Humanities and Digital Sciences approved this research (EDC #2020/058).

Pilot Study

Before the interviews, we conducted a pilot study among students via the university’s participant pool (N = 13, M = 20.15, SD = 2.38, 76.9% women) to fine-tune the interviewing guide and procedure. Because of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, the interviews took place in an online setting via the chat function in Zoom (2023). Despite the online nature, the pilot study helped to finalize the interviewing guide by revealing some missing questions and unnecessary overlap among questions. Yet in the online setting we noticed that participants were inclined to provide shorter answers to our questions, because typing takes more effort than talking (Antheunis et al. 2012). Therefore, we decided to conduct the actual interviews in a face-to-face setting.

Participants

Participants were gathered through the participant pool of the university. Students with an Instagram account who has posted a brand-related picture at least once in the past year were eligible to participate. Based on previous research (Hennink, Kaiser, and Marconi 2017; Muntinga, Moorman, and Smit 2011), we expected that 25 interviews would be sufficient to capture the different motivations. After conducting 25 interviews, we indeed had the impression that the number of new motivations mentioned by participants was minimal. To make sure that data saturation was achieved, we conducted five additional interviews, during which no new motivations were identified; we determined that saturation had been reached. With these 30 participants (M_age = 21.77, SD_age = 2.71, 83.3% women) we discussed 103 pictures, of which 59 were branded selfies (57%), 15 were brand-only pictures (15%), and 29 were nonbranded pictures (28%). Even though the distribution of the picture types is skewed, we are confident that we reached saturation for all picture types, because no new motivations emerged in the final five interviews for any of the picture types. An overview of the product categories we discussed can be found in Table 1.

Table 1. Overview of product categories discussed.

Product Category	Examples of Brands	Count: Brand Only	Count: Branded Selfies
Bags and accessories	Ideal of Sweden, Furla, CLUSE, Prada	2	15
Books and magazines	Jan Magazine	1	0
Cars and transportation	Fiat 500, KLM	0	2
Charity	College on Wheels	1	0
Events and leisure	Wish Outdoor Festival, Walibi Holland	0	3
Fashion	Tommy Hilfiger, Scotch & Soda, SHEIN	0	18
Food and drinks	Heineken, Fentimans, LIDL	2	12
Footwear	Asics, Dr. Martens, New Balance	3	4
Furniture	Tylko	1	0
Media	BredaNu, NPO	0	2
Music	Yamaha	0	1
Services	Repay	0	1
Sports	DMF Dance Company	1	0
Technology and appliances	Apple, Quooker, IKEA	3	0
Travel	Algarve Surf Hostel, Hihahut	1	1
Total		15	59

Note. The third picture type (nonbranded selfie) was not included in Table 1 because these pictures did not contain any brands.

Procedure

The interviews took place in a face-to-face setting in a room at the university. Before the interview, participants filled out a survey in which they gave informed consent and answered general questions about demographics and Instagram usage. All interviews were structured with an interview guide, which broadly outlined the topics that we wanted to cover (see Supplemental Online Appendix A). Because we use a semistructured interview procedure, the exact questions differed per individual participant. The first part of the interview covered Instagram use in general and brand-related Instagram use (e.g., “Do you follow brand pages?”).

After this first part, the photo-elicitation procedure started. In this part, the interviewer and interviewee discussed pictures the interviewee had posted to the platform. The pictures that were discussed were chosen by the interviewer. The interviewer selected the most recent pictures that fell into one of three categories (i.e., branded selfie, brand only, nonbranded; see Figure 1 for an example of each category) up to a maximum of four pictures.¹ The number of pictures depended on how many relevant pictures were present in the Instagram profile and how much time was left in the interview (the interviews lasted one hour maximum). Pictures discussed had to be less than one year old to make sure people still remembered posting them. For each picture, the underlying motivations are discussed. Participants received a course credit for participation.

Figure 1. An example of each category: Branded selfie, brand only, nonbranded content.

Analysis

To analyze the data, we used a thematic coding procedure following the step-by-step approach of Braun and Clarke (2006) to ensure validity and reliability. This method is frequently used in qualitative advertising and social media research (e.g., Keegan and Rowley 2017; Munsch 2021). In the first step, we transcribed the recorded interviews completely and read them for the first time. Second, we identified relevant phrases in the data and assigned initial codes. After this first analysis, we combined the initial codes into overarching themes. Before we assigned a new theme, we looked to see whether the contents could fit any of the motivations that were identified in previous research (e.g., Muntinga, Moorman, and Smit 2011; Sung et al. 2016; see Supplemental Online Appendix B). After identifying the themes, we read the data again to see whether the themes indeed matched the content of the interviews. During this review procedure, some themes were altered in name to better match the content, combined with another theme, or extracted from an overarching theme. The initial coding was done by one coauthor, but all codes and themes were discussed among all three coauthors and with colleagues not involved in the research to maximize validity.

Results

To gain insight in the motivations consumers have to post visual Br-UGC and whether there is a difference between branded selfies, brand-only pictures, and nonbranded pictures we analyze the motivations per picture type and compare these motivations to answer the research questions.

Motivations to Create Branded Selfies

The first picture type we discuss is branded selfies. The most important motivations that were identified are discussed in the sections that follow. A full overview can be found in Table 2.

Table 2. Overview of identified motivations to post visual Br-UGC per picture type.

Motivation	Submotivations	Brand Only	Branded Selfie	Nonbranded Selfie
Personal identity	Self-expression	X	X
	Self-presentation	X	X	X
Social interaction and integration	Sharing experiences	X	X	X
	Social affection	X	X	X
	Social grooming		X	X
	Social pressure		X	X
	Social identity		X	X
	Social interaction	X	X	X
Remuneration	Social media rewards	X	X
Empowerment	Brand love	X	X
	Employee loyalty		X
	Startup support	X	X
Entertainment	Enjoyment	X	X	X
Information	Inspiration	X	X
	Knowledge	X
Archiving	—	X	X	X
Aesthetics	Picture appearance	X	X	X
	Profile presentation	X		X

Note. Boldface motivations indicate motivations that were not present in previous research.

Personal Identity

The first motivation that was often mentioned is personal identity. Consumers use Instagram to present a favorable image of themselves, and brand-related pictures seem to be considered a good way to do so. Personal identity consists of two submotivations, namely, self-expression and self-presentation. These were also identified in previous research (Muntinga, Moorman, and Smit 2011).

In the first sub-motivation, self-expression, people use a brand to express their identities and show the world who they are. As Participant 18 (male, age 20), who uses a photo of him playing his Yamaha keyboard to express his love for music, stated: “This is the first keyboard I bought. . . . For me, it is an important part of making music, and the brand itself is also very well-known in the music industry. So yeah, that is how I would describe the brand. It is a high-quality brand. But for me, personally, it was just something very personal.”

The second submotivation that came up was self-presentation. As opposed to self-expression, this motivation is more focused on showing off and impressing other people. Participant 5 (female, age 21) explained that she does this with her LA Sisters sweater: “Yes, maybe more to show everybody: ‘Well, guys, look what a beautiful outfit I put on today.’” When showing off, the brand is often used as a subtle cue to give information about the participant. For example, Participant 22 (female, age 21) told us: “I have to admit that I put the bag there because it is from Michael Kors.” When asked why she did not show the logo of the bag, she replied: “Because I think that would be too much; now it still seems like the bag was there accidentally.” Moreover, participants specifically indicated that they use photos as a form of self-enhancement (Taylor, Strutton, and Thompson 2012; Zheng et al. 2020), to show the best version of themselves. As Participant 13 (male, age 19) explained about his Philipp Plein outfit: “I posted this because I thought that I look really good in these two pictures.”

Social Interaction and Integration

A second important motivation to post a branded selfie is social interaction and integration. This motivation is about connecting with other people. This motivation was also found in previous research (Muntinga, Moorman, and Smit 2011). In accordance with Muntinga, Moorman, and Smit (2011), we identified social pressure, social identity, and social interaction as submotivations for this behavior (See Table 2). Moreover, we identified three new submotivations that apply for branded selfies, which we discuss in this section.

The first new submotivation is sharing experiences. In this motivation people want to share important moments in life with other people. They want to show people that they are doing well and having fun. For example, as Participant 22 (female, age 21) explained about a photo of her and a friend holding a NooNoo bag: “I wanted to tell people that we were in Berlin together and that we had a lot of fun.” This submotivation ties in with the submotivation self-presentation, which was mentioned under Personal Identity. However, compared to the self-presentation motivation, this submotivation is less about impressing others and more about sharing a special moment with other people.

The second submotivation, also not identified in previous research, is social affection. People with this submotivation want to show how proud they are of their close others: “I want people to see that our friend group is still together, after 10 years. . . . Not necessarily that we are in Walibi” (Participant 20; female, age 25). Related to that, people use Instagram to show other people that there is no need to worry about them. As Participant 1 (female, age 22) explains a photo with a group of friends drinking Desperados: “I just moved out of my parents’ house. You meet new people, you want to show—I don’t know—maybe I started a new life here or something. Especially toward all the people from high school, the people you leave behind. I think—yes, I think that was the reason behind it at the time. Yes.”

The third submotivation that we established in the category of social interaction and integration is social grooming (Ellison et al. 2014). People with this motivation post to Instagram to show that they are still present, to make sure people will not forget about them (Ellison et al. 2014). For this reason, Participant 4 (male, age 20) posted a picture at his job as radio host for BredaNu: “I thought, ‘I have to put myself out there again. I have to show that I am still totally here, actually.’ Because everything I do—I post some stories now and then, but they are less noticeable than a post. So it was about time for the active followers to show them that I am still here.”

Remuneration

Third, we observed a different version of the motivation remuneration (Muntinga, Moorman, and Smit 2011). As opposed to Muntinga, Moorman, and Smit (2011), people did not engage with visual Br-UGC to gain monetary benefits but instead expected benefits related to the platform itself, such as more likes and followers. For example, Participant 18 (male, age 20) told us: “It is of course, when looking at my own branding, a way to expand. Scotch & Soda has a larger reach than I do. So, I would have liked it to be reposted.” We consider this a new submotivation of remuneration called social media rewards.

Empowerment

The fourth motivation is empowerment. However, like remuneration the submotivations underlying this motivation seem to be different than previously observed (Muntinga, Moorman, and Smit 2011). We identified three new submotivations that all seem to point at the importance of brand ambassadorship. People will post brand-related pictures to Instagram only when they genuinely like the brand (i.e., brand love), work for the brand (i.e., employee loyalty), or because they have sympathy for small and upcoming brands (i.e., startup support). For example, Participant 17 (female, age 23) explains that she posted a picture of herself in a TAPPERWARE sweater to help out the owner: “I thought it would be nice to draw attention to the brand [TAPPERWARE], because it’s the startup of my cousin.” Moreover, various participants specifically indicate that they do not have any interest in helping larger brands: “Because I have the feeling that many people know the brand already. So then I do not see the necessity to tag it [H&M]. . . . When it is something small, then I think, ‘Oh, it would be nice for people to get to know this’” (Participant 15; female, age 22).

Aesthetics

The fifth motivation we observed was a motivation not identified in previous research: aesthetics. Participants with this motivation are mainly concerned with the appearance of a specific picture or the profile in general. We identify two submotivations within this category. The first submotivation is picture appearance. Participants with this submotivation indicate that they like posting pictures because the composition of the picture is beautiful. For example, Participant 28 (female, age 24) explained why she posted a picture of herself in Paris with an Alix the Label sweater: “Because I really, yes, I thought it was really beautiful, and yes, it was really beautiful, so that is why.” A second submotivation is concerned with the social media profile in general; we therefore call it profile presentation. Participants with this submotivation post pictures because the contents of the photos fit well with the colors and atmosphere of their Instagram profile. Like Participant 2 (female, age 24) explained about a picture of her Nike shoes: “Yeah, it is mostly because it matches. Yes, I should have one more here actually, but you see how the colors flow over, so that is the reason behind my pictures; they all fit in my feed.”

Motivations to Post Brand-Only Pictures

Second, we discuss the most important motivations people have to post brand-only pictures to Instagram (see Table 2).

Personal Identity

Many participants told us that they prefer to be featured together with the brand because they feel like they should be present in their own Instagram feed and want to make sure the connection between the brand and their own identity is clear. Participant 27 (female, age 23) told us: “I would like to be in the picture myself. . . . I want to be able to show the connection between me and the brand. It would be weird to only show the brand. Putting myself in the picture automatically makes that connection.”

Yet when comparing the motivations to post branded selfies to visual Br-UGC that does not feature a person, we notice that personal identity is also an important motivator for pictures in which the poster is not present. For example, Participant 29 (female, age 19) explained about a picture of her Dr. Martens shoes: “It is kind of my identity. . . . In high school I always used to wear Dr. Martens. I wear them a lot; I am known for it.” This is the submotivation self-expression. Moreover, self-presentation also is still present even when the person is not. For example, Participant 20 (female, age 25) explained, “I wanted to show everybody that I have a Quooker, because those are really popular in the kitchen world at the moment.” In conclusion, it seems that even when the poster is not present in the picture, how they come off is still an important motivator for posting these types of pictures.

Remuneration

The new submotivation social media rewards is also identified for brand-only pictures, for example, as a way to build an influencer status. As Participant 20 (female, age 25) put it: “Maybe those brands would see it and say, ‘Oh, nice kitchen! Maybe you want to try out our new product!’ or—I don’t know. . . . I like it when brands see this account.”

Empowerment

Brand-only pictures seem to be more often driven by empowerment than branded selfies. As Participant 1 (female, age 22) stated about a charity project she visited: “I stand behind what they do. And I think often they do small projects, for example, with COVID-19 to distribute soap and rice in villages. Yes, I would definitely share that, to make sure that, for example, there will be more donations.”

Information

Next to empowerment, brand-only pictures are also used to inform other people about a product and inspire fellow consumers. For example, Participant 26 (female, age 27) explained about posting a picture of her Tylko closet: “More like, for other people, I can say, ‘Oh look, it’s from this brand, so if you like it, you know where to get it.’”

Motivations to Create Nonbranded Visual Content

Finally, we discuss the motivations that were identified for posting nonbranded visual content (see Table 2).

Personal Identity

Like posting branded selfies, personal identity is also an important motivation to post nonbranded content. However, as compared to branded selfies, there is less variation in submotivations. Participants with this motivation to post nonbranded content indicate self-presentation as the most important submotivation. For example, as Participant 27 (female, age 23) explained: “I realize now that I quite often indeed want to show that I am on a nice holiday . . . that you are tanned, wearing nice clothes, drinking some wine and enjoying yourself.” Self-expression was more often focused on self-enhancement (i.e., showing your looks) for nonbranded content as compared to branded content.

Social Interaction and Integration

The second motivation to post nonbranded visual content is social interaction and integration. Like the branded visual Br-UGC, we identified all submotivations identified in previous research as well as the three new submotivations identified earlier in this study (see Table 2). For example, Participant 13 (male, age 19) wanted to share his experience of becoming an uncle: “I wanted to show on social media that I became an uncle.” Participant 27 (female, age 23) engaged in social affection: “I look good, my sister looks good, it is a nice picture together. And maybe also proud that she is my sister.” Participant 17 (female, age 23) posted a picture with social grooming as motivation: “I hope that they see that I am happy, that I am having fun.”

Aesthetics

Aesthetics was also an important motivation for nonbranded content. The submotivations picture appearance and profile presentation were both present. For example, Participant 16 (female, age 21) was motivated by the appearance of the picture: “I thought it was a beautiful picture, so I posted it. But I do not care if other people do not like it.” Participant 25 (female, age 21) was motivated by profile presentation: “I thought, ‘Okay, that looks nice, that will fit in my feed.’”

Archiving

Also, archiving was identified as motivator. Participants indicated that they use the platform as an online photo album, to look back on special moments they experienced. As Participant 21 (female, age 30) noted, “Yes, at the end of the year, you always look back. What did I do in the pictures? Where was I?”

Answering the Research Questions

The first research question examined consumers’ motivations to post visual Br-UGC. The results show that motivations are both self-centered and brand centered. Personal identity and social interaction and integration are still important motivators to post visual Br-UGC. Yet for social interaction and integration we identified new submotivations, namely, social affection, social grooming, and sharing experiences. This suggests that the way the motivations are gratified differ as compared to other media. In addition, consumers are driven by brand-centered reasons such as empowerment or information. Moreover, we identified a new motivation called aesthetics. More than with textual content consumers are concerned with the look of the photograph and their overall profile.

The second research question examined whether motivations to post visual Br-UGC differed from motivations to post nonbranded visual content. When we compare the motivations of both picture types, we see overlap but also notable differences. For both types of content, social interaction and integration, personal identity, and aesthetics are important motives to post content to Instagram. Remarkably, personal identity seems to play an even bigger role for visual Br-UGC as compared to nonbranded content. People use brands to show who they are and to paint a favorable image of themselves, whereas this is less the case with nonbranded content. Moreover, brand-related images are more often used to gain some kind of remuneration in the form of platform-related rewards, such as likes, followers, or an influencer career. For nonbranded visual content, on the other hand, social interaction and integration seem to play a bigger role.

Finally, the third research question examined the difference between motivations to create branded selfies as compared to brand-only pictures. For both picture types, personal identity is an important motivator. Even when only brands are present in photos, posters often want to communicate information about themselves. Nevertheless, motivations to post brand-only pictures are more often brand centered than motivations to post branded selfies. Motivations such as empowerment or informing other people are more common, whereas social interaction and integration was not often mentioned for brand-only pictures.

Discussion

This research examined the underlying motivations of consumers to post visual Br-UGC and how these differ from nonbranded content. Moreover, we examined whether motivations to post branded selfies differ from motivations to post brand-only pictures. Results showed that for both brand-related and non-brand-related pictures personal identity, social interaction and integration, and aesthetics were important motivators. Notably, for brand-related pictures participants seem to put even more emphasis on personal identity. They indicate that they use the brands to express their personality and to construct a favorable image of themselves. The brand mostly plays a supporting role in these pictures, with the profile owner as the main topic.

These findings are in line with previous research that looked at motivations to use Instagram, which found that self-expression is an important motivator for people to post pictures to visual social media (Daxböck et al. 2021; Lee et al. 2015). Moreover, Instagram is used to present an “ideal self” through pictures (Choi and Sung 2018). Our research suggests that this is also the case for visual Br-UGC. Even when the picture contains a brand, the motivations for posting are often self-centered, with consumers using the brand to shape their ideal selves. For example, because they think the brand can express who they are or because the brand is considered a status symbol.

Because of the self-centered nature of selfies and its possibilities for self-presentation, we expected that this self-expression would be an even more important motivator for branded selfies. However, the current research did not find this difference. For both branded selfies as well as brand-only pictures, personal identity was an important motivator. Even when the person is not physically present, consumers use the pictures to express who they are by showing brands that fit their personalities. We think this finding might be explained by the nature of the Instagram platform. According to Yau and Reich (2019), Instagram users think carefully about every picture they post, because they actively use their profiles to be found interesting and to be liked by other people. Thus, self-expression seems to be the overarching goal of using the platform, and all pictures, regardless of whether the Instagram posters are portrayed in them, must contribute toward that goal.

Next to personal identity, also social interaction and integration was a common motivation for both visual Br-UGC as well as nonbranded pictures. This is in line with previous research focusing on both motivations to create branded content (research question 1) and motivations to post pictures to Instagram (research question 2). However, it is notable that this social interaction and integration seems to be focused mostly on strong ties, or people with whom they have already established a (strong) connection in an offline context (Granovetter 1973). In the research of Muntinga, Moorman, and Smit (2011), social motivations were mainly focused on meeting like-minded individuals (e.g., people who are also fans of a specific brand). Again, in visual Br-UGC the brand does not seem to be the focus in these interactions. Participants use Instagram pictures to show their affection for people who are important to them and want to keep their close others updated about their daily lives. This notion is further strengthened by the fact that social grooming was identified as new motivation to post (brand-related) selfies on Instagram. This strong focus on close others may be explained by the social character of Instagram, as Instagram is often used for social interaction (Voorveld et al. 2018).

Although the motivations to post visual Br-UGC are mostly personal, some participants do post pictures specifically for the brand. Empowerment as a motivation, which was previously identified by Muntinga, Moorman, and Smit (2011), was still present for visual Br-UGC as well. When posting an image about a brand, people do so mainly with brands for which they feel empathy. For example, they use their Instagram accounts to inform people about an up-and-coming brand. It rarely happens that people post a branded picture to help brands that are already established. Moreover, sometimes the brand is used for personal gain—for example, because they expect that posting a picture of a brand will get them reposted or increase the chances of receiving many likes and comments. This motivation is similar to the remuneration motivation noted by Muntinga, Moorman, and Smit (2011); however, the type of remuneration that is sought is focused more on the platform itself rather than on monetary incentives.

Finally, for both visual Br-UGC as well as nonbranded pictures, the look of the picture (i.e., aesthetics) was an important motivation. It may be that users are really motivated to share aesthetically pleasing pictures because they think such images are beautiful. However, it may also be that this need for aesthetically pleasing pictures derives from personal identity motivation. According to Harris and Bardey (2019), an aesthetically pleasing account (i.e., pictures that look beautiful and fit well together) can lead to a halo effect where the pleasantness of the account is transferred to inferences about the personality of the profile owner. People with an aesthetically pleasing account are often thought of as having more positive personality traits than people with less aesthetically pleasing accounts. In other words, it might be that people post aesthetically pleasing pictures because they think it will improve their online image.

Limitations and Future Research

The current research has some limitations. First, the distribution of the different types of content we discuss (i.e., branded selfie, brand only, nonbranded) was not even. Branded selfies were a lot more common than brand-only pictures. Because we discuss multiple pictures per participant and did not encounter any new motivations in the final group of interviews (see Materials and Methods section), we are confident that we reached data saturation. Nevertheless, it might be that branded selfies being much more common influenced the results. Future research can try to further equalize this distribution by enlarging the sample size.

Furthermore, the qualitative approach of this research focused on in-depth understandings of motivations. Therefore, it is not possible to draw conclusions about the prevalence and consequently the relative importance of the motivations. It would be interesting to extend this research with a more quantitative approach in which it is possible to measure how often the different motivation types arise.

A final limitation involves the sample of pictures. In the current research we included pictures that were intentionally brand related and pictures that unintentionally contained a brand (e.g., some participants did not realize they portrayed a brand on their Instagram posts). We believe this is a strong point of the research because both strategies arise in Instagram and both types of pictures can have an influence on consumers. However, people who post the brand on purpose might have different motivations to post visual Br-UGC than people who included the brand unintentionally. Future research can give more insights into these differences by separating these picture strategies.

Theoretical and Practical Implications

The current research provides both theoretical and practical implications. On a theoretical level, we show that UGT (Katz, Blumler, and Gurevitch 1974) is still applicable when examining visual Br-UGC. We extend motivations previously identified for posting textual Br-UGC (e.g., Muntinga, Moorman, and Smit 2011) and for posting nonbranded visual content (e.g., Sung et al. 2016) by adding a list of submotivations. For social interaction and integration, we add sharing experience, social affection, and social grooming as new submotivations. All relate to maintaining relationships emphasizing the social character of social media (Voorveld et al. 2018). Specifically for visual Br-UGC we identified new submotivations to the motivations renumeration and empowerment. Remuneration is characterized by social media–specific rewards, such as likes and comments. For empowerment we unraveled the submotivations brand love, employee loyalty, and startup support. Finally, this study identified one new motivation, namely, aesthetics. The way the picture looks (picture appearance) and the social media profile looks (profile presentation) turned out to be important motivators for posting both branded visual Br-UGC and nonbranded visual Br-UGC. The revelation of these new motivations also extends the body of research on motivations to use social media by including a brand-related context.

On a practical level, this research can give advertisers insight into why consumers post pictures about brands. It is important to realize that consumers post pictures that contain brands even when the brands are not the focus of the pictures. Even though consumers may not be aware of the presence of brands in pictures, these brand representations in consumers’ posts tell the organization something about how their brands are represented, what the associations and consumer habits are related to the brands, and how the brands are evaluated by consumers. As a result, social media monitoring is extremely important in modern-day advertising. Good monitoring can help maximize the advertising potential of positive visual Br-UGC (e.g., by reposting UGC on a brand’s page) and can help quickly react to negative Br-UGC or Br-UGC that is not in line with the intended brand image. Moreover, this study identified consumers’ motivations to post visual Br-UGC. Playing into these motivations can increases advertisers’ chances that consumers will choose to post visual Br-UGC about brands. Specifically, advertisers can focus ads on personal identity, social interaction and integration, and/or aesthetics. They can do so by asking consumers to take branded photos that express who they are (personal identity) or to take branded photos with their close others (social interaction and integration). Finally, to appeal to aesthetics as a motivation, advertisers could sponsor a contest that rewards the most beautiful visual Br-UGC photograph posted by a consumer.

Ethics Statement

The research ethics and data management committee of Tilburg School of Humanities and Digital Sciences approved this research (REDC #2020/058).

Acknowledgments

We are grateful to Floor van der Klis, Malou Verbruggen, and Britt Libau for their help with data collection.

Disclosure Statement

The authors report there are no competing interests to declare.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Annemarie J. Nanne

Annemarie J. Nanne (PhD, Tilburg University) is an assistant professor of digital marketing, Tilburg Center for Cognition and Communication, Tilburg University.

Marjolijn L. Antheunis

Marjolijn L. Antheunis (PhD, University of Amsterdam) is a full professor of communication and technology, Tilburg Center for Cognition and Communication, Tilburg University.

Guda van Noort

Guda van Noort (PhD, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam) is a full professor of persuasion and new media technologies, Amsterdam School of Communication Research, University of Amsterdam.

Notes

1 As defined by the American Marketing Association (AMA), branded content is content with “a name, term, sign, symbol or design, intended to identify the goods and services of one seller or group of sellers and to differentiate them from those of competition” (Keller and Swaminathan 2020, p. 2).