Have attitudes to anti-aging skincare changed?

Have attitudes to anti-aging skincare changed: do we believe in their abilities more or are we still sceptical?

Introduction

This paper draws upon several reports which can be found in the Archive of Market and Social Research. We have looked at responses from the 1970s into the early 1990s and compared them to more sources found online.

The question we aim to answer is whether attitudes towards anti-aging skincare have changed. And if they have, is it because anti-aging skincare is now much better/does work, or because we’re more willing to believe it? Or, as skincare in general has normalised, is that scepticism still there but we do it anyway because, ultimately, women have always wanted to slow down the signs of aging (so why wouldn’t you get help from your face cream?).

The seventies:

Use of skincare becomes more mainstream, but healthy scepticism leads discussions around promises of anti-aging

Summary

• While skincare starts the decade as a functional experience, as the decade goes on skincare in general, and moisturiser in particular, becomes a frequent part of daily life for women.
• Concerns around aging are common throughout the decade, but the prevailing belief is that aging is inevitable. The desire for anti-aging skincare is mostly driven by prevention and delay, rather than a belief it could stop or reverse the appearance of lines and/or wrinkles. By the end of the decade though we start to see attitudes becoming more hopeful.
• Overt claims around anti-aging capabilities were dismissed as over-exaggerations or cons and widely rejected. Although, as we head towards the second half of the decade there is some softening as some women show a desire to believe them.

In the early 1970s, skincare was seen as functional and problem-led. Most women were conscious of skin deterioration and decay, and this was inevitably ascribed to age. There was a desire to preserve the skin and for it to look it’s best. However the general feeling was of anxiety up until the point (c55-60years old) the inevitable happened, at which point there was sadness but acceptance [1].

Skincare, especially moisturisers, were seen as essential, not just with a hope to delay the signs of aging, but also as protection from pollution and weather, and to counteract elements like diet, which all were blamed for or felt to contribute to skin problems. It was felt that, by engaging in skincare products, they were doing what they could [1].

“Everyone uses something and if they don’t they ought to” [1]

The reports show some class and age differences in attitudes, with the younger and upper-class respondents being more concerned with skincare, as opposed to their counterparts who seemed more concerned with cosmetics (which could be seen as covering up rather than trying to delay or prevent) [1]. Generally, younger women wanted to take steps to prevent wrinkles arriving too early, although the specific desire to soften and slow down the appearance of lines and wrinkles was most prominent from 20years old onwards [2]. Once the signs of aging were accepted (wrinkles and lines), the objectives of skincare were around softening and smoothing them [2]. There was a drop off in usage of skincare around life stage changes such as getting married or having babies, but the lack of preventative action was seen as risky by those women and most continued the use of moisturisers [2].

While there was some acceptance of the fact that the use of skincare could delay the skin aging process, the claim that skincare would make skin younger was outright rejected and described as ‘nonsensical’ and an “advertisers myth” [1].

“They must think that women are complete fools” [1]

In the early 1970s, there was a general scepticism about the claims skincare brands were making about their products generally, and for the anti-aging qualities specifically. Concepts that claimed too much were seen as “too good to be true” and claims around certain ingredients such as Vitamin F were viewed with suspicion and doubt to their benefit or their existence at all [2].

“This reminds me of a cornflake ad, with the sun and the vitamins” [2]

“Is it a misprint? Should it be Vitamin E?” [2]

Specifically, anti-aging claims were interesting to all age groups if they claimed the process of aging could be delayed but rejected if they claimed to erase or prevent lines or wrinkles entirely [2]. In fact, products offering anti-wrinkle benefits were described as “perfect bait” and believed to have been “commercialised” to exploit fears and anxieties. However, there was also a conflicting desire to be “conned” by these claims, when it related to a deliberate desire to pamper themselves rather than a desire for anti-aging specifically [3].

“If it really would do all those things…..” [2]

Moisturiser in general was seen to be the most important addition to the skincare ‘armoury’ that was seen to have grown in the past 10-15years [3].

By the mid-1970s, usage of specific night creams (especially by older/more menopausal women) had begun to be normalised. Lines and wrinkles were still considered an inevitable part of aging and the focus remained on delaying rather than avoiding them [4], although we start to see more emotional responses to anti-aging and the beginnings of a desire to believe in their ability to prevent old skin appearing. This wasn’t universal, while most agreed regular usage of moisturiser would keep their skin looking better for longer, there was a divide. Some felt it could keep skin young-looking, some felt it would prevent dryness which was felt to contribute to the formation of lines and wrinkles, and some rejected the notion [5].

“There was an element of fear when I started using a moisturiser … I wasn’t as young as I used to be. I needed to feel more attractive” [5]
“You can’t bring back the fresh glow of youth… no product can do that” [5]

As seen in the early-1970s, it was felt preventing needed to start with usage early enough (20year olds onwards), and regular usage was seen as key if you wanted to experience benefits later [5].

“I feel that if I use a moisturiser now I won’t look like an old hag in ten or fifteen years time” [5]

Advertising claims continued to be viewed with scepticism, although more accepted when they were viewed not as exaggerations, scientific, or overt advertising claims [4]. But, with the beginning desire to believe, we start to see some women seeking miracle cures and even those who treated skincare rationally were beginning to be more interested in trading up in case there were benefits they were missing [6].

It’s possible that the shift in attitudes we start to see in the mid-1970s is linked to a wider attitude change around preventative medicine, driving in part by the publications and reports seen throughout the 1970s and specifically the ‘Prevention and Health: Everybody’s Business’ report from Spring 1976 where lifestyle factors (such as smoking, drinking, diet and exercise) began codified in public health policy. The drive towards prevention was linked also with a sense that the responsibility lay with the individual and a campaign of ‘Look After Yourself’ [a]. It’s possible that these changing public attitudes fed into a general desire to take individual action and led to an increased desire to reverse signs of aging which had already started to be linked to, and a reflection of, lifestyle.

The eighties:

Skincare is now a standard part of day to day life, and while anti-aging claims are still disbelieved, we see a growing desire for them to be true:

• Moisturisers continue to be seen as a vital part of the skincare routine, with skincare in general now more of an everyday activity.
• Anti-aging products are still seen as things you use to slow the process of lines and wrinkles down or minimise the effects of age. However, as we started to see towards the end of the 1970s, there seems to be a growing desire to believe that stopping aging is possible. This is reflected in a softening in rejection of advertising claims for general skincare. Although specific anti-aging claims are still met with derision, it appears that there is enough hope to drive purchases just in case.

By the early 1980s, moisturising is seen as a hygiene factor, now a core part of the day to day to the point it’s considered automatic and mechanical, even to some boring or tedious [7].

As we saw towards the end of the 1970s, women wanted to belief that products could leave skin youthful and even reverse signs of aging. But, despite wanting to believe, the widespread view was still that this was absurd, with some women going so far as to make jokes about their wish to believe [7].

‘References to the “absurd promises” of eternal youth and disappearing wrinkles were made in order to show that they knew the fantasies but did not really believe in them despite their underlying wish to do so.’ [7]

“Because its so nice and everything, you look at it and you think ‘that’s lovely but you know it will not be true’ but its worth a go” [10]

The prevailing belief throughout the 1980s continues to be that products may minimise the effects of age, rather than eradicating them entirely [8].

One of the main changes in this decade is the softening towards the marketing claims around ingredients. By the early to mid-1980s, emotional language was more accepted, especially when they related to more natural ingredients. Science based claims were also more acceptable if the items contained were seen to be good. Whether the claim was true or not, or even understood, appears more irrelevant than the outright rejection we saw in the 1970s [7].

“You’d expect a good honest moisture lotion – there’s no gimmicks and gold letters.” [7]

The inclusion of ‘protective conditioners’ and ‘Ph Balanced’ were assumed to be beneficial even though most saw the language as being more the promise of other products… [7]

When ingredients were less easily identified as good, for example when scientific names were used, negative reactions still occurred however at a low level of significance [9]. The desire for natural (and therefore considered ‘good’) products continued into the late-1980s, even the fantasy that products were natural contributed to positive or neutral responses, whether true or not women were happy to give products a go and even expressed a desired to be conned [10].

“I like to be conned that my beauty routine is very natural rather than me creating a transplant operation every morning to make me look human.” [10]

Anti-aging ingredients, however, continued to be disbelieved [8]. Although interestingly we see that while women might publicly express disbelief, the desire to believe ensured products who made claims of maintaining youthful looking skin were regularly bought and wanted [7]. Generally though, the actual ability to reverse signs of aging was rejected.

Within the use of moisturisers there is also an element of magic and (vain) hope about the products’ ability to preserve one’s skin against the ‘ravages’ of age. [7]

There were two specific changes to the skincare market in the 1980s that could have contributed to the changing attitudes towards skincare and marketing.

• The drive for natural or ‘good’ products grew throughout the 1980s, driven by retailers like Neal’s Yard Remedies promoting values of sustainability and organic ingredients.
• Launched in 1982, the Estée Lauder ‘Night Repair Cellular Recovery Complex’ (now known as Advanced Night Repair) pioneered the concept of nighttime skin repair.

We see this reflected particularly in relation to the marketing and advertising language accepted. Whilst not necessarily understood (or believed) the feeling that the ingredients and the product were in anyway natural or good led to more positive feedback.

Conversely, this might have had a negative impact to the claims or language used with anti-aging products. Previously unknown ingredients, like collagen, were questioned and rejected. Although in this decade we see more acceptance around the inclusion of ingredients like Vitamin E [8] compared to in the early-1970s where ingredients like Vitamin F was met with suspicion [2], vitamins in products were still in general seen as irrelevant and related to diet rather than skin [8].

The nineties to now:

Anti-aging technology and products are more widely used, have they also gotten better and do we really believe in them?

Since the 1990s there have been several impactful changes around, and additions to, the anti-aging market:

• The 1990s saw more widespread understanding on the dangers of sun damage, with the first skin cancer prevention campaign in the UK launched in 1996 [b].
• In the early 1990s, radiofrequency (RF) technology was discovered. It is used to create heat for shrinking tissues, which is then used in collagen formation, giving way to a tighter, youthful-looking skin [c].
• By the late 1990s retinol have become available outside of the dermatologists [d]. Retinoids reduce fine lines and wrinkles by increasing the production of collagen [e].
  • The UK retinol beauty products market generated a revenue of USD 58.4 million in 2024 [f].
• Botox was FDA-approved for cosmetic use to minimise appearance of wrinkles in 2002 [g].
• The 2020s has already seen advances in technology and aesthetics devices, such as stem cell treatments, PRP facial treatments, and nano-current technologies [c].
  • 900,000 Botox treatments are carried out in the UK every year [h].

Globally, the anti-aging skincare product market was valued at USD 54042.72 million in 2025. A rising global population, seeking prevention and correction, is believed to be driving this with approximately 63% of the global demand originating from the older age segments [i].

What does this all mean for general attitudes to skincare and aging, are we more prone to believe the claims products make (are they more likely to be true)?

Industry reports state that Retinol does work to improve skin texture and soften fine lines which has been backed by years of research [j]. And, while it was an accidental discovery [k], Botox does visibly minimise the look of fine lines and wrinkles.

If we use usage as a proxy for belief, 78% of women in 2025 YouGov report buying skincare products for themselves in the past year. Of these, 42% reported they purchase separate products ‘(each product designed for a specific purpose)’, and effectiveness is the most important purchase factor [l].

However, in a 2026 YouGov report, there was a clear split between respondents who saw preventing signs of aging as important versus those who were more neutral and those who didn’t prioritise it [m].

The same report states that ‘Britons are less likely to think it’s important to prevent the signs of ageing compared to other countries surveyed at 34%. They’re also the least likely of all markets surveyed to actively try to slow or reverse the signs of ageing (6%)’ [m].

As we saw beginning in the 1970s, lifestyle aspects like diet were seen as the most important factors in aging. Belief in skincare (and other therapies) was unsurprisingly strongest for those who saw preventing signs of aging as important but even then, only 8% of the British audience put skincare in the top 3 for having an impact on aging and longevity [m].

Conclusion

The desire to keep skin looking young and healthy has been around for generations and shows no sign of disappearing.

Products that are proven to prevent or delay lines and wrinkles have increased in availability; however this hasn’t necessarily shown an increase in either the amount using anti-aging skincare, or the amount that believe reversal is possible. Ultimately, the goal seems to continue to be prevention and delay. It would seem that, at least in Britain, healthy scepticism in claims of anti-aging remain.

Additional note

Much of this paper has been on qualitative research, with biases towards London and Manchester, and with varying age groupings and caps.
Due to the qualitative nature we can gain insight into common attitudes and have quoted directly where relevant.

But there are limitations:

• Small base sizes
• Limited regional representation
• Inconsistent age groupings

The focus of all the research was on women; this paper has followed suit. However, it is worth noting that 42% of men in the 2025 YouGov report used skincare products [l]. Men also made up 37% of the segment wanting to prevent the signs of aging identified in the 2026 YouGov report [m]. Due to prevailing gender attitudes in the 1970s and 1980s it is unlikely we would be able to track male attitudes in the same way.

---

Sources

All contained on the Archive of Market and Social Research:

[1] Research Report on Skincare, December 1972

[2] Research report Qualitative Research on Skincare Concepts, March 1973

[3] Research Report. Qualitative Research on Skincare, November 1973

[4] Report on Qualitative Research on Night Cream Attitudes and Advertising, January 1975

[5] Research Report Qualitative research on the Development of a New Moisturiser for Nivea, January 1976

[6] Qualitative Research on Elizabeth Arden Velva Moisturiser Film, March 1976

[7] Apricot & Water Pack and Product Research A Qualitative Study, May 1983

[8] Buf-Puf New Product Development Cleanser and Moisturiser Research Report, December 1988

[9] ACO Skincare U.K. Research Report on Stage III, August 1984

[10] Helen IIIB Advertising Report, April 1988

---

Web references

Links included

 

Clare Woodward

Posted to amsr.org.uk in June 2026