Mainstream media is throwing around the accusation that social media is inherently harmful to teens, but what does the research really say?
Yesterday, I reported on mainstream media openly lobbying government to expand age verification laws to include social media. One of the arguments that mainstream media used is that social media is inherently harmful to the mental health of teenagers and young people. This as if it is somehow established fact. Of course, if you are a keen observer, you’ll notice that this assertion was not backed up by any evidence. So, we dug deeper to get at the actual truth of the matter and go further into this area.
So, in our quest to fact-check the mainstream media, the question is this: is social media harmful to the mental health of kids and teenagers? For the answers, we turn to the real science and look at multiple studies to find out the answer.
In 2019, a study was conducted by Oxford researchers to look in to whether or not social media makes kids unhappy. The result? No, social media does not do that. From Techdirt:
A much more thorough, careful, and methodologically sound study was just released finding little impact on “adolescent life satisfaction” from using social media. The study was conducted by three researchers at Oxford’s well-respected Internet Institute, including Professor Andrew Przybylski, who has a history of very thoughtful work in this space. The conclusions suggest that there’s perhaps more of a moral panic among some about social media than any actual evidence:
In this study, we used large-scale representative panel data to disentangle the between-person and within-person relations linking adolescent social media use and well-being. We found that social media use is not, in and of itself, a strong predictor of life satisfaction across the adolescent population. Instead, social media effects are nuanced, small at best, reciprocal over time, gender specific, and contingent on analytic methods.
As the report notes, most past research in this space is not great, often leading to “trivial trends” being “routinely over-interpreted by those under increasing pressure to rapidly craft evidence-based policies.” The study was carefully done, involved a very large number of individuals (over 12,000), and tries to tease out the actual impact, and where that is, rather than generalize across the board.
In 2022, Meta did their own research in this area and found that in most metrics, social media is having either a neutral or positive effect on teen mental health. Here’s that famous slide:
So, with respect to most areas such as anxiety, FOMO, sleep issues, loneliness, and numerous other areas, social media had either a neutral impact or positive impact. Now, obviously, this image is quite famous because it was one of the most cherry-picked images out there in terms of trying to spread moral panic about social media. This is because some members of the mainstream media, as well as some in the research community with an axe to grind, cherry picked the one in three teenage girls feeling worse about their body and distorting the truth to try and proclaim that social media is inherently harmful.
One example of this was the notorious Unuesco report which cherry picked the data to try and support the researchers personal beliefs rather than what the research actually said. So, if you still see that quip about body image, more often then not, it was derived from that slide which paints a VERY different picture of social media’s impact on teenage mental health.
Also in 2022, Pew Research conducted their own research in the area. Their findings showed that social media actually had a positive impact on teen mental health:
But now the Pew Research Center, whose work tends to be impeccable, has released a study also highlighting how social media generally seems to be making teenagers’ lives better, not worse.
Eight-in-ten teens say that what they see on social media makes them feel more connected to what’s going on in their friends’ lives, while 71% say it makes them feel like they have a place where they can show their creative side. And 67% say these platforms make them feel as if they have people who can support them through tough times. A smaller share – though still a majority – say the same for feeling more accepted. These positive sentiments are expressed by teens across demographic groups.
When asked about the overall impact of social media on them personally, more teens say its effect has been mostly positive (32%) than say it has been mostly negative (9%). The largest share describes its impact in neutral terms: 59% believe social media has had neither a positive nor a negative effect on them. For teens who view social media’s effect on them as mostly positive, many describe maintaining friendships, building connections, or accessing information as main reasons they feel this way, with one teen saying:
“It connects me with the world, provides an outlet to learn things I otherwise wouldn’t have access to, and allows me to discover and explore interests.” – Teen girl
So, once again, the general sentiment is that for many teenagers social media improves their lives. For an even larger portion, it neither improves nor makes their lives worse. It’s just a small percentage who find it problematic.
Another study conducted by the Journal of Pediatrics found that social media was not necessarily to blame for the decline in teenage mental health, but rather, helicopter parents:
A recent study in the Journal of Pediatrics suggests a compelling alternative. It’s not social media, but the rise of helicopter parenting, in which kids no longer have spaces to just hang out with each other and be kids. It’s titled: Decline in Independent Activity as a Cause of Decline in Children’s Mental Well-being: Summary of the Evidence. If you can’t see the full version, there’s a preprint version here.
The research summarizes the decline in “independent mobility” for kids over the last few decades:
Considerable research, mostly in Europe, has focused on children’s independent mobility (CIM), defined as children’s freedom to travel in their neighborhood or city without adult accompaniment. That research has revealed significant declines in CIM, especially between 1970 and 1990, but also some large national differences. For example, surveys regarding the “licenses” (permissions) parents grant to their elementary school children revealed that in England, license to walk home alone from school dropped from 86% in 1971 to 35% in 1990 and 25% in 2010; and license to use public buses alone dropped from 48% in 1971 to 15% in 1990 to 12% in 2010.11 In another study, comparing CIM in 16 different countries (US not included), conducted from 2010 to 2012, Finland stood out as allowing children the greatest freedom of movement. The authors wrote: “At age 7, a majority of Finnish children can already travel to places within walking distance or cycle to places alone; by age 8 a majority can cross main roads, travel home from school and go out after dark alone, by age 9 a majority can cycle on main roads alone, and by age 10 a majority can travel on local buses alone.” Although we have found no similar studies of parental permissions for US children, other data indicate that the US is more like the UK concerning children’s independent mobility than like Finland. For example, National Personal Transportation Surveys revealed that only 12.7% walked or biked to school in 2009 compared with 47.7% in 1969.
And then it notes the general decline in mental health as well, which they highlight started long before social media existed:
Perhaps the most compelling and disturbing evidence comes from studies of suicide and suicidal thoughts. Data compiled by the CDC indicate that the rate of suicide among children under age 15 rose 3.5-fold between 1950 and 2005 and by another 2.4-fold between 2005 and 2020. No other age group showed increases nearly this large. By 2019, suicide was the second leading cause of death for children from age 10 through 15, behind only unintentional injury. Moreover, the 2019 YRBS survey revealed that during the previous year 18.8% of US high school students seriously considered attempting suicide, 15.7% made a suicide plan, 8.9% attempted suicide one or more times, and 2.5% made a suicide attempt requiring medical treatment. We are clearly experiencing an epidemic of psychopathology among young people.
But, unlike those who assume correlation is causation with regards to social media, the researchers here admit there needs to be more. And they bring the goods, pointing to multiple studies that suggest a pretty clear causal relationship, rather than just correlation.
Several studies have examined relationships between the amount of time young children have for self-directed activities at home and psychological characteristics predictive of future wellbeing. These have revealed significant positive correlations between amount of self-structured time (largely involving free play) and (a) scores on two different measures of executive functioning; (b) indices of emotional control and social ability; and (c) scores, two years later, on a measure of self-regulation. There is also evidence that risky play, where children deliberately put themselves in moderately frightening situations (such as climbing high into a tree) helps protect against the development of phobias and reduces future anxiety by increasing the person’s confidence that they can deal effectively with emergencies.
Studies with adults involving retrospections about their childhood experiences provide another avenue of support for the idea that early independent activity promotes later wellbeing. In one such study, those who reported much free and adventurous play in their elementary school years were assessed as having more social success, higher self-esteem, and better overall psychological and physical health in adulthood than those who reported less such play. In another very similar study, amount of reported free play in childhood correlated positively with measures of social success and goal flexibility (ability to adapt successfully to changes in life conditions) in adulthood. Also relevant here are studies in which adults (usually college students) rated the degree to which their parents were overprotective and overcontrolling (a style that would reduce opportunity for independent activity) and were also assessed for their current levels of anxiety and depression. A systematic review of such studies revealed, overall, positive correlations between the controlling, overprotective parenting style and the measures of anxiety and depression.
They also note that they are not claiming (of course) that this is the sole reason for the declines in mental health. Just that there is strong evidence that it is a key component. They explore a few other options that may contribute, including increased pressure at schools and societal changes. They also consider the impact of social media and digital technologies and note (as we have many times) that there just is no real evidence to support the claims:
Much recent discussion of young people’s mental health has focused on the role of increased use of digital technologies, especially involvement with social media. However, systematic reviews of research into this have provided little support for the contention that either total screen time or time involved with social media is a major cause of, or even correlate of, declining mental health. One systematic review concluded that research on links between digital technology use and teens’ mental health “has generated a mix of often conflicting small positive, negative and null associations” (Odgers & Jensen, 2020). Another, a “review of reviews” concluded that “the association between digital technology use, or social media use in particular, and psychological well-being is, on average, negative but very small” and noted some evidence, from longitudinal research, that negative correlations may result from declining mental health leading to more social media use rather than the reverse (Orben, 2020)
Indeed, if this theory is true, that the lack of spaces for kids to explore and play and experiment without adult supervision is a leading cause of mental health decline, you could easily see how those who are depressed are more likely to seek out those private spaces, and turn to social media, given the lack of any such spaces they can go to physically.
Another study in 2023 was conducted by Norwegian researchers. They not only concluded that there was no link between social media and depression, but also scolded the handful of papers that suggested that there is a link for bad research practices:
Anyway, now we have yet another study on this subject, looking specifically at children in Norway, where (yet again) they can find no link between social media and depression. You can read the whole study if you’d like the details. The results are clear:
Within-person changes in self- and other oriented social media behavior were unrelated to within-person changes in symptoms of depression or anxiety two years later, and vice versa. This null finding was evident across all timepoints and for both sexes. Conclusions: The frequency of posting, liking, and commenting is unrelated to future symptoms of depression and anxiety. This is true also when gold standard measures of depression and anxiety are applied.
As the authors of the paper note, many other papers trying to make this link have used perhaps questionable proxies for mental health:
A major shortcoming of existing research is that studies have conceptualized mental health problems in a variety of ways (e.g., reduced well-being, psychological distress, poor self-esteem, depressive symptoms). Because social media use may relate differently to different mental health problems (e.g., social anxiety versus overall well-being), these inconsistent findings may be due to studies not assessing the same phenomenon. Studies have also typically relied on self-reports of both social media use and mental health, thereby running the risk of inflating relations due to a common methods bias. Studies assessing more strictly defined mental health problems and measuring such problems by other means than self-report are needed.
Another study by the National Academies of Science also looked into this and concluded that there is no link between mental health issues and social media:
But now we have yet another study to add to the list. And it’s a big one. It comes from the National Academies of Science, entitled Social Media and Adolescent Health. Eleven different academics helped put the paper together, along with another seven staff members who worked on it. This isn’t just some random report that a couple academics put together. It was a massive project. And it shows.
But the key finding:
The committee’s review of the literature did not support the conclusion that social media causes changes in adolescent health at the population level.
That’s not to say that everything is great. As we’ve detailed, and as many other studies have shown, there certainly are situations where some individuals who are already dealing with certain mental health issues may find them exacerbated on social media. And there are some reasonable concerns about some kids getting so focused on social media that it takes away from sleep or studying. And the report makes this clear as well.
As this (and many other) reports make clear, the issues here are more complex, and any focus on just banning social media outright would likely do more harm than good:
Studies looking at the association between social media use and feelings of sadness over time have largely found small to no effects, but people with clinically meaningful depression may engage with social media differently. Some research has proposed that this relation is circular, with people with more symptoms of depression spending more time using social media and social media use predicting risk of depression. At the same time, the relation between social media use and depression might vary among different demographic or identity groups. Among LGBTQ+ teens, for example, social media use is associated with fewer depressive symptoms but an increased risk of bullying.
Oxford University, for their part, looked at whether or not more screen time in general is linked to mental health issues. Given the theme throughout this article, you probably won’t be surprised to learn that there is no link:
Now, the folks at Oxford University, who did one of those studies above, have released another study, this time looking at almost 12,000 kids in the US to determine whether “screen time” had an impact on their brain function or well-being. This is a pretty massive study, and the results are pretty damn clear:
Screen time activities included ‘traditional’ screen pursuits such as watching TV shows or movies and using digital platforms such as YouTube to watch videos, as well as interactive pursuits like playing video games. In addition, they were asked about connecting with others through apps, calls, video calls and social media.
Even with participants who had high rates of digital engagement, there was no evidence of impaired functioning in the brain development of the children.
The study appears pretty thorough:
Using data from the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development (ABCD) Study, the largest long-term study of brain development and child health in the United States, researchers from Oxford Internet Institute, University of Oxford, University of Oregon, Tilburg University, and University of Cambridge analysed the cognitive function of 9-12 year old children alongside their self-reported screen time use.
[….]
In the ABCD study, the participants’ neurodevelopment was assessed through monitoring functional brain connectivity, which refers to how regions of the brain work together and includes emotional and physiological activities. This was done through MRI scans. Further to this, physical and mental health assessments and information from the child’s caregiver was provided.
When analysing the screen time use alongside the ABCD data, patterns of functional brain connectivity were related to patterns of screen engagement, but there was no meaningful association between screen time use and measures of cognitive and mental well-being, even when the evidential threshold was set very low.
I don’t know about you, but the science seems pretty clear to me. The research concludes that there is no link between mental health problems with kids and teenagers and social media. So, as far as I’m concerned, the myth that social media is inherently harmful to the mental health of kids and teenagers is extremely thoroughly debunked. At this point, people who say otherwise are trying to push unfounded narratives – especially when they don’t cite their sources on this matter.
