is social media harmful or helpful essay

Social Media: Beneficial or Harmful? Essay

• To find inspiration for your paper and overcome writer’s block
• As a source of information (ensure proper referencing)
• As a template for you assignment

It is important to note that social media is a core element of the internet, and it reshaped how a modern human perceives information, communicates, socializes, and learns about the outside world. It became a primary lens through which one interacts with others, and thus, it is critical to properly evaluate whether or not such a state of affairs is beneficial or harmful to human wellbeing. The given assessment argues that social media, not the internet, is harmful to society and humanity in general because it reshapes the social fabric, causes loss of reason, logic, attentiveness, and memory, violates individual rights of all people as well as proliferates misinformation, which means that social media’s harms heavily outweigh its benefits.

Firstly, in order to fairly and properly assess the benefits or harms of social media, the latter should be distinguished from the internet. For example, it is stated that “the notion that the Internet is bad for you seems premised on the idea that the Internet is one thing—a monolith” (Goldsmith 597). In other words, the internet is not one thing but rather a collection of vastly different forms of communication, presentation, information exchange, entertainment, interactions, and other functions. Therefore, the internet is a source of many positive aspects of modernity because it not only brings more informational democracy but also prevents restriction and control of the free exchange of knowledge. However, the question is not about the internet as a whole but rather social media. Unlike the internet, which brings a number of benefits, which far outweigh the harms, social media does not bring a similar imbalance in favor of good. Social media was designed to simplify socialization and communication online, but the outcome is unchecked control of the flow of conversation in favor of a specific agenda, profit, and violation of individual rights.

Secondly, not all internet elements utilize artificial intelligence as extensively as social media platforms. The use of AI allows such companies to fine-tune one typology of information consumed, which means that it is social media that makes decisions for its users. While the internet is a library of knowledge, where a person makes a clear choice on what to read, watch, listen to, or interact with, social media uses AI and complex algorithms to influence its user. The underlying business model of all social media platforms is to learn about its user as much as possible and profit from them in a targeted manner. Such a design is not an inherent feature of the internet, which is not constrained to be profitable in this manner since many websites operate through subscriptions, direct sales, or other means. When it comes to such dangers, AI itself can also be a problem. It is stated that “there are indeed concerns about the near-term future of AI —algorithmic traders crashing the economy, or sensitive power grids overreacting to fluctuations and shutting down electricity for large swaths of the population” (Littman 314). In other words, social media’s extensive use of AI in combination with its problematic business model creates a host of issues that are not attributable to the internet.

Thirdly, in addition to social media-specific problems, they are also linked to harms associated with both devices and the internet in general. As stated before, the internet has its harms and benefits, but the latter usually outweighs the former. Similarly, devices come with harms as well as benefits, where the balance is tilted towards the positive aspects. However, not only social media has its inherent design flaws, but it also has problems with devices and the internet in general, which makes their harms far more abundant than benefits. For example, it is stated that “while our phones offer convenience and diversion, they also breed anxiety” (Carr 582). In addition, “as the brain grows dependent on the technology, the research suggests, the intellect weakens,” and “the division of attention impedes reasoning and performance” (Carr 583). Therefore, these device-related problems are multiplied a hundredfold by the fact that social media amplifies distraction and attention division through notifications. Social media is not a highly intellect-strengthening medium either, which further complicates the dependence factor.

Fourthly, social media companies are not properly regulated, and the nature of the business heavily favors oligopoly rather than a proper competitive environment because people want to have a unified platform for communication and audience-building. Therefore, the industry generates highly powerful companies with unchecked capabilities, where the national and even international discourse takes place exclusively on such mediums. For example, one cannot deny the influence of Twitter or Facebook as drivers of political or social discourse. Therefore, there is a conflict of interest among such big tech companies in regards to providing an open and fair platform versus making a profit, and the decision is clearly made in favor of the latter. The very structure of the business model of social media is to influence users to buy the advertisers’ products or services, and thus, it cannot be a just and fair place for discussion on important subjects by definition. Such a state of affairs threatens the fabric of society whether or not these companies intend to do so.

Fifthly, the conflict of interest described in the previous section brings its biggest harm when it comes to the First Amendment of the United States Constitution, where private enterprises are not obliged to protect the freedom of speech and expression. Since the national and international discourse and communication are taking the place of social media, where the First Amendment is mandatory to have, these platforms are unable, unwilling, and not obliged to provide it. One can easily observe how such companies can become politically tilted towards one agenda over the other, where accounts of even the most influential individuals can be banned because they violated the terms of service of the company. In other words, a company’s rules override the Constitutional rules. It is important to note that only a better speech can be an answer to a bad speech and not a removal of that voice.

Sixthly, social media platforms are heavily engaged in data collection and privacy violations, which was demonstrated by well-known scandals and criticisms. Once again, the business model of social media companies is structured in such a manner that their primary customers are not users but advertisers. A former group is a form of product or service being sold to advertisers, which means that social media advances surveillance capitalism at its core. In a century where the right to privacy is constantly becoming a problem due to governmental antiterrorism interests, social media further threatens these fundamental rights. The problem is even more dangerous when one considers the ever-increasing cyber threat proliferation, which means a breach of security in a social media company endangers all of its users.

Seventhly, social media does not have a well-structured method of combatting misinformation since its primary incentive is to promote engagement and grab attention. Social media companies are conflicted between ensuring the accuracy of the information on their platform and boosting the interactivity with their users. Such companies want to have interesting pieces of information, which are better provided by misinformation since the truth is always more complex and intricate. Therefore, one can see how social media can become a breeding ground for people with agenda of public deception. In addition, these platforms would not have the capability to ensure the accuracy of information even if they were incentivized somehow. Public panic and political polarization are other phenomena that accompany social networks, and the catalyst for these occurrences is information received both directly by the subject and disseminated using modern social communication technologies.

In conclusion, social media is not the internet, and its harms are far more extensive than the latter because it affects memory, attention, and reason and violates individual rights for privacy, free expression, and fairness in discourse, as well as proliferates misinformation. In addition, social media inherits inherent problems associated with modern devices and the internet in general, which further compounds its harm. Therefore, the effects of social media hurt the social fabric by pretending that it serves its users while its actual customers are advertisers. It also pretends to provide an open and free platform for communication while its very business model implies targeted influence on the user’s preferences. The use of AI also adds to all of the concerns related to artificial intelligence safety.

Works Cited

Carr, Nicholas. “How Smartphones Hijack Our Minds.” They Say/I Say , edited by Gerald Graff and Cathy Birkenstein, W.W. Norton & Norton Company, 2021, pp. 582-596.

Goldsmith, Kenneth. “Go Ahead: Waste Time on the Internet.” They Say/I Say , edited by Gerald Graff and Cathy Birkenstein, W.W. Norton & Norton Company, 2021, pp. 597-602.

Littman, Michael. “Rise of the Machines” Is Not a Likely Future.” They Say/I Say , edited by Gerald Graff and Cathy Birkenstein, W.W. Norton & Norton Company, 2021, pp. 311-314.

• Inoculation Theory, Misinformation, and Fake News
• Innovation in Textiles: New Fabric
• Navigating AI in Security: Safeguarding Privacy and Society
• Online Identity-Creating New Personas and Relations
• IT Network Connectivity
• Interconnection of College Campus Lans to Wan
• Extensible HyperText Markup Language
• Influence of YouTube and Facebook on Business
• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2022, July 2). Social Media: Beneficial or Harmful? https://ivypanda.com/essays/social-media-beneficial-or-harmful/

"Social Media: Beneficial or Harmful?" IvyPanda , 2 July 2022, ivypanda.com/essays/social-media-beneficial-or-harmful/.

IvyPanda . (2022) 'Social Media: Beneficial or Harmful'. 2 July.

IvyPanda . 2022. "Social Media: Beneficial or Harmful?" July 2, 2022. https://ivypanda.com/essays/social-media-beneficial-or-harmful/.

1. IvyPanda . "Social Media: Beneficial or Harmful?" July 2, 2022. https://ivypanda.com/essays/social-media-beneficial-or-harmful/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Social Media: Beneficial or Harmful?" July 2, 2022. https://ivypanda.com/essays/social-media-beneficial-or-harmful/.

• Entertainment

Is Social Media Helpful or Harmtful to Today’s Society (Essay Example)

We often question whether social media benefits or damages our society. Social media draws concerns from many different aspects of our normal lives. It has the potential to destroy or build up one’s life. Using it can affect you and everyone else around you, positively or negatively. Social media ties into seven main important aspects of everyday life: safety, religion, culture, education, politics, humanity, and family.

Safety is something we all strive for and social media just might put our safety at risk. An issue that a lot of people fall into is catfishing. Catfishing is when someone deliberately deceives you into thinking they are someone that they are not. ¨For these victims of catfishing, invasion of privacy, appropriation, false light, and intentional or negligent infliction of emotional distress do not provide a substantial likelihood of successful recovery.¨ (Tyler W. Hartney) Catfishing victims obtain severe mental distress when they figure out they have been catfished. Due to this they gain mental issues that they can not steadily recover from. Another major issue that people come across on social media is suicidal influences. ¨There is increasing evidence that the Internet and social media can influence suicide-related behavior.¨ (Tyler W. Hartney) We often encounter cruel and evil people on social media platforms that try to influence our suicidal behavior.

Religion is important to many people around the globe and social media carries a lot of information that disagrees and agrees with certain religions. Communication about religion is key to people and most social platforms include a way to communicate. ¨Technology can be beneficial to religion when it enhances the communal aspects of religion, and detrimental to religion when it degrades these communal aspects.¨ (Mookgo S. Kgatle) Although we can communicate, people tend to communicate in a negative way to degrade aspects of a person’s religion. We often jump to judgement, instead we should listen and provide a positive way of communication towards others on social media. ¨ The third shortcoming is the publication of false information. ¨(Mookgo S. Kgatle)Others on social media frequently put out false information in order to persuade you into believing their opinion on a certain religion. Social media is filled with faulty information that is put out by evil people. 

Social media impacts cultures in major ways. Cultures around the world are dramatically changing due to long usage of social media. Without social interaction we often fall short of our cultural needs. ¨Social media has a negative impact on social lifestyle interactions. ¨(Joshua Ebere Chukwuere) Social media draws your attention towards your phone, computer, tablet, etc too often causing lack of social interaction. People need to interact with others to maintain their cultural identity. Social media destroys how we value life. ¨Social media destroys people's social values.¨(Joshua Ebere Chukwuere) People are hooked on social media to the extent that they forget the value of an actual social lifestyle. There needs to be a push for more real life social interactions.

Education is key to living a great life and social media helps by providing many different sources of information on almost every subject. Social media provides us a great way to interact and learn with each other. “Social media applications therefore allow users to converse and interact with each other; to create, edit and share new forms of textual, visual and audio content.”(Neil Selwyn) With social media people are able to access information and learn easily. There are forms of visual and audio learning available making education easier for people with social media. Social media also provides ways to multitask; We can listen to a book while playing a sport and there are plenty more ways. ¨Social media is therefore associated with an increased tendency for young people to multitask.¨(Neil Selwyn) Social media makes it easier for young students to do multiple things at once. Social media provides a sound way of getting a solid education.

`Politics play important roles in our everyday lives. We depend on politicians to make the right decisions everyday. Social media provides us with the latest information on different topics about politics. ¨Social media can bring forward content that is not featured in the mainstream media. ¨ (Tim Highfield) Mainstream media tends to be biased towards certain political parties. Meaning they will put out what they think is right for their political opinions. Social media holds a lot of unbiased information on politics. Certain platforms allow people to speak freely upon their opinion on politics. Facebook offers various opportunities to express opinions on politics¨ (Tim Highfield) Facebook, a social media platform, allows others to share their own opinions and beliefs about politics. Social media provides us with the ability to share important information about politics.

It's hard to decipher whether social media is human or inhumane. It can affect our everyday mental and physical processes because of how long we stay on social platforms. ¨Social media usage has dangerous effects for younger generations because problems related to mental health which develop during short periods can act as an epidemic for any individual throughout life.¨(Hilal Bashir) When we look at our phones everyday constantly, we tend to not focus on how we are doing mentally. Our mental health is important and social media drags it down.  ¨Loneliness is one of the prime concerns of present virtual society, as it is intimately related to serious health problems.¨(Hilal Bashir)  As we are looking through social media, we forget about our social life. Social media can affect how much we eat due to addiction. Social media is inhumane.

Family is important and social media distracts us from our family bonds, but it also can bring us together in ways we never thought was possible. “It is possible that families use both entertainment and social media in positive ways in their family.”(Sarah M. Coyne) Social media can help the family bond more by producing a sense of entertainment that the whole family enjoys. We can use social media to our advantage and bond together tightly with our family. Social media makes us hide from our family and focus on our phones.  ¨Social media may displace real life meaningful interactions with family.¨(Sarah M. Coyne) Social media also has the potential to draw you away from family. Don’t let social media affect your social interaction with family. 

Social media affects everyday aspects of life including  safety, religion, culture, education, politics, humanity, and family. It draws us away from safety by putting us in situations we don't know how to handle. It can push or pull us to a religion depending on who or what platform you're on. Social media draws us away from culture by making us spend too much time on our phones. Social media increasingly helps with education by giving a way to multitask and learn simultaneously. Social media shows us different opinions and facts on politics, sometimes we can trust them and sometimes we can’t. Social media is inhumane because it puts stress on our minds and bodies. We spend too much time on social media rather than having an actual social life.

Related Samples

• Zero Short Film Analysis Essay Example
• Essay on Mental Health Norman Osborn and the Green Goblin
• Essay Sample: Andrew Garfield vs. Tobey Maguire
• Effect of Technology on Empathy Research Paper
• Digital Storytelling Essya Example
• Compare and Contrast Essay: Themes of Confinement. Plato’s Allegory of the Cave vs. Tim Burton’s Big Fish
• Analysis of Social Classes in Disney's Sleeping Beauty Essay Example
• Compare and Contrast Essay: Twelfth Night vs. She’s The Man
• The Negative Effects of Technology on Society
• Negative Effects Of Instagram Essay Example

Didn't find the perfect sample?

You can order a custom paper by our expert writers

Essay on Social Media for School Students and Children

500+ words essay on social media.

Social media is a tool that is becoming quite popular these days because of its user-friendly features. Social media platforms like Facebook, Instagram, Twitter and more are giving people a chance to connect with each other across distances. In other words, the whole world is at our fingertips all thanks to social media. The youth is especially one of the most dominant users of social media. All this makes you wonder that something so powerful and with such a massive reach cannot be all good. Like how there are always two sides to a coin, the same goes for social media. Subsequently, different people have different opinions on this debatable topic. So, in this essay on Social Media, we will see the advantages and disadvantages of social media.

Advantages of Social Media

When we look at the positive aspect of social media, we find numerous advantages. The most important being a great device for education . All the information one requires is just a click away. Students can educate themselves on various topics using social media.

Moreover, live lectures are now possible because of social media. You can attend a lecture happening in America while sitting in India.

Furthermore, as more and more people are distancing themselves from newspapers, they are depending on social media for news. You are always updated on the latest happenings of the world through it. A person becomes more socially aware of the issues of the world.

In addition, it strengthens bonds with your loved ones. Distance is not a barrier anymore because of social media. For instance, you can easily communicate with your friends and relatives overseas.

Most importantly, it also provides a great platform for young budding artists to showcase their talent for free. You can get great opportunities for employment through social media too.

Another advantage definitely benefits companies who wish to promote their brands. Social media has become a hub for advertising and offers you great opportunities for connecting with the customer.

Get the huge list of more than 500 Essay Topics and Ideas

Disadvantages of Social Media

Despite having such unique advantages, social media is considered to be one of the most harmful elements of society. If the use of social media is not monitored, it can lead to grave consequences.

Thus, the sharing on social media especially by children must be monitored at all times. Next up is the addition of social media which is quite common amongst the youth.

This addiction hampers with the academic performance of a student as they waste their time on social media instead of studying. Social media also creates communal rifts. Fake news is spread with the use of it, which poisons the mind of peace-loving citizens.

In short, surely social media has both advantages and disadvantages. But, it all depends on the user at the end. The youth must particularly create a balance between their academic performances, physical activities, and social media. Excess use of anything is harmful and the same thing applies to social media. Therefore, we must strive to live a satisfying life with the right balance.

FAQs on Social Media

Q.1 Is social media beneficial? If yes, then how?

A.1 Social media is quite beneficial. Social Media offers information, news, educational material, a platform for talented youth and brands.

Q.2 What is a disadvantage of Social Media?

A.2 Social media invades your privacy. It makes you addicted and causes health problems. It also results in cyberbullying and scams as well as communal hatred.

Customize your course in 30 seconds

Which class are you in.

• Travelling Essay
• Picnic Essay
• Our Country Essay
• My Parents Essay
• Essay on Favourite Personality
• Essay on Memorable Day of My Life
• Essay on Knowledge is Power
• Essay on Gurpurab
• Essay on My Favourite Season
• Essay on Types of Sports

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Download the App

Essay Service Examples Sociology Social Media

Is Social Media Beneficial or Harmful: Persuasive Essay

• Proper editing and formatting
• Free revision, title page, and bibliography
• Flexible prices and money-back guarantee

Our writers will provide you with an essay sample written from scratch: any topic, any deadline, any instructions.

Cite this paper

Related essay topics.

Get your paper done in as fast as 3 hours, 24/7.

Related articles

Most popular essays

• Social Media

Keri Hilson once said, “We live in such a gullible world. Anything that’s written, anything that’s...

• Social Media Marketing

The world we lived in 30 years ago as compared with the world today is completely different. In...

• Media Violence

“Around 44 percent of U.S. consumers cited some sort of online publication as their main source of...

• Vaccination

In this essay, I intend to discuss a host of factors associated with the theme of vaccinating...

My whole generation commonly referred to as ‘Gen Z’ but also notably as the ‘generation, is the...

• Effects of Social Media

Promoting a private company with YouTube publicizing may result in the greatest value for the...

YouTube has become one of the biggest social media platforms today. Its popularity has grown...

Social media must be restricted as it leads to depression, anxiety and can sometimes make young...

People use social media for a variety of reasons. But does anyone ever stop to think about the...

Join our 150k of happy users

• Get original paper written according to your instructions
• Save time for what matters most

Fair Use Policy

EduBirdie considers academic integrity to be the essential part of the learning process and does not support any violation of the academic standards. Should you have any questions regarding our Fair Use Policy or become aware of any violations, please do not hesitate to contact us via [email protected].

We are here 24/7 to write your paper in as fast as 3 hours.

Provide your email, and we'll send you this sample!

By providing your email, you agree to our Terms & Conditions and Privacy Policy .

Say goodbye to copy-pasting!

Get custom-crafted papers for you.

Enter your email, and we'll promptly send you the full essay. No need to copy piece by piece. It's in your inbox!

Pursuit home

• All sections

Is social media actually good for you?

It’s worth considering the ‘why’ and the ‘how’ we use social media when we’re thinking about whether it’s good for our mental health

By Professor Peggy Kern, University of Melbourne

Whether I’m standing on the tram, sitting in a café, or walking down the street, I’m struck by the sight of so many people looking down at their phones, scrolling through Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, TikTok or a myriad of other social media platforms.

I immediately ask myself, in this increasingly technological age, what is the impact of constant social media use on our mental health?

On one hand, it allows us to stay up-to-date and connected. I can find out what friends in America and around the world are doing at any time of day or night.

On the other, it’s hard to carry a normal conversation without someone compulsively checking their feed, rendered paranoid by FOMO (fear of missing out). A person might have thousands of “friends”, but feel completely alone.

So is social media good or bad for us?

In our new study published in the Journal of Mental Health , PhD student Elizabeth Seabrook, Dr Nikki Rickard from Monash University and myself found that it is not as clear-cut as you might think.

We reviewed 70 studies that have examined how social network use relates to depression, anxiety, and subjective wellbeing. Results were mixed.

Some studies found social media users were happier and more connected with other people.

Why that Instagram post may cost you more than you think

But other studies found that social media users had more signs of depression or anxiety . So we also looked at various factors that had an impact on when it is beneficial or harmful.

Our studies were conducted between 2005 and 2016 , mostly with adolescents and young adults. Most focused on Facebook, with a few studies centred around the use of Twitter, MySpace, or social media in general.

These studies examined a variety of themes, including how much time people spent on social media, the number of friends they had, and whether or not they liked and felt accepted by their friends.

We also examined the words they used, how much personal information they shared, whether they compared themselves with others, and how much they felt addicted to social media.

Across the studies, it appears that it’s not so much that social media causes anxiety and depression, but that people have different ways of using social media, which may be more or less helpful.

For example, Chris*, who reported high levels of wellbeing, liked to use Facebook to catch up on the latest gossip and share with others fun things that happened during the day.

Meanwhile, Carey*, who suffers from depression, spent hours browsing the newsfeed, and bemoaning how nice everyone else’s life seems.

Facebook, the Government and revenge porn

For many, social media appears to have a range of benefits. It provides a way for many of us to connect with others. We can support other people and feel supported by them. It may even be a useful way for those with social anxiety and those who have a hard time with face-to-face interactions to connect with others.

But for those with depression or anxiety, it could make their symptoms worse.

Indeed people who often compared themselves to their friends, ruminated about life, or had negative interactions with others, were at greater risk of depression and anxiety.

Notably, the number of hours that people spent on social media didn’t make a clear difference – it was more the feeling of being addicted to it. It seems like what a person writes about is more indicative of their state of mental health than the number of hours spent online.

Those with symptoms of depression were more likely to be jealous of their friends, compare themselves to others, and use negative language when using social media. This is similar to what I’ve seen in some of my other research, which points to the power of the words that we use.

A growing number of studies suggest that we might be able to use data from social media use to identify people suffering from depression or anxiety, thereby providing the possibility for offering support and resources for those who might not otherwise get the help they need.

So what can we take away from the study?

How gender shapes our Facebook chats

We each have unique patterns in how we use social media, in terms of the language we use and how we behave when we are using it.

Do you keep your friends updated on your activities? Post pictures of your family? Complain about work or other people? Passively browse news feeds without commenting? Do you feel like it helps you connect with others, or do you feel addicted and controlled by it?

As a whole, our review suggests that it is valuable to pause and consider what our behavioural patterns are. By understanding them better, we potentially can make better choices about how to best use social media, as well as use it to promote good mental health.

Banner: Pexels

Skip to content

Read the latest news stories about Mailman faculty, research, and events. 

Departments

We integrate an innovative skills-based curriculum, research collaborations, and hands-on field experience to prepare students.

Learn more about our research centers, which focus on critical issues in public health.

Our Faculty

Meet the faculty of the Mailman School of Public Health. 

Become a Student

Life and community, how to apply.

Learn how to apply to the Mailman School of Public Health. 

Just How Harmful Is Social Media? Our Experts Weigh-In.

A recent investigation by the Wall Street Journal revealed that Facebook was aware of mental health risks linked to the use of its Instagram app but kept those findings secret. Internal research by the social media giant found that Instagram worsened body image issues for one in three teenage girls, and all teenage users of the app linked it to experiences of anxiety and depression. It isn’t the first evidence of social media’s harms. Watchdog groups have identified Facebook and Instagram as avenues for cyberbullying , and reports have linked TikTok to dangerous and antisocial behavior, including a recent spate of school vandalism .

As social media has proliferated worldwide—Facebook has 2.85 billion users—so too have concerns over how the platforms are affecting individual and collective wellbeing. Social media is criticized for being addictive by design and for its role in the spread of misinformation on critical issues from vaccine safety to election integrity, as well as the rise of right-wing extremism. Social media companies, and many users, defend the platforms as avenues for promoting creativity and community-building. And some research has pushed back against the idea that social media raises the risk for depression in teens . So just how healthy or unhealthy is social media?

Two experts from Columbia University Mailman School of Public Health and Columbia Psychiatry share their insights into one crucial aspect of social media’s influence—its effect on the mental health of young people and adults. Deborah Glasofer , associate professor of psychology in psychiatry, conducts psychotherapy development research for adults with eating disorders and teaches about cognitive behavioral therapy. She is the co-author of the book Eating Disorders: What Everyone Needs to Know. Claude Mellins , Professor of medical psychology in the Departments of Psychiatry and Sociomedical Sciences, studies wellbeing among college and graduate students, among other topics, and serves as program director of CopeColumbia, a peer support program for Columbia faculty and staff whose mental health has been affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. She co-led the SHIFT research study to reduce sexual violence among undergraduates. Both use social media.

What do we know about the mental health risks of social media use?

Mellins : Facebook and Instagram and other social media platforms are important sources of socialization and relationship-building for many young people. Although there are important benefits, social media can also provide platforms for bullying and exclusion, unrealistic expectations about body image and sources of popularity, normalization of risk-taking behaviors, and can be detrimental to mental health. Girls and young people who identify as sexual and gender minorities can be especially vulnerable as targets. Young people’s brains are still developing, and as individuals, young people are developing their own identities. What they see on social media can define what is expected in ways that is not accurate and that can be destructive to identity development and self-image. Adolescence is a time of risk-taking, which is both a strength and a vulnerability. Social media can exacerbate risks, as we have seen played out in the news. 

Although there are important benefits, social media can also provide platforms for bullying and exclusion, unrealistic expectations about body image and sources of popularity, normalization of risk-taking behaviors, and can be detrimental to mental health. – Claude Mellins

Glasofer : For those vulnerable to developing an eating disorder, social media may be especially unhelpful because it allows people to easily compare their appearance to their friends, to celebrities, even older images of themselves. Research tells us that how much someone engages with photo-related activities like posting and sharing photos on Facebook or Instagram is associated with less body acceptance and more obsessing about appearance. For adolescent girls in particular, the more time they spend on social media directly relates to how much they absorb the idea that being thin is ideal, are driven to try to become thin, and/or overly scrutinize their own bodies. Also, if someone is vulnerable to an eating disorder, they may be especially attracted to seeking out unhelpful information—which is all too easy to find on social media.

Are there any upsides to social media?

Mellins : For young people, social media provides a platform to help them figure out who they are. For very shy or introverted young people, it can be a way to meet others with similar interests. During the pandemic, social media made it possible for people to connect in ways when in-person socialization was not possible.  Social support and socializing are critical influences on coping and resilience. Friends we couldn’t see in person were available online and allowed us important points of connection. On the other hand, fewer opportunities for in-person interactions with friends and family meant less of a real-world check on some of the negative influences of social media.

Whether it’s social media or in person, a good peer group makes the difference. A group of friends that connects over shared interests like art or music, and is balanced in their outlook on eating and appearance, is a positive. – Deborah Glasofer

Glasofer : Whether it’s social media or in person, a good peer group makes the difference. A group of friends that connects over shared interests like art or music, and is balanced in their outlook on eating and appearance, is a positive. In fact, a good peer group online may be protective against negative in-person influences. For those with a history of eating disorders, there are body-positive and recovery groups on social media. Some people find these groups to be supportive; for others, it’s more beneficial to move on and pursue other interests.

Is there a healthy way to be on social media?

Mellins : If you feel social media is a negative experience, you might need a break. Disengaging with social media permanently is more difficult­—especially for young people. These platforms are powerful tools for connecting and staying up-to-date with friends and family. Social events, too. If you’re not on social media then you’re reliant on your friends to reach out to you personally, which doesn’t always happen. It’s complicated.

Glasofer : When you find yourself feeling badly about yourself in relation to what other people are posting about themselves, then social media is not doing you any favors. If there is anything on social media that is negatively affecting your actions or your choices­—for example, if you’re starting to eat restrictively or exercise excessively—then it’s time to reassess. Parents should check-in with their kids about their lives on social media. In general, I recommend limiting social media— creating boundaries that are reasonable and work for you—so you can be present with people in your life. I also recommend social media vacations. It’s good to take the time to notice the difference between the virtual world and the real world.

Find anything you save across the site in your account

How Harmful Is Social Media?

By Gideon Lewis-Kraus

In April, the social psychologist Jonathan Haidt published an essay in The Atlantic in which he sought to explain, as the piece’s title had it, “Why the Past 10 Years of American Life Have Been Uniquely Stupid.” Anyone familiar with Haidt’s work in the past half decade could have anticipated his answer: social media. Although Haidt concedes that political polarization and factional enmity long predate the rise of the platforms, and that there are plenty of other factors involved, he believes that the tools of virality—Facebook’s Like and Share buttons, Twitter’s Retweet function—have algorithmically and irrevocably corroded public life. He has determined that a great historical discontinuity can be dated with some precision to the period between 2010 and 2014, when these features became widely available on phones.

“What changed in the 2010s?” Haidt asks, reminding his audience that a former Twitter developer had once compared the Retweet button to the provision of a four-year-old with a loaded weapon. “A mean tweet doesn’t kill anyone; it is an attempt to shame or punish someone publicly while broadcasting one’s own virtue, brilliance, or tribal loyalties. It’s more a dart than a bullet, causing pain but no fatalities. Even so, from 2009 to 2012, Facebook and Twitter passed out roughly a billion dart guns globally. We’ve been shooting one another ever since.” While the right has thrived on conspiracy-mongering and misinformation, the left has turned punitive: “When everyone was issued a dart gun in the early 2010s, many left-leaning institutions began shooting themselves in the brain. And, unfortunately, those were the brains that inform, instruct, and entertain most of the country.” Haidt’s prevailing metaphor of thoroughgoing fragmentation is the story of the Tower of Babel: the rise of social media has “unwittingly dissolved the mortar of trust, belief in institutions, and shared stories that had held a large and diverse secular democracy together.”

These are, needless to say, common concerns. Chief among Haidt’s worries is that use of social media has left us particularly vulnerable to confirmation bias, or the propensity to fix upon evidence that shores up our prior beliefs. Haidt acknowledges that the extant literature on social media’s effects is large and complex, and that there is something in it for everyone. On January 6, 2021, he was on the phone with Chris Bail, a sociologist at Duke and the author of the recent book “ Breaking the Social Media Prism ,” when Bail urged him to turn on the television. Two weeks later, Haidt wrote to Bail, expressing his frustration at the way Facebook officials consistently cited the same handful of studies in their defense. He suggested that the two of them collaborate on a comprehensive literature review that they could share, as a Google Doc, with other researchers. (Haidt had experimented with such a model before.) Bail was cautious. He told me, “What I said to him was, ‘Well, you know, I’m not sure the research is going to bear out your version of the story,’ and he said, ‘Why don’t we see?’ ”

Bail emphasized that he is not a “platform-basher.” He added, “In my book, my main take is, Yes, the platforms play a role, but we are greatly exaggerating what it’s possible for them to do—how much they could change things no matter who’s at the helm at these companies—and we’re profoundly underestimating the human element, the motivation of users.” He found Haidt’s idea of a Google Doc appealing, in the way that it would produce a kind of living document that existed “somewhere between scholarship and public writing.” Haidt was eager for a forum to test his ideas. “I decided that if I was going to be writing about this—what changed in the universe, around 2014, when things got weird on campus and elsewhere—once again, I’d better be confident I’m right,” he said. “I can’t just go off my feelings and my readings of the biased literature. We all suffer from confirmation bias, and the only cure is other people who don’t share your own.”

Haidt and Bail, along with a research assistant, populated the document over the course of several weeks last year, and in November they invited about two dozen scholars to contribute. Haidt told me, of the difficulties of social-scientific methodology, “When you first approach a question, you don’t even know what it is. ‘Is social media destroying democracy, yes or no?’ That’s not a good question. You can’t answer that question. So what can you ask and answer?” As the document took on a life of its own, tractable rubrics emerged—Does social media make people angrier or more affectively polarized? Does it create political echo chambers? Does it increase the probability of violence? Does it enable foreign governments to increase political dysfunction in the United States and other democracies? Haidt continued, “It’s only after you break it up into lots of answerable questions that you see where the complexity lies.”

Haidt came away with the sense, on balance, that social media was in fact pretty bad. He was disappointed, but not surprised, that Facebook’s response to his article relied on the same three studies they’ve been reciting for years. “This is something you see with breakfast cereals,” he said, noting that a cereal company “might say, ‘Did you know we have twenty-five per cent more riboflavin than the leading brand?’ They’ll point to features where the evidence is in their favor, which distracts you from the over-all fact that your cereal tastes worse and is less healthy.”

After Haidt’s piece was published, the Google Doc—“Social Media and Political Dysfunction: A Collaborative Review”—was made available to the public . Comments piled up, and a new section was added, at the end, to include a miscellany of Twitter threads and Substack essays that appeared in response to Haidt’s interpretation of the evidence. Some colleagues and kibbitzers agreed with Haidt. But others, though they might have shared his basic intuition that something in our experience of social media was amiss, drew upon the same data set to reach less definitive conclusions, or even mildly contradictory ones. Even after the initial flurry of responses to Haidt’s article disappeared into social-media memory, the document, insofar as it captured the state of the social-media debate, remained a lively artifact.

Near the end of the collaborative project’s introduction, the authors warn, “We caution readers not to simply add up the number of studies on each side and declare one side the winner.” The document runs to more than a hundred and fifty pages, and for each question there are affirmative and dissenting studies, as well as some that indicate mixed results. According to one paper, “Political expressions on social media and the online forum were found to (a) reinforce the expressers’ partisan thought process and (b) harden their pre-existing political preferences,” but, according to another, which used data collected during the 2016 election, “Over the course of the campaign, we found media use and attitudes remained relatively stable. Our results also showed that Facebook news use was related to modest over-time spiral of depolarization. Furthermore, we found that people who use Facebook for news were more likely to view both pro- and counter-attitudinal news in each wave. Our results indicated that counter-attitudinal exposure increased over time, which resulted in depolarization.” If results like these seem incompatible, a perplexed reader is given recourse to a study that says, “Our findings indicate that political polarization on social media cannot be conceptualized as a unified phenomenon, as there are significant cross-platform differences.”

Interested in echo chambers? “Our results show that the aggregation of users in homophilic clusters dominate online interactions on Facebook and Twitter,” which seems convincing—except that, as another team has it, “We do not find evidence supporting a strong characterization of ‘echo chambers’ in which the majority of people’s sources of news are mutually exclusive and from opposite poles.” By the end of the file, the vaguely patronizing top-line recommendation against simple summation begins to make more sense. A document that originated as a bulwark against confirmation bias could, as it turned out, just as easily function as a kind of generative device to support anybody’s pet conviction. The only sane response, it seemed, was simply to throw one’s hands in the air.

When I spoke to some of the researchers whose work had been included, I found a combination of broad, visceral unease with the current situation—with the banefulness of harassment and trolling; with the opacity of the platforms; with, well, the widespread presentiment that of course social media is in many ways bad—and a contrastive sense that it might not be catastrophically bad in some of the specific ways that many of us have come to take for granted as true. This was not mere contrarianism, and there was no trace of gleeful mythbusting; the issue was important enough to get right. When I told Bail that the upshot seemed to me to be that exactly nothing was unambiguously clear, he suggested that there was at least some firm ground. He sounded a bit less apocalyptic than Haidt.

“A lot of the stories out there are just wrong,” he told me. “The political echo chamber has been massively overstated. Maybe it’s three to five per cent of people who are properly in an echo chamber.” Echo chambers, as hotboxes of confirmation bias, are counterproductive for democracy. But research indicates that most of us are actually exposed to a wider range of views on social media than we are in real life, where our social networks—in the original use of the term—are rarely heterogeneous. (Haidt told me that this was an issue on which the Google Doc changed his mind; he became convinced that echo chambers probably aren’t as widespread a problem as he’d once imagined.) And too much of a focus on our intuitions about social media’s echo-chamber effect could obscure the relevant counterfactual: a conservative might abandon Twitter only to watch more Fox News. “Stepping outside your echo chamber is supposed to make you moderate, but maybe it makes you more extreme,” Bail said. The research is inchoate and ongoing, and it’s difficult to say anything on the topic with absolute certainty. But this was, in part, Bail’s point: we ought to be less sure about the particular impacts of social media.

Bail went on, “The second story is foreign misinformation.” It’s not that misinformation doesn’t exist, or that it hasn’t had indirect effects, especially when it creates perverse incentives for the mainstream media to cover stories circulating online. Haidt also draws convincingly upon the work of Renée DiResta, the research manager at the Stanford Internet Observatory, to sketch out a potential future in which the work of shitposting has been outsourced to artificial intelligence, further polluting the informational environment. But, at least so far, very few Americans seem to suffer from consistent exposure to fake news—“probably less than two per cent of Twitter users, maybe fewer now, and for those who were it didn’t change their opinions,” Bail said. This was probably because the people likeliest to consume such spectacles were the sort of people primed to believe them in the first place. “In fact,” he said, “echo chambers might have done something to quarantine that misinformation.”

The final story that Bail wanted to discuss was the “proverbial rabbit hole, the path to algorithmic radicalization,” by which YouTube might serve a viewer increasingly extreme videos. There is some anecdotal evidence to suggest that this does happen, at least on occasion, and such anecdotes are alarming to hear. But a new working paper led by Brendan Nyhan, a political scientist at Dartmouth, found that almost all extremist content is either consumed by subscribers to the relevant channels—a sign of actual demand rather than manipulation or preference falsification—or encountered via links from external sites. It’s easy to see why we might prefer if this were not the case: algorithmic radicalization is presumably a simpler problem to solve than the fact that there are people who deliberately seek out vile content. “These are the three stories—echo chambers, foreign influence campaigns, and radicalizing recommendation algorithms—but, when you look at the literature, they’ve all been overstated.” He thought that these findings were crucial for us to assimilate, if only to help us understand that our problems may lie beyond technocratic tinkering. He explained, “Part of my interest in getting this research out there is to demonstrate that everybody is waiting for an Elon Musk to ride in and save us with an algorithm”—or, presumably, the reverse—“and it’s just not going to happen.”

When I spoke with Nyhan, he told me much the same thing: “The most credible research is way out of line with the takes.” He noted, of extremist content and misinformation, that reliable research that “measures exposure to these things finds that the people consuming this content are small minorities who have extreme views already.” The problem with the bulk of the earlier research, Nyhan told me, is that it’s almost all correlational. “Many of these studies will find polarization on social media,” he said. “But that might just be the society we live in reflected on social media!” He hastened to add, “Not that this is untroubling, and none of this is to let these companies, which are exercising a lot of power with very little scrutiny, off the hook. But a lot of the criticisms of them are very poorly founded. . . . The expansion of Internet access coincides with fifteen other trends over time, and separating them is very difficult. The lack of good data is a huge problem insofar as it lets people project their own fears into this area.” He told me, “It’s hard to weigh in on the side of ‘We don’t know, the evidence is weak,’ because those points are always going to be drowned out in our discourse. But these arguments are systematically underprovided in the public domain.”

In his Atlantic article, Haidt leans on a working paper by two social scientists, Philipp Lorenz-Spreen and Lisa Oswald, who took on a comprehensive meta-analysis of about five hundred papers and concluded that “the large majority of reported associations between digital media use and trust appear to be detrimental for democracy.” Haidt writes, “The literature is complex—some studies show benefits, particularly in less developed democracies—but the review found that, on balance, social media amplifies political polarization; foments populism, especially right-wing populism; and is associated with the spread of misinformation.” Nyhan was less convinced that the meta-analysis supported such categorical verdicts, especially once you bracketed the kinds of correlational findings that might simply mirror social and political dynamics. He told me, “If you look at their summary of studies that allow for causal inferences—it’s very mixed.”

As for the studies Nyhan considered most methodologically sound, he pointed to a 2020 article called “The Welfare Effects of Social Media,” by Hunt Allcott, Luca Braghieri, Sarah Eichmeyer, and Matthew Gentzkow. For four weeks prior to the 2018 midterm elections, the authors randomly divided a group of volunteers into two cohorts—one that continued to use Facebook as usual, and another that was paid to deactivate their accounts for that period. They found that deactivation “(i) reduced online activity, while increasing offline activities such as watching TV alone and socializing with family and friends; (ii) reduced both factual news knowledge and political polarization; (iii) increased subjective well-being; and (iv) caused a large persistent reduction in post-experiment Facebook use.” But Gentzkow reminded me that his conclusions, including that Facebook may slightly increase polarization, had to be heavily qualified: “From other kinds of evidence, I think there’s reason to think social media is not the main driver of increasing polarization over the long haul in the United States.”

In the book “ Why We’re Polarized ,” for example, Ezra Klein invokes the work of such scholars as Lilliana Mason to argue that the roots of polarization might be found in, among other factors, the political realignment and nationalization that began in the sixties, and were then sacralized, on the right, by the rise of talk radio and cable news. These dynamics have served to flatten our political identities, weakening our ability or inclination to find compromise. Insofar as some forms of social media encourage the hardening of connections between our identities and a narrow set of opinions, we might increasingly self-select into mutually incomprehensible and hostile groups; Haidt plausibly suggests that these processes are accelerated by the coalescence of social-media tribes around figures of fearful online charisma. “Social media might be more of an amplifier of other things going on rather than a major driver independently,” Gentzkow argued. “I think it takes some gymnastics to tell a story where it’s all primarily driven by social media, especially when you’re looking at different countries, and across different groups.”

Another study, led by Nejla Asimovic and Joshua Tucker, replicated Gentzkow’s approach in Bosnia and Herzegovina, and they found almost precisely the opposite results: the people who stayed on Facebook were, by the end of the study, more positively disposed to their historic out-groups. The authors’ interpretation was that ethnic groups have so little contact in Bosnia that, for some people, social media is essentially the only place where they can form positive images of one another. “To have a replication and have the signs flip like that, it’s pretty stunning,” Bail told me. “It’s a different conversation in every part of the world.”

Nyhan argued that, at least in wealthy Western countries, we might be too heavily discounting the degree to which platforms have responded to criticism: “Everyone is still operating under the view that algorithms simply maximize engagement in a short-term way” with minimal attention to potential externalities. “That might’ve been true when Zuckerberg had seven people working for him, but there are a lot of considerations that go into these rankings now.” He added, “There’s some evidence that, with reverse-chronological feeds”—streams of unwashed content, which some critics argue are less manipulative than algorithmic curation—“people get exposed to more low-quality content, so it’s another case where a very simple notion of ‘algorithms are bad’ doesn’t stand up to scrutiny. It doesn’t mean they’re good, it’s just that we don’t know.”

Bail told me that, over all, he was less confident than Haidt that the available evidence lines up clearly against the platforms. “Maybe there’s a slight majority of studies that say that social media is a net negative, at least in the West, and maybe it’s doing some good in the rest of the world.” But, he noted, “Jon will say that science has this expectation of rigor that can’t keep up with the need in the real world—that even if we don’t have the definitive study that creates the historical counterfactual that Facebook is largely responsible for polarization in the U.S., there’s still a lot pointing in that direction, and I think that’s a fair point.” He paused. “It can’t all be randomized control trials.”

Haidt comes across in conversation as searching and sincere, and, during our exchange, he paused several times to suggest that I include a quote from John Stuart Mill on the importance of good-faith debate to moral progress. In that spirit, I asked him what he thought of the argument, elaborated by some of Haidt’s critics, that the problems he described are fundamentally political, social, and economic, and that to blame social media is to search for lost keys under the streetlamp, where the light is better. He agreed that this was the steelman opponent: there were predecessors for cancel culture in de Tocqueville, and anxiety about new media that went back to the time of the printing press. “This is a perfectly reasonable hypothesis, and it’s absolutely up to the prosecution—people like me—to argue that, no, this time it’s different. But it’s a civil case! The evidential standard is not ‘beyond a reasonable doubt,’ as in a criminal case. It’s just a preponderance of the evidence.”

The way scholars weigh the testimony is subject to their disciplinary orientations. Economists and political scientists tend to believe that you can’t even begin to talk about causal dynamics without a randomized controlled trial, whereas sociologists and psychologists are more comfortable drawing inferences on a correlational basis. Haidt believes that conditions are too dire to take the hardheaded, no-reasonable-doubt view. “The preponderance of the evidence is what we use in public health. If there’s an epidemic—when COVID started, suppose all the scientists had said, ‘No, we gotta be so certain before you do anything’? We have to think about what’s actually happening, what’s likeliest to pay off.” He continued, “We have the largest epidemic ever of teen mental health, and there is no other explanation,” he said. “It is a raging public-health epidemic, and the kids themselves say Instagram did it, and we have some evidence, so is it appropriate to say, ‘Nah, you haven’t proven it’?”

This was his attitude across the board. He argued that social media seemed to aggrandize inflammatory posts and to be correlated with a rise in violence; even if only small groups were exposed to fake news, such beliefs might still proliferate in ways that were hard to measure. “In the post-Babel era, what matters is not the average but the dynamics, the contagion, the exponential amplification,” he said. “Small things can grow very quickly, so arguments that Russian disinformation didn’t matter are like COVID arguments that people coming in from China didn’t have contact with a lot of people.” Given the transformative effects of social media, Haidt insisted, it was important to act now, even in the absence of dispositive evidence. “Academic debates play out over decades and are often never resolved, whereas the social-media environment changes year by year,” he said. “We don’t have the luxury of waiting around five or ten years for literature reviews.”

Haidt could be accused of question-begging—of assuming the existence of a crisis that the research might or might not ultimately underwrite. Still, the gap between the two sides in this case might not be quite as wide as Haidt thinks. Skeptics of his strongest claims are not saying that there’s no there there. Just because the average YouTube user is unlikely to be led to Stormfront videos, Nyhan told me, doesn’t mean we shouldn’t worry that some people are watching Stormfront videos; just because echo chambers and foreign misinformation seem to have had effects only at the margins, Gentzkow said, doesn’t mean they’re entirely irrelevant. “There are many questions here where the thing we as researchers are interested in is how social media affects the average person,” Gentzkow told me. “There’s a different set of questions where all you need is a small number of people to change—questions about ethnic violence in Bangladesh or Sri Lanka, people on YouTube mobilized to do mass shootings. Much of the evidence broadly makes me skeptical that the average effects are as big as the public discussion thinks they are, but I also think there are cases where a small number of people with very extreme views are able to find each other and connect and act.” He added, “That’s where many of the things I’d be most concerned about lie.”

The same might be said about any phenomenon where the base rate is very low but the stakes are very high, such as teen suicide. “It’s another case where those rare edge cases in terms of total social harm may be enormous. You don’t need many teen-age kids to decide to kill themselves or have serious mental-health outcomes in order for the social harm to be really big.” He added, “Almost none of this work is able to get at those edge-case effects, and we have to be careful that if we do establish that the average effect of something is zero, or small, that it doesn’t mean we shouldn’t be worried about it—because we might be missing those extremes.” Jaime Settle, a scholar of political behavior at the College of William & Mary and the author of the book “ Frenemies: How Social Media Polarizes America ,” noted that Haidt is “farther along the spectrum of what most academics who study this stuff are going to say we have strong evidence for.” But she understood his impulse: “We do have serious problems, and I’m glad Jon wrote the piece, and down the road I wouldn’t be surprised if we got a fuller handle on the role of social media in all of this—there are definitely ways in which social media has changed our politics for the worse.”

It’s tempting to sidestep the question of diagnosis entirely, and to evaluate Haidt’s essay not on the basis of predictive accuracy—whether social media will lead to the destruction of American democracy—but as a set of proposals for what we might do better. If he is wrong, how much damage are his prescriptions likely to do? Haidt, to his great credit, does not indulge in any wishful thinking, and if his diagnosis is largely technological his prescriptions are sociopolitical. Two of his three major suggestions seem useful and have nothing to do with social media: he thinks that we should end closed primaries and that children should be given wide latitude for unsupervised play. His recommendations for social-media reform are, for the most part, uncontroversial: he believes that preteens shouldn’t be on Instagram and that platforms should share their data with outside researchers—proposals that are both likely to be beneficial and not very costly.

It remains possible, however, that the true costs of social-media anxieties are harder to tabulate. Gentzkow told me that, for the period between 2016 and 2020, the direct effects of misinformation were difficult to discern. “But it might have had a much larger effect because we got so worried about it—a broader impact on trust,” he said. “Even if not that many people were exposed, the narrative that the world is full of fake news, and you can’t trust anything, and other people are being misled about it—well, that might have had a bigger impact than the content itself.” Nyhan had a similar reaction. “There are genuine questions that are really important, but there’s a kind of opportunity cost that is missed here. There’s so much focus on sweeping claims that aren’t actionable, or unfounded claims we can contradict with data, that are crowding out the harms we can demonstrate, and the things we can test, that could make social media better.” He added, “We’re years into this, and we’re still having an uninformed conversation about social media. It’s totally wild.”

New Yorker Favorites

First she scandalized Washington. Then she became a princess .

What exactly happened between Neanderthals and humans ?

The unravelling of an expert on serial killers .

When you eat a dried fig, you’re probably chewing wasp mummies, too .

The meanings of the Muslim head scarf .

The slippery scams of the olive-oil industry .

Critics on the classics: our 1991 review of “Thelma & Louise.”

Sign up for our daily newsletter to receive the best stories from The New Yorker .

By signing up, you agree to our User Agreement and Privacy Policy & Cookie Statement . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

By Jack Truesdale

By Elise Paschen

By Robin Wright

• Entertainment
• Environment
• Information Science and Technology
• Social Issues

Home Essay Samples Sociology Effects of Social Media

Is Social Media Harmful or Beneficial for an Individual

Table of contents, the dark side of social media, empowerment and positive influence, impact on relationships and connectivity.

• Andreassen, C. S., Pallesen, S., & Griffiths, M. D. (2017). The relationship between addictive use of social media, narcissism, and self-esteem: Findings from a large national survey. Addictive Behaviors, 64, 287-293.
• Best, P., Manktelow, R., & Taylor, B. (2014). Online communication, social media and adolescent wellbeing: A systematic narrative review. Children and Youth Services Review, 41, 27-36.
• Kross, E., Verduyn, P., Demiralp, E., Park, J., Lee, D. S., Lin, N., ... & Ybarra, O. (2013). Facebook use predicts declines in subjective well-being in young adults. PLoS One, 8(8), e69841.
• Ryan, T., Chester, A., Reece, J., & Xenos, S. (2014). The uses and abuses of Facebook: A review of Facebook addiction. Journal of Behavioral Addictions, 3(3), 133-148.
• Wang, J. L., Jackson, L. A., Gaskin, J., & Wang, H. Z. (2014). The effects of social media on college students. Telematics and Informatics, 31(3), 343-351.

*minimum deadline

Cite this Essay

To export a reference to this article please select a referencing style below

• Race and Sexuality
• White American
• Human Sexual Behavior
• Gender Stereotypes
• African American

Related Essays

Need writing help?

You can always rely on us no matter what type of paper you need

*No hidden charges

100% Unique Essays

Absolutely Confidential

Money Back Guarantee

By clicking “Send Essay”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement. We will occasionally send you account related emails

You can also get a UNIQUE essay on this or any other topic

Thank you! We’ll contact you as soon as possible.

Does Social Media Do More Harm Than Good for Society?

Social media has both positive and negative effects on society. But is it doing more harm than good?

Media has always had the power to influence our society, but it wasn't until the social media boom that we saw it on this scale and magnitude. While it has the potential for good, social media has been also been harmful to society because of how we use it.

Here's how social media is harming our mental health, self-image, communication skills, and society at large—potentially causing more harm than good overall.

Social Media Can Lead to Depression, Anxiety, and Loneliness

The uncontrollable urge to share everyday life with others on social media is starting to have long-term effects. Studies have shown that increased use of social media platforms like Facebook, Instagram, and TikTok is leading to depression, anxiety, and loneliness.

The COVID-19 pandemic not only pushed more people to the platforms but also caused people to spend unusual amounts of time cruising their feeds. According to Statista , as of 2022, people spend an average of 147 minutes on social media daily. That's more than two hours.

More importantly, science has found that social media can make you sad . Social media platforms have become aware of how to manipulate your brain's reward response to increase engagement and time spent on apps. When you receive positive feedback on a post you made or a picture you uploaded, it releases endorphins. This is what keeps people on the platforms for hours. But it can also lead to increased feelings of anxiety, depression, and loneliness.

Casinos use the same types of tactics to get people to spend more time, and money, on their business. Giving out small wins to keep people coming back but never being able to fulfill their needs. If everyone had a full understanding of this concept, it could lead to healthier social media habits. Problem is, not very many people know how to create a healthy balance.

Communication on Social Media Has a Dark Side

While not everyone on the internet has a hard time communicating in real life, there is still a good portion of introverts who have an easier time talking online. Social media makes it easier for those people to connect with others and learn social cues that could have been missed. This can be especially helpful for people who live in smaller towns and have a deep desire to broaden their horizons.

While you can't exactly remain anonymous on social media without creating a fake profile, you can create a whole new persona. This can help people who have a hard time socializing to break out of their shells.

Where social media has gotten into trouble is when these personas get pulled to the dark side. According to Help Guide , about 10 percent of teens report being bullied on social media, and even more claim they have been the recipient of offensive remarks. Being on the receiving end can lead to lower self-esteem and self-image.

It's also hard to express clear and concise communication when only using a keyboard. Language gets lost in translation without more communication clues to give context, like body language. What could have been intended as an innocent remark could be taken personally. This could lead to an argument that could have been avoided if it had been made in person.

Communication on social media still has some maturing to do before it becomes a force for good.

Social Media's Divisive Effect

At no other time in the history of the world has it been easier to connect with someone from around the world as it is today. Social media has had a large part in getting more people in contact with each other. These connections have fostered a whole world of communities that wouldn't have existed without the invention of the internet and social media. To be fair, social media has some positive effects on society .

But at the same time, the ease of finding like-minded people through social media has shown to be just as dangerous as it has been positive. Since its inception, the public has become increasingly aware of just what types of groups were forming in the dark corners of social media. Groups that would threaten the well-being of others were allowed to assemble online.

The 2016 election was controversial for the use of foreign interference through Facebook ads to swing the opinions of the public. The continued disparity between political opinions is a big reason why Americans feel social media is doing more harm than good these days.

The power of social media to influence entire nations has come under the microscope with recent events and other forms of media, like movies. Documentaries like The Social Dilemma have shown exactly what kind of manipulation social media is capable of.

Our dependence on social media is causing large consequences on how we live our lives. Although, the same could potentially be said about any form of media. The only difference is the scale that social media operates on and the instantaneous effect of that power. As a result, we face a dilemma of disinformation, social division spurred by bad-faith actors, and massive influence campaigns driven by social media.

Self-Image Suffers Due to Social Media

We have all gone through periods of comparing ourselves to others, whether it be in school or work. Social media has taken that concept to a whole other level by putting the haves and the have-nots front and center. What started as an honest way to connect with like-minded communities and friends has become a way to sell and buy happiness. Social media has, essentially, turned into a marketing platform.

Facebook, Instagram, and even LinkedIn have all drastically reduced the organic reach of posts with algorithmic timelines. This means fewer and fewer people get to see what you post unless you want to pay for advertising. Only a handful of people, known as influencers, have a massive audience.

And many of them have financial reasons for their posts. They sell products by filling their social feeds with good experiences and amazing places. This leads to a majority of people on the platform trying to make their lives seem just as good. That, in turn, can lead to severe loneliness and pressure from always comparing your life to others without knowing the context behind the pictures.

The Future of Social Media in Society

Social media, in and of itself, is not bad or harmful to society. What makes it harmful is how we use it and how we feel about ourselves while using it.

Right now, that pendulum is swinging in the wrong direction, but all it takes is enough people choosing to use it for the right reasons.

The Pros and Cons of Social Media for Youth

A new review article looks at how social media affects well-being in youth...

Posted October 16, 2021 | Reviewed by Lybi Ma

• Social media has both positive and negative effects on well-being in youth.
• Social media impacts four distinct areas for youth: connections, identity, learning, and emotions.

More than 90 percent of teenagers in the U.S. have a smartphone. Access to this type of technology and social networking changes the playing field for young people who are simultaneously developing a sense of identity and new social relationships.

We have certainly heard about the downside of teens and smartphones: cyberbullying, anxiety , and a misrepresented sense of body image . Research demonstrates there are some benefits too, including the ability to keep in touch with friends and loved ones – especially when the COVID-19 pandemic limited in-person social interactions.

A new systematic review published in the journal Adolescent Research Review combines the evidence from qualitative studies that investigate adolescent social media use.

The authors found, in short, that the links between adolescent well-being and social media are complicated and depend on a broad range of factors.

“Adults have always been concerned about how the latest technology will harm children,” said Amanda Purington, director of evaluation and research for ACT for Youth in the BCTR and a doctoral candidate in Cornell’s Social Media Lab. “This goes back to radio programs, comic books, novels – you name it, adults were worried about it. The same is now true for social media. And yes, there are concerns – there are many potential risks and harms. But there are potential benefits, too.”

Reviewing 19 studies of young people ages 11 to 20, the authors identified four major themes related to social media and well-being that ultimately affected aspects of young people’s mental health and sense of self.

The first theme, connections, describes how social media either supports or hinders young people’s relationships with their peers, friends, and family. The studies in the review provided plenty of examples of ways that social media helped youth build connections with others. Participants reported that social media helped to create intimacy with friends and could improve popularity. Youth who said they were shy reported having an easier time making friends through social media. Studies also found social media was useful in keeping in touch with family and friends who live far away and allowing groups to communicate in masse. In seven papers, participants identified social media as a source of support and reassurance.

In 13 of the papers, youth reported that social media also harmed their connections with others. They provided examples of bullying and threats and an atmosphere of criticism and negativity during social media interactions. Youth cited the anonymity of social media as part of the problem, as well as miscommunication that can occur online.

Study participants also reported a feeling of disconnection associated with relationships on social media. Some youth felt rejected or left out when their social media posts did not receive the feedback they expected. Others reported feeling frustrated, lonely , or paranoid about being left out.

The second theme, identity, describes how adolescents are supported or frustrated on social media in trying to develop their identities.

Youth in many of the studies described how social media helped them to “come out of their shells” and express their true identities. They reported liking the ability to write and edit their thoughts and use images to express themselves. They reported that feedback they received on social media helped to bolster their self-confidence and they reported enjoying the ability to look back on memories to keep track of how their identity changed over time.

In eight studies, youth described ways that social media led to inauthentic representations of themselves. They felt suspicious that others would use photo editing to disguise their identities and complained about how easy it was to deliver communications slyly, rather than with the honesty required in face-to-face communication. They also felt self-conscious about posting selfies, and reported that the feedback they received would affect their feelings of self-worth .

The third theme, learning, describes how social media use supports or hinders education . In many studies, participants reported how social media helped to broaden their perspectives and expose them to new ideas and topics. Many youths specifically cited exposure to political and social movements, such as Black Lives Matter.

On the flip side, youth in five studies reported that social media interfered with their education. They said that phone notifications and the pressure to constantly check in on social media distracted them from their studies. Participants reported that they found it difficult to spend quiet time alone without checking their phones. Others said the 24-7 nature of social media kept them up too late at night, making it difficult to get up for school the next day.

The fourth theme, emotions, describes the ways that social media impacts young people’s emotional experiences in both positive and negative ways. In 11 papers, participants reported that social media had a positive effect on their emotions. Some reported it improved their mood, helped them to feel excited, and often prompted laughter . (Think funny animal videos.) Others reported that social media helped to alleviate negative moods, including annoyance, anger , and boredom . They described logging onto social media as a form of stress management .

But in nearly all of the papers included in the review, participants said social media was a source of worry and pressure. Participants expressed concern about judgment from their peers. They often felt embarrassed about how they looked in images. Many participants expressed worry that they were addicted to social media. Others fretted about leaving a digital footprint that would affect them later in life. Many participants reported experiencing pressure to constantly respond and stay connected on social media. And a smaller number of participants reported feeling disturbed by encountering troubling content, such as self-harm and seeing former partners in new relationships.

“As this review article highlights, social media provides spaces for adolescents to work on some of the central developmental tasks of their age, such as forming deeper connections with peers and exploring identity,” Purington said. “I believe the key is to help youth maximize these benefits while minimizing risks, and we can do this by educating youth about how to use social media in ways that are positive, safe, and prosocial.”

The take-home message: The body of evidence on social media and well-being paints a complicated picture of how this new technology is affecting youth. While there are certainly benefits when young people use social media, there is also a broad range of pressures and negative consequences.

The Bronfenbrenner Center for Translational Research at Cornell University is focused on using research findings to improve health and well-being of people at all stages of life.

• Find a Therapist
• Find a Treatment Center
• Find a Psychiatrist
• Find a Support Group
• Find Online Therapy
• United States
• Brooklyn, NY
• Chicago, IL
• Houston, TX
• Los Angeles, CA
• New York, NY
• Portland, OR
• San Diego, CA
• San Francisco, CA
• Seattle, WA
• Washington, DC
• Asperger's
• Bipolar Disorder
• Chronic Pain
• Eating Disorders
• Passive Aggression
• Personality
• Goal Setting
• Positive Psychology
• Stopping Smoking
• Low Sexual Desire
• Relationships
• Child Development
• Self Tests NEW
• Therapy Center
• Diagnosis Dictionary
• Types of Therapy

At any moment, someone’s aggravating behavior or our own bad luck can set us off on an emotional spiral that threatens to derail our entire day. Here’s how we can face our triggers with less reactivity so that we can get on with our lives.

• Emotional Intelligence
• Gaslighting
• Affective Forecasting
• Neuroscience

Social media brings benefits and risks to teens. Psychology can help identify a path forward

New psychological research exposes the harms and positive outcomes of social media. APA’s recommendations aim to add science-backed balance to the discussion

Vol. 54 No. 6 Print version: page 46

• Social Media and Internet

This was the year that social media itself went viral—and not in a good way. In March, President Joe Biden threatened to ban the Chinese-owned video-sharing site TikTok. In April, a bipartisan group of senators introduced legislation to ban kids under 13 from joining social media. In May, the U.S. surgeon general issued an advisory urging action to protect children online ( Social Media and Youth Mental Health: The U.S. Surgeon General’s Advisory , 2023 ). Just days earlier, APA issued its first-ever health advisory, providing recommendations to protect youth from the risks of social media ( Health Advisory on Social Media Use in Adolescence , 2023 ).

As youth mental health continues to suffer, parents, teachers, and legislators are sounding the alarm on social media. But fear and misinformation often go hand in hand. APA’s recommendations aim to add science-backed balance to the discussion. “There’s such a negative conversation happening around social media, and there is good reason for that. However, it’s important to realize there can be benefits for many teens,” said Jacqueline Nesi, PhD, an assistant professor of psychology at Brown University who studies technology use in youth, and a member of the APA panel that produced the health advisory. “Teens (and adults) obviously get something out of social media. We have to take a balanced view if we want to reach teens and help them use these platforms in healthier ways.”

[ Related:  What parents should know to keep their teens safe on social media ]

In 2023, an estimated 4.9 billion people worldwide are expected to use social media. For teens who grew up with technology, those digital platforms are woven into the fabric of their lives. “Social media is here to stay,” said Mary Alvord, PhD, a clinical psychologist in Maryland and adjunct professor at George Washington University, and a member of the APA panel. That doesn’t mean we have to accept its dangers, however. “Just as we decide when kids are old enough to drive, and we teach them to be good drivers, we can establish guidelines and teach children to use social media safely,” Alvord said.

Social media charms and harms

Even before the COVID-19 pandemic, rates of depression, anxiety, and suicide in young people were climbing. In 2021, more than 40% of high school students reported depressive symptoms, with girls and LGBTQ+ youth reporting even higher rates of poor mental health and suicidal thoughts, according to data from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention ( American Economic Review , Vol. 112, No. 11, 2022 ).

Young people may be particularly vulnerable to social media’s charms—as well as its harms. During adolescent development, brain regions associated with the desire for attention, feedback, and reinforcement from peers become more sensitive. Meanwhile, the brain regions involved in self-control have not fully matured. That can be a recipe for disaster. “The need to prioritize peers is a normal part of adolescent development, and youth are turning to social media for some of that longed-for peer contact,” said clinical psychologist Mary Ann McCabe, PhD, ABPP, a member-at-large of APA’s Board of Directors, adjunct associate professor of pediatrics at George Washington University School of Medicine, and cochair of the expert advisory panel. “The original yearning is social, but kids can accidentally wander into harmful content.”

[ Related: Potential risks of content, features, and functions: The science of how social media affects youth ]

The potential risks of social media may be especially acute during early adolescence when puberty delivers an onslaught of biological, psychological, and social changes. One longitudinal analysis of data from youth in the United Kingdom found distinct developmental windows during which adolescents are especially sensitive to social media’s impact. During those windows—around 11 to 13 for girls and 14 to 15 for boys—more social media use predicts a decrease in life satisfaction a year later, while lower use predicts greater life satisfaction ( Orben, A., et al.,  Nature Communications , Vol. 13, No. 1649, 2022 ).

One takeaway from such research is that adults should monitor kids’ social media use closely in early adolescence, between the ages of 10 and 14 or so. As kids become more mature and develop digital literacy skills, they can earn more autonomy.

The cost of connection

The internet is at its best when it brings people together. Adults can help kids get the most out of social media by encouraging them to use online platforms to engage with others in positive ways. “The primary benefit is social connection, and that’s true for teens who are connecting with friends they already have or making new connections,” Nesi said. “On social media, they can find people who share their identities and interests.”

Online social interaction can promote healthy socialization among teens, especially when they’re experiencing stress or social isolation. For youth who have anxiety or struggle in social situations, practicing conversations over social media can be an important step toward feeling more comfortable interacting with peers in person. Social media can also help kids stay in touch with their support networks. That can be especially important for kids from marginalized groups, such as LGBTQ+ adolescents who may be reluctant or unable to discuss their identity with caregivers ( Craig, S. L., et al.,  Social Media + Society , Vol. 7, No. 1, 2021 ). In such cases, online support can be a lifeline.

“We know from suicide prevention research that it’s critical for people to know they aren’t alone,” Alvord said.

Kids also learn about themselves online. “Social media provides a lot of opportunities for young people to discover new information, learn about current events, engage with issues, and have their voices heard,” Nesi added. “And it gives them an opportunity to explore their identities, which is an important task of the adolescent years.”

Yet all those opportunities come at a cost. “There is a lot of good that can come from social media. The problem is, the algorithms can also lead you down rabbit holes,” Alvord said. Technology is expertly designed to pull us in. Features such as “like” buttons, notifications, and videos that start playing automatically make it incredibly hard to step away. At the extreme, social media use can interfere with sleep, physical activity, schoolwork, and in-person social interactions. “The risk of technologies that pull us in is that they can get in the way of all the things we know are important for a teen’s development,” Nesi said.

Research suggests that setting limits and boundaries around social media, combined with discussion and coaching from adults, is the best way to promote positive outcomes for youth ( Wachs, S., et al.,  Computers & Education , Vol. 160, No. 1, 2021 ). Parents should talk to kids often about social media and technology and also use strategies like limiting the amount of time kids can use devices and removing devices from the bedroom at night. Caregivers should also keep an eye out for problematic behaviors, such as strong cravings to use social media, an inability to stop, and lying or sneaking around in order to use devices when they aren’t allowed.

[ Related:   How much is too much social media use: A Q&A with Mitch Prinstein, PhD ]

In helping to set boundaries around social media, it’s important that parents don’t simply limit access to devices, Alvord added. “Removing devices can feel punitive. Instead, parents should focus on encouraging kids to spend time with other activities they find valuable, such as movement and art activities they enjoy,” she said. “When kids are spending more time on those things, they’re less likely to be stuck on social media.”

Dangerous content

Spending too much time on social media is one cause for concern. Dangerous content is another. Despite efforts by caregivers and tech companies to protect kids from problematic material, they still encounter plenty of it online—including mis- and disinformation, racism and hate speech, and content that promotes dangerous behaviors such as disordered eating and self-harm.

During the first year of the pandemic, when kids were spending more time at home and online, McCabe saw a flurry of new diagnoses of eating disorders in her teen patients and their friends. “These kids often reported that they started by watching something relatively benign, like exercise videos,” she said. But their social media algorithms doubled down on that content, offering up more and more material related to body image and weight. “It was an echo chamber,” McCabe added. “And several of my patients attributed their eating disorders to this online behavior.”

Unfortunately, McCabe’s observations seem to be part of a common pattern. A large body of research, cited in APA’s health advisory, suggests that using social media for comparisons and feedback related to physical appearance is linked to poorer body image, disordered eating, and depressive symptoms, especially among girls.

Other research shows that when youth are exposed to unsafe behaviors online, such as substance use or self-harm, they may be at greater risk of engaging in similar behaviors themselves. In a longitudinal study of high school students, Nesi and colleagues showed that kids who saw their peers drinking alcohol on social media were more likely to start drinking and to binge drink 1 year later, even after controlling for demographic and developmental risk factors ( Journal of Adolescent Health , Vol. 60, No. 6, 2017 ).

Cyberbullying is another source of worry, both for young people and their caregivers. Indeed, research shows that online bullying and harassment can be harmful for a young person’s psychological well-being. APA’s health advisory cited several studies that found online bullying and harassment can be more severe than offline bullying. The research showed it can increase the risk of mental health problems in adolescents—with risks for both perpetrators and victims of cyberhate.

Ingrained racism

Search engines and social media algorithms can expose adolescents to other types of cyberhate, including racism. In fact, online algorithms often have structural racism and bias baked in, in ways that White users might not even notice. Sometimes, the algorithms themselves churn out biased or racist content. TikTok, for instance, has come under fire for recommending new accounts based on the appearance of the people a user already follows—with the inadvertent effect of segregating the platform. In addition to this form of “algorithmic bias,” people of color are frequently subjected to what some researchers call “filter bias.” In one common example, the beauty filters built into sites like Instagram or Snapchat might apply paler skin or more typically White facial features to a user’s selfies.

Like microaggressions in offline life, online racism in the form of algorithmic and filter bias can take a toll on mental health, said Brendesha Tynes, PhD, a professor of education and psychology at the University of Southern California, and a member of the APA advisory panel. In an ongoing daily diary study with adolescents, she is finding evidence that people who are exposed to algorithmic and filter bias are at increased risk of next-day depression and anxiety symptoms.

“I’m an adult who studies these issues and who has a lot of strategies to protect myself, and it can still be really hard” to cope with online racism, she said. Impressionable teens who haven’t learned such strategies are likely to experience even greater psychological impacts from the racism they encounter every day on social media. “We’re just beginning to understand the profound negative impacts of online racism,” Tynes said. “We need all hands on deck in supporting kids of color and helping them cope with these experiences.”

Despite the drawbacks of technology, there is a silver lining. Tynes has found Black youth receive valuable social support from other Black people on social media. Those interactions can help them learn to think critically about the racism they encounter. That’s important, since her research also shows that youth who are able to critique racism experience less psychological distress when they witness race-related traumatic events online ( Journal of Adolescent Health , Vol. 43, No. 6, 2008 ).

Tynes said more research is needed to understand how online racism affects youth and how best to protect them from its harms.

“Different groups have vastly different experiences online,” she said. “We need more detailed recommendations for specific groups.”

A role for psychology

How to protect kids from online racism is just one of a long list of questions on researchers’ wish lists. Digital technologies evolve so quickly that kids are off to a new platform before scientists can finish collecting data about yesterday’s favorite sites. “There’s so much we still don’t know about this topic. That’s understandably frustrating for people because social media is impacting people’s lives as we speak,” Nesi said.

It’s likely some groups, and some individuals, are more susceptible than others to the negative effects of social media, she added. “We need more information about who is more vulnerable and who is more resilient, and what it is they’re doing online that’s healthy versus harmful.”

While there is a lot of work to be done, Nesi said, “we’re getting closer.” As APA’s recommendations make clear, there is ample evidence some types of content and online behaviors can harm youth. Adult role models can work together with teens to understand the pitfalls of technology and establish boundaries to protect them from dangerous content and excessive screen time.

Psychological research shows children from a young age should be taught digital literacy skills such as identifying misinformation, protecting privacy, understanding how people can misrepresent themselves online, and how to critically evaluate race-related materials online. One way to promote those skills may be to lean into teens’ inherent skepticism of grown-ups. “You can teach kids that a lot of people want something from them,” Alvord said—whether it’s a stranger trying to message them on Instagram, or TikTok earning money by collecting their data or showing them branded content.

That’s not to say it’s easy to help kids develop a healthy relationship with social media. “By necessity, adolescents disagree more with their parents—and they are formidable when they insist on having something, like phones or social media, that all their friends have,” McCabe said. “But parents are eager for guidance. There is an appetite for this information now,” she added—and psychological scientists can help provide it.

That scientific research can inform broader efforts to keep children safe on social media as well. “Parents can’t do this alone,” Nesi said. “We need larger-scale changes to these platforms to protect kids.”

There are efforts to make such changes. The Kids Online Safety Act, a bipartisan bill introduced in April, establishes a duty of care for social media companies to protect minors from mental health harms, sex trafficking, narcotics, and other dangers. Additionally, the bill requires social media companies to go through independent, external audits, allows researcher access to platform data assets, and creates substantial youth and parental controls to create a safer digital environment. Even as legislators and tech companies consider those and other policies, researchers can continue their efforts to determine which actions might be most protective, said Nesi, who is currently leading a study to understand which features of social media are helpful versus harmful for kids at high risk of suicide. “For some kids, being able to connect with others and find support is really important. For others, social media may create more challenges than it solves,” Nesi said. “The key is making sure we don’t accidentally do any harm” by enacting restrictions and legislation that are not backed by science.

While researchers forge ahead, clinical psychologists, too, can add valuable insight for teens and their families. “Screens are a central part of adolescents’ lives, and that needs to be integrated into assessment and treatment,” Nesi said. “Clinicians can help families and teens take a step back and look at their social media use to figure out what’s working for them and what isn’t.”

Someday, McCabe said, digital literacy may be taught in schools the same way that youth learn about sexual health and substance use. “I hope we’ll come to a point where teaching about the healthy use of social media is an everyday occurrence,” she said. “Because of this dialogue that we’re having now among families and policymakers, we may see a new generation of kids whose entry into the digital world is very different, where we can use social media for connection and education but minimize the harms,” she added. “I hope this is the beginning of a new day.”

Social media recommendations

APA’s Health Advisory on Social Media Use in Adolescence makes these recommendations based on the scientific evidence to date:

• Youth using social media should be encouraged to use functions that create opportunities for social support, online companionship, and emotional intimacy that can promote healthy socialization.
• Social media use, functionality, and permissions/consenting should be tailored to youths’ developmental capabilities; designs created for adults may not be appropriate for children.
• In early adolescence (i.e., typically 10–14 years), adult monitoring (i.e., ongoing review, discussion, and coaching around social media content) is advised for most youths’ social media use; autonomy may increase gradually as kids age and if they gain digital literacy skills. However, monitoring should be balanced with youths’ appropriate needs for privacy.
• To reduce the risks of psychological harm, adolescents’ exposure to content on social media that depicts illegal or psychologically maladaptive behavior, including content that instructs or encourages youth to engage in health-risk behaviors, such as self-harm (e.g., cutting, suicide), harm to others, or those that encourage eating-disordered behavior (e.g., restrictive eating, purging, excessive exercise) should be minimized, reported, and removed; moreover, technology should not drive users to this content.
• To minimize psychological harm, adolescents’ exposure to “cyberhate” including online discrimination, prejudice, hate, or cyberbullying especially directed toward a marginalized group (e.g., racial, ethnic, gender, sexual, religious, ability status), or toward an individual because of their identity or allyship with a marginalized group should be minimized.
• Adolescents should be routinely screened for signs of “problematic social media use” that can impair their ability to engage in daily roles and routines, and may present risk for more serious psychological harms over time.
• The use of social media should be limited so as to not interfere with adolescents’ sleep and physical activity.
• Adolescents should limit use of social media for social comparison, particularly around beauty- or appearance-related content.
• Adolescents’ social media use should be preceded by training in social media literacy to ensure that users have developed psychologically-informed competencies and skills that will maximize the chances for balanced, safe, and meaningful social media use.
• Substantial resources should be provided for continued scientific examination of the positive and negative effects of social media on adolescent development.

Read the full recommendations and see the science behind them .

Further reading

Algorithms of oppression: How search engines reinforce racism Noble, S. U., New York University Press, 2018

Family Online Safety Institute

An updated agenda for the study of digital media use and adolescent development: Future directions following Odgers & Jensen (2020) Prinstein, M. J., et al., The Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry , 2020

From Google searches to Russian disinformation: Adolescent critical race digital literacy needs and skills Tynes, B., et al., International Journal of Multicultural Education , 2021

How social media affects teen mental health: A missing link Orben, A., & Blakemore, S.J. Nature , Feb. 14, 2023

Techno Sapiens

Recommended Reading

Six Things Psychologists are Talking About

The APA Monitor on Psychology ® sister e-newsletter offers fresh articles on psychology trends, new research, and more.

Welcome! Thank you for subscribing.

Speaking of Psychology

Subscribe to APA’s audio podcast series highlighting some of the most important and relevant psychological research being conducted today.

Subscribe to Speaking of Psychology and download via:

Contact APA

You may also like.

Is social media use bad for young people’s mental health? It’s complicated.

July 17, 2023 – On May 23, U.S. Surgeon General Vivek Murthy issued an advisory warning about the potential dangers of social media for the mental health of children and teens . Laura Marciano , postdoctoral research fellow at the Lee Kum Sheung Center for Health and Happiness and in the  Department of Social and Behavioral Sciences at Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, says that social media use might be detrimental for young people’s well-being but can also have positive effects.

Q: What are your thoughts on the Surgeon General’s advisory?

A: The advisory highlighted compelling evidence published during the last decade on the potential harmful impact of social media on children and adolescents. Some of what young people experience online—including cyberbullying, online harassment and abuse, predatory behaviors, and exposure to violent, sexual, and hate-based content—can undoubtedly be negative. But social media experiences are not limited to these types of content.

Much of the scientific literature on the effects of social media use has focused on negative outcomes. But the link between social media use and young people’s mental health is complicated. Literature reviews show that study results are mixed: Associations between social media use and well-being can be positive, negative, and even largely null when advanced data analyses are carried out, and the size of the effects is small. And positive and negative effects can co-exist in the same individual. We are still discovering how to compare the effect size of social media use with the effects of other behavioral habits—such as physical activity, sleep, food consumption, life events, and time spent in offline social connections—and psychological processes happening offline. We are also still studying how social media use may be linked positively with well-being.

It’s important to note that many of the existing studies relied on data from people living in so-called WEIRD countries (Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich and Democratic), thus leaving out the majority of the worldwide population living in the Global South. In addition, we know that populations like minorities, people experiencing health disparities and chronic health conditions , and international students can find social media extremely helpful for creating and maintaining social communities to which they feel they belong.

A number of large cohort studies have measured social media use according to time spent on various platforms. But it’s important to consider not just time spent, but whether that time is displacing time for other activities promoting well-being, like physical activity and sleep. Finally, the effects of social media use are idiosyncratic, meaning that each child and adolescent might be affected differently, which makes it difficult to generalize about the effects.

Literature reviews on interventions limiting social media use present a more balanced picture. For example, one comprehensive review on the effects of digital detox—refraining from using devices such as smartphones—wasn’t able to draw any clear conclusions about whether such detox could be effective at promoting a healthy way of life in the digital era, because the findings were mixed and contradictory.

Q: What has your research found regarding the potential risks and benefits of social media use among young people?

A: In my work with Prof. Vish Viswanath , we have summarized all the papers on how social media use is related to positive well-being measures, to balance the ongoing bias of the literature on negative outcomes such as depression and anxiety. We found both positive and negative correlations between different social media activities and well-being. The most consistent results show a link between social media activities and hedonic well-being (positive emotions) and social well-being. We also found that social comparison—such as comparing how many likes you have with how many someone else has, or comparing yourself to digitally enhanced images online—drives the negative correlation with well-being.

Meanwhile, I am working on the “ HappyB ” project, a longitudinal project based in Switzerland, through which I have collected data from more than 1,500 adolescents on their smartphone and social media use and well-being. In a recent study using that cohort, we looked at how social media use affects flourishing , a construct that encompasses happiness, meaning and purpose, physical and mental health, character, close social relationships, and financial stability. We found that certain positive social media experiences are associated with flourishing. In particular, having someone to talk to online when feeling lonely was the item most related to well-being. That is not surprising, considering that happiness is related to the quality of social connections.

Our data suggest that homing in on the psychological processes triggered during social media use is key to determining links with well-being. For example, we should consider if a young person feels appreciated and part of a group in a particular online conversation. Such information can help us shed light on the dynamics that shape young people’s well-being through digital activities.

In our research, we work to account for the fact that social media time is a sedentary behavior. We need to consider that any behavior that risks diminishing the time spent on physical activity and sleep—crucial components of brain development and well-being—might be detrimental. Interestingly, some studies suggest that spending a short amount of time using social media, around 1-2 hours, is beneficial, but—as with any extreme behavior—it can cause harm if the time spent online dominates a child’s or adolescent’s day.

It’s also important to consider how long the effects of social media last. Social media use may have small ephemeral effects that can accumulate over time. A step for future research is to disentangle short- versus long-term effects and how long each last. In addition, we should better understand how digital media usage affects the adolescent brain. Colleagues and I have summarized existing neuroscientific studies on the topic, but more multidisciplinary research is needed.

Q: What are some steps you’d recommend to make social media use safer for kids?

A: I’ll use a metaphor to answer this question. Is a car safe for someone that is not able to drive? To drive safely, we need to learn how to accelerate, recognize road signs, make safe decisions according to certain rules, and wear safety belts. Similarly, to use social media safely, I think we as a society—including schools, educators, and health providers—should provide children and families with clear, science-based information on both its positive and negative potential impacts.

We can also ask social media companies to pay more attention to how some features—such as the number of “likes”—can modulate adolescent brain activity, and to think about ways to limit negative effects. We might even ask adolescents to advise designers on how to create social media platforms specifically for them. It would be extremely valuable to ask them which features would be best for them and which ones they would like to avoid. I think that co-designing apps and conducting research with the young people who use the platforms is a crucial step.

For parents, my suggestion is to communicate with your children and promote a climate of safety and empathy when it comes to social media use. Try to use these platforms along with them, for example by explaining how a platform works and commenting on the content. Also, I would encourage schools and parents to collaborate on sharing information with young people about social media and well-being.

Also, to offset children’s sedentary time spent on social media, parents could offer them alternative extracurricular activities to provide some balance. But it’s important to remember that social well-being depends on the quality of social connections, and that social media can help to promote this kind of well-being. So I’d recommend trying to keep what is good—according to my research that would include instant messaging, the chance to talk to people when someone is feeling lonely, and funny or inspirational content—and minimizing what’s negative, such as too much sedentary time or too much time spent on social comparison.

– Karen Feldscher

Every print subscription comes with full digital access

Science News

Social media harms teens’ mental health, mounting evidence shows. what now.

Understanding what is going on in teens’ minds is necessary for targeted policy suggestions

Most teens use social media, often for hours on end. Some social scientists are confident that such use is harming their mental health. Now they want to pinpoint what explains the link.

Carol Yepes/Getty Images

Share this:

By Sujata Gupta

February 20, 2024 at 7:30 am

In January, Mark Zuckerberg, CEO of Facebook’s parent company Meta, appeared at a congressional hearing to answer questions about how social media potentially harms children. Zuckerberg opened by saying: “The existing body of scientific work has not shown a causal link between using social media and young people having worse mental health.”

But many social scientists would disagree with that statement. In recent years, studies have started to show a causal link between teen social media use and reduced well-being or mood disorders, chiefly depression and anxiety.

Ironically, one of the most cited studies into this link focused on Facebook.

Researchers delved into whether the platform’s introduction across college campuses in the mid 2000s increased symptoms associated with depression and anxiety. The answer was a clear yes , says MIT economist Alexey Makarin, a coauthor of the study, which appeared in the November 2022 American Economic Review . “There is still a lot to be explored,” Makarin says, but “[to say] there is no causal evidence that social media causes mental health issues, to that I definitely object.”

The concern, and the studies, come from statistics showing that social media use in teens ages 13 to 17 is now almost ubiquitous. Two-thirds of teens report using TikTok, and some 60 percent of teens report using Instagram or Snapchat, a 2022 survey found. (Only 30 percent said they used Facebook.) Another survey showed that girls, on average, allot roughly 3.4 hours per day to TikTok, Instagram and Facebook, compared with roughly 2.1 hours among boys. At the same time, more teens are showing signs of depression than ever, especially girls ( SN: 6/30/23 ).

As more studies show a strong link between these phenomena, some researchers are starting to shift their attention to possible mechanisms. Why does social media use seem to trigger mental health problems? Why are those effects unevenly distributed among different groups, such as girls or young adults? And can the positives of social media be teased out from the negatives to provide more targeted guidance to teens, their caregivers and policymakers?

“You can’t design good public policy if you don’t know why things are happening,” says Scott Cunningham, an economist at Baylor University in Waco, Texas.

Increasing rigor

Concerns over the effects of social media use in children have been circulating for years, resulting in a massive body of scientific literature. But those mostly correlational studies could not show if teen social media use was harming mental health or if teens with mental health problems were using more social media.

Moreover, the findings from such studies were often inconclusive, or the effects on mental health so small as to be inconsequential. In one study that received considerable media attention, psychologists Amy Orben and Andrew Przybylski combined data from three surveys to see if they could find a link between technology use, including social media, and reduced well-being. The duo gauged the well-being of over 355,000 teenagers by focusing on questions around depression, suicidal thinking and self-esteem.

Digital technology use was associated with a slight decrease in adolescent well-being , Orben, now of the University of Cambridge, and Przybylski, of the University of Oxford, reported in 2019 in Nature Human Behaviour . But the duo downplayed that finding, noting that researchers have observed similar drops in adolescent well-being associated with drinking milk, going to the movies or eating potatoes.

Holes have begun to appear in that narrative thanks to newer, more rigorous studies.

In one longitudinal study, researchers — including Orben and Przybylski — used survey data on social media use and well-being from over 17,400 teens and young adults to look at how individuals’ responses to a question gauging life satisfaction changed between 2011 and 2018. And they dug into how the responses varied by gender, age and time spent on social media.

Social media use was associated with a drop in well-being among teens during certain developmental periods, chiefly puberty and young adulthood, the team reported in 2022 in Nature Communications . That translated to lower well-being scores around ages 11 to 13 for girls and ages 14 to 15 for boys. Both groups also reported a drop in well-being around age 19. Moreover, among the older teens, the team found evidence for the Goldilocks Hypothesis: the idea that both too much and too little time spent on social media can harm mental health.

“There’s hardly any effect if you look over everybody. But if you look at specific age groups, at particularly what [Orben] calls ‘windows of sensitivity’ … you see these clear effects,” says L.J. Shrum, a consumer psychologist at HEC Paris who was not involved with this research. His review of studies related to teen social media use and mental health is forthcoming in the Journal of the Association for Consumer Research.

Cause and effect

That longitudinal study hints at causation, researchers say. But one of the clearest ways to pin down cause and effect is through natural or quasi-experiments. For these in-the-wild experiments, researchers must identify situations where the rollout of a societal “treatment” is staggered across space and time. They can then compare outcomes among members of the group who received the treatment to those still in the queue — the control group.

That was the approach Makarin and his team used in their study of Facebook. The researchers homed in on the staggered rollout of Facebook across 775 college campuses from 2004 to 2006. They combined that rollout data with student responses to the National College Health Assessment, a widely used survey of college students’ mental and physical health.

The team then sought to understand if those survey questions captured diagnosable mental health problems. Specifically, they had roughly 500 undergraduate students respond to questions both in the National College Health Assessment and in validated screening tools for depression and anxiety. They found that mental health scores on the assessment predicted scores on the screenings. That suggested that a drop in well-being on the college survey was a good proxy for a corresponding increase in diagnosable mental health disorders. 

Compared with campuses that had not yet gained access to Facebook, college campuses with Facebook experienced a 2 percentage point increase in the number of students who met the diagnostic criteria for anxiety or depression, the team found.

When it comes to showing a causal link between social media use in teens and worse mental health, “that study really is the crown jewel right now,” says Cunningham, who was not involved in that research.

A need for nuance

The social media landscape today is vastly different than the landscape of 20 years ago. Facebook is now optimized for maximum addiction, Shrum says, and other newer platforms, such as Snapchat, Instagram and TikTok, have since copied and built on those features. Paired with the ubiquity of social media in general, the negative effects on mental health may well be larger now.

Moreover, social media research tends to focus on young adults — an easier cohort to study than minors. That needs to change, Cunningham says. “Most of us are worried about our high school kids and younger.” 

And so, researchers must pivot accordingly. Crucially, simple comparisons of social media users and nonusers no longer make sense. As Orben and Przybylski’s 2022 work suggested, a teen not on social media might well feel worse than one who briefly logs on. 

Researchers must also dig into why, and under what circumstances, social media use can harm mental health, Cunningham says. Explanations for this link abound. For instance, social media is thought to crowd out other activities or increase people’s likelihood of comparing themselves unfavorably with others. But big data studies, with their reliance on existing surveys and statistical analyses, cannot address those deeper questions. “These kinds of papers, there’s nothing you can really ask … to find these plausible mechanisms,” Cunningham says.

One ongoing effort to understand social media use from this more nuanced vantage point is the SMART Schools project out of the University of Birmingham in England. Pedagogical expert Victoria Goodyear and her team are comparing mental and physical health outcomes among children who attend schools that have restricted cell phone use to those attending schools without such a policy. The researchers described the protocol of that study of 30 schools and over 1,000 students in the July BMJ Open.

Goodyear and colleagues are also combining that natural experiment with qualitative research. They met with 36 five-person focus groups each consisting of all students, all parents or all educators at six of those schools. The team hopes to learn how students use their phones during the day, how usage practices make students feel, and what the various parties think of restrictions on cell phone use during the school day.

Talking to teens and those in their orbit is the best way to get at the mechanisms by which social media influences well-being — for better or worse, Goodyear says. Moving beyond big data to this more personal approach, however, takes considerable time and effort. “Social media has increased in pace and momentum very, very quickly,” she says. “And research takes a long time to catch up with that process.”

Until that catch-up occurs, though, researchers cannot dole out much advice. “What guidance could we provide to young people, parents and schools to help maintain the positives of social media use?” Goodyear asks. “There’s not concrete evidence yet.”

More Stories from Science News on Science & Society

Scientists are fixing flawed forensics that can lead to wrongful convictions

Privacy remains an issue with several women’s health apps

Should we use AI to resurrect digital ‘ghosts’ of the dead?

A hidden danger lurks beneath Yellowstone

Online spaces may intensify teens’ uncertainty in social interactions

Want to see butterflies in your backyard? Try doing less yardwork

Ximena Velez-Liendo is saving Andean bears with honey

‘Flavorama’ guides readers through the complex landscape of flavor

Subscribers, enter your e-mail address for full access to the Science News archives and digital editions.

Not a subscriber? Become one now .

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• HHS Author Manuscripts

Social Media and Mental Health: Benefits, Risks, and Opportunities for Research and Practice

John a. naslund.

a Department of Global Health and Social Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA

Ameya Bondre

b CareNX Innovations, Mumbai, India

John Torous

c Department of Psychiatry, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA

Kelly A. Aschbrenner

d Department of Psychiatry, Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, Lebanon, NH

Social media platforms are popular venues for sharing personal experiences, seeking information, and offering peer-to-peer support among individuals living with mental illness. With significant shortfalls in the availability, quality, and reach of evidence-based mental health services across the United States and globally, social media platforms may afford new opportunities to bridge this gap. However, caution is warranted, as numerous studies highlight risks of social media use for mental health. In this commentary, we consider the role of social media as a potentially viable intervention platform for offering support to persons with mental disorders, promoting engagement and retention in care, and enhancing existing mental health services. Specifically, we summarize current research on the use of social media among mental health service users, and early efforts using social media for the delivery of evidence-based programs. We also review the risks, potential harms, and necessary safety precautions with using social media for mental health. To conclude, we explore opportunities using data science and machine learning, for example by leveraging social media for detecting mental disorders and developing predictive models aimed at characterizing the aetiology and progression of mental disorders. These various efforts using social media, as summarized in this commentary, hold promise for improving the lives of individuals living with mental disorders.

Introduction

Social media has become a prominent fixture in the lives of many individuals facing the challenges of mental illness. Social media refers broadly to web and mobile platforms that allow individuals to connect with others within a virtual network (such as Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Snapchat, or LinkedIn), where they can share, co-create, or exchange various forms of digital content, including information, messages, photos, or videos ( Ahmed, Ahmad, Ahmad, & Zakaria, 2019 ). Studies have reported that individuals living with a range of mental disorders, including depression, psychotic disorders, or other severe mental illnesses, use social media platforms at comparable rates as the general population, with use ranging from about 70% among middle-age and older individuals, to upwards of 97% among younger individuals ( Aschbrenner, Naslund, Grinley, et al., 2018 ; M. L. Birnbaum, Rizvi, Correll, Kane, & Confino, 2017 ; Brunette et al., 2019 ; Naslund, Aschbrenner, & Bartels, 2016 ). Other exploratory studies have found that many of these individuals with mental illness appear to turn to social media to share their personal experiences, seek information about their mental health and treatment options, and give and receive support from others facing similar mental health challenges ( Bucci, Schwannauer, & Berry, 2019 ; Naslund, Aschbrenner, Marsch, & Bartels, 2016b ).

Across the United States and globally, very few people living with mental illness have access to adequate mental health services ( Patel et al., 2018 ). The wide reach and near ubiquitous use of social media platforms may afford novel opportunities to address these shortfalls in existing mental health care, by enhancing the quality, availability, and reach of services. Recent studies have explored patterns of social media use, impact of social media use on mental health and wellbeing, and the potential to leverage the popularity and interactive features of social media to enhance the delivery of interventions. However, there remains uncertainty regarding the risks and potential harms of social media for mental health ( Orben & Przybylski, 2019 ), and how best to weigh these concerns against potential benefits.

In this commentary, we summarized current research on the use of social media among individuals with mental illness, with consideration of the impact of social media on mental wellbeing, as well as early efforts using social media for delivery of evidence-based programs for addressing mental health problems. We searched for recent peer reviewed publications in Medline and Google Scholar using the search terms “mental health” or “mental illness” and “social media”, and searched the reference lists of recent reviews and other relevant studies. We reviewed the risks, potential harms, and necessary safety precautions with using social media for mental health. Overall, our goal was to consider the role of social media as a potentially viable intervention platform for offering support to persons with mental disorders, promoting engagement and retention in care, and enhancing existing mental health services, while balancing the need for safety. Given this broad objective, we did not perform a systematic search of the literature and we did not apply specific inclusion criteria based on study design or type of mental disorder.

Social Media Use and Mental Health

In 2020, there are an estimated 3.8 billion social media users worldwide, representing half the global population ( We Are Social, 2020 ). Recent studies have shown that individuals with mental disorders are increasingly gaining access to and using mobile devices, such as smartphones ( Firth et al., 2015 ; Glick, Druss, Pina, Lally, & Conde, 2016 ; Torous, Chan, et al., 2014 ; Torous, Friedman, & Keshavan, 2014 ). Similarly, there is mounting evidence showing high rates of social media use among individuals with mental disorders, including studies looking at engagement with these popular platforms across diverse settings and disorder types. Initial studies from 2015 found that nearly half of a sample of psychiatric patients were social media users, with greater use among younger individuals ( Trefflich, Kalckreuth, Mergl, & Rummel-Kluge, 2015 ), while 47% of inpatients and outpatients with schizophrenia reported using social media, of which 79% reported at least once-a-week usage of social media websites ( Miller, Stewart, Schrimsher, Peeples, & Buckley, 2015 ). Rates of social media use among psychiatric populations have increased in recent years, as reflected in a study with data from 2017 showing comparable rates of social media use (approximately 70%) among individuals with serious mental illness in treatment as compared to low-income groups from the general population ( Brunette et al., 2019 ).

Similarly, among individuals with serious mental illness receiving community-based mental health services, a recent study found equivalent rates of social media use as the general population, even exceeding 70% of participants ( Naslund, Aschbrenner, & Bartels, 2016 ). Comparable findings were demonstrated among middle-age and older individuals with mental illness accessing services at peer support agencies, where 72% of respondents reported using social media ( Aschbrenner, Naslund, Grinley, et al., 2018 ). Similar results, with 68% of those with first episode psychosis using social media daily were reported in another study ( Abdel-Baki, Lal, D.-Charron, Stip, & Kara, 2017 ).

Individuals who self-identified as having a schizophrenia spectrum disorder responded to a survey shared through the National Alliance of Mental Illness (NAMI), and reported that visiting social media sites was one of their most common activities when using digital devices, taking up roughly 2 hours each day ( Gay, Torous, Joseph, Pandya, & Duckworth, 2016 ). For adolescents and young adults ages 12 to 21 with psychotic disorders and mood disorders, over 97% reported using social media, with average use exceeding 2.5 hours per day ( M. L. Birnbaum et al., 2017 ). Similarly, in a sample of adolescents ages 13-18 recruited from community mental health centers, 98% reported using social media, with YouTube as the most popular platform, followed by Instagram and Snapchat ( Aschbrenner et al., 2019 ).

Research has also explored the motivations for using social media as well as the perceived benefits of interacting on these platforms among individuals with mental illness. In the sections that follow (see Table 1 for a summary), we consider three potentially unique features of interacting and connecting with others on social media that may offer benefits for individuals living with mental illness. These include: 1) Facilitate social interaction; 2) Access to a peer support network; and 3) Promote engagement and retention in services.

Summary of potential benefits and challenges with social media for mental health

Facilitate Social Interaction

Social media platforms offer near continuous opportunities to connect and interact with others, regardless of time of day or geographic location. This on demand ease of communication may be especially important for facilitating social interaction among individuals with mental disorders experiencing difficulties interacting in face-to-face settings. For example, impaired social functioning is a common deficit in schizophrenia spectrum disorders, and social media may facilitate communication and interacting with others for these individuals ( Torous & Keshavan, 2016 ). This was suggested in one study where participants with schizophrenia indicated that social media helped them to interact and socialize more easily ( Miller et al., 2015 ). Like other online communication, the ability to connect with others anonymously may be an important feature of social media, especially for individuals living with highly stigmatizing health conditions ( Berger, Wagner, & Baker, 2005 ), such as serious mental disorders ( Highton-Williamson, Priebe, & Giacco, 2015 ).

Studies have found that individuals with serious mental disorders ( Spinzy, Nitzan, Becker, Bloch, & Fennig, 2012 ) as well as young adults with mental illness ( Gowen, Deschaine, Gruttadara, & Markey, 2012 ) appear to form online relationships and connect with others on social media as often as social media users from the general population. This is an important observation because individuals living with serious mental disorders typically have few social contacts in the offline world, and also experience high rates of loneliness ( Badcock et al., 2015 ; Giacco, Palumbo, Strappelli, Catapano, & Priebe, 2016 ). Among individuals receiving publicly funded mental health services who use social media, nearly half (47%) reported using these platforms at least weekly to feel less alone ( Brusilovskiy, Townley, Snethen, & Salzer, 2016 ). In another study of young adults with serious mental illness, most indicated that they used social media to help feel less isolated ( Gowen et al., 2012 ). Interestingly, more frequent use of social media among a sample of individuals with serious mental illness was associated with greater community participation, measured as participation in shopping, work, religious activities or visiting friends and family, as well as greater civic engagement, reflected as voting in local elections ( Brusilovskiy et al., 2016 ).

Emerging research also shows that young people with moderate to severe depressive symptoms appear to prefer communicating on social media rather than in-person ( Rideout & Fox, 2018 ), while other studies have found that some individuals may prefer to seek help for mental health concerns online rather than through in-person encounters ( Batterham & Calear, 2017 ). In a qualitative study, participants with schizophrenia described greater anonymity, the ability to discover that other people have experienced similar health challenges, and reducing fears through greater access to information as important motivations for using the Internet to seek mental health information ( Schrank, Sibitz, Unger, & Amering, 2010 ). Because social media does not require the immediate responses necessary in face-to-face communication, it may overcome deficits with social interaction due to psychotic symptoms that typically adversely affect face-to-face conversations ( Docherty et al., 1996 ). Online social interactions may not require the use of non-verbal cues, particularly in the initial stages of interaction ( Kiesler, Siegel, & McGuire, 1984 ), with interactions being more fluid, and within the control of users, thereby overcoming possible social anxieties linked to in-person interaction ( Indian & Grieve, 2014 ). Furthermore, many individuals with serious mental disorders can experience symptoms including passive social withdrawal, blunted affect and attentional impairment, as well as active social avoidance due to hallucinations or other concerns ( Hansen, Torgalsbøen, Melle, & Bell, 2009 ); thus, potentially reinforcing the relative advantage, as perceived by users, of using social media over in person conversations.

Access to a Peer Support Network

There is growing recognition about the role that social media channels could play in enabling peer support ( Bucci et al., 2019 ; Naslund, Aschbrenner, et al., 2016b ), referred to as a system of mutual giving and receiving where individuals who have endured the difficulties of mental illness can offer hope, friendship, and support to others facing similar challenges ( Davidson, Chinman, Sells, & Rowe, 2006 ; Mead, Hilton, & Curtis, 2001 ). Initial studies exploring use of online self-help forums among individuals with serious mental illnesses have found that individuals with schizophrenia appeared to use these forums for self-disclosure, and sharing personal experiences, in addition to providing or requesting information, describing symptoms, or discussing medication ( Haker, Lauber, & Rössler, 2005 ), while users with bipolar disorder reported using these forums to ask for help from others about their illness ( Vayreda & Antaki, 2009 ). More recently, in a review of online social networking in people with psychosis, Highton-Williamson et al (2015) highlight that an important purpose of such online connections was to establish new friendships, pursue romantic relationships, maintain existing relationships or reconnect with people, and seek online peer support from others with lived experience ( Highton-Williamson et al., 2015 ).

Online peer support among individuals with mental illness has been further elaborated in various studies. In a content analysis of comments posted to YouTube by individuals who self-identified as having a serious mental illness, there appeared to be opportunities to feel less alone, provide hope, find support and learn through mutual reciprocity, and share coping strategies for day-to-day challenges of living with a mental illness ( Naslund, Grande, Aschbrenner, & Elwyn, 2014 ). In another study, Chang (2009) delineated various communication patterns in an online psychosis peer-support group ( Chang, 2009 ). Specifically, different forms of support emerged, including ‘informational support’ about medication use or contacting mental health providers, ‘esteem support’ involving positive comments for encouragement, ‘network support’ for sharing similar experiences, and ‘emotional support’ to express understanding of a peer’s situation and offer hope or confidence ( Chang, 2009 ). Bauer et al. (2013) reported that the main interest in online self-help forums for patients with bipolar disorder was to share emotions with others, allow exchange of information, and benefit by being part of an online social group ( Bauer, Bauer, Spiessl, & Kagerbauer, 2013 ).

For individuals who openly discuss mental health problems on Twitter, a study by Berry et al. (2017) found that this served as an important opportunity to seek support and to hear about the experiences of others ( Berry et al., 2017 ). In a survey of social media users with mental illness, respondents reported that sharing personal experiences about living with mental illness and opportunities to learn about strategies for coping with mental illness from others were important reasons for using social media ( Naslund et al., 2017 ). A computational study of mental health awareness campaigns on Twitter provides further support with inspirational posts and tips being the most shared ( Saha et al., 2019 ). Taken together, these studies offer insights about the potential for social media to facilitate access to an informal peer support network, though more research is necessary to examine how these online interactions may impact intentions to seek care, illness self-management, and clinically meaningful outcomes in offline contexts.

Promote Engagement and Retention in Services

Many individuals living with mental disorders have expressed interest in using social media platforms for seeking mental health information ( Lal, Nguyen, & Theriault, 2018 ), connecting with mental health providers ( M. L. Birnbaum et al., 2017 ), and accessing evidence-based mental health services delivered over social media specifically for coping with mental health symptoms or for promoting overall health and wellbeing ( Naslund et al., 2017 ). With the widespread use of social media among individuals living with mental illness combined with the potential to facilitate social interaction and connect with supportive peers, as summarized above, it may be possible to leverage the popular features of social media to enhance existing mental health programs and services. A recent review by Biagianti et al (2018) found that peer-to-peer support appeared to offer feasible and acceptable ways to augment digital mental health interventions for individuals with psychotic disorders by specifically improving engagement, compliance, and adherence to the interventions, and may also improve perceived social support ( Biagianti, Quraishi, & Schlosser, 2018 ).

Among digital programs that have incorporated peer-to-peer social networking consistent with popular features on social media platforms, a pilot study of the HORYZONS online psychosocial intervention demonstrated significant reductions in depression among patients with first episode psychosis ( Alvarez-Jimenez et al., 2013 ). Importantly, the majority of participants (95%) in this study engaged with the peer-to-peer networking feature of the program, with many reporting increases in perceived social connectedness and empowerment in their recovery process ( Alvarez-Jimenez et al., 2013 ). This moderated online social therapy program is now being evaluated as part of a large randomized controlled trial for maintaining treatment effects from first episode psychosis services ( Alvarez-Jimenez et al., 2019 ).

Other early efforts have demonstrated that use of digital environments with the interactive peer-to-peer features of social media can enhance social functioning and wellbeing in young people at high risk of psychosis ( Alvarez-Jimenez et al., 2018 ). There has also been a recent emergence of several mobile apps to support symptom monitoring and relapse prevention in psychotic disorders. Among these apps, the development of PRIME (Personalized Real-time Intervention for Motivational Enhancement) has involved working closely with young people with schizophrenia to ensure that the design of the app has the look and feel of mainstream social media platforms, as opposed to existing clinical tools ( Schlosser et al., 2016 ). This unique approach to the design of the app is aimed at promoting engagement, and ensuring that the app can effectively improve motivation and functioning through goal setting and promoting better quality of life of users with schizophrenia ( Schlosser et al., 2018 ).

Social media platforms could also be used to promote engagement and participation in in-person services delivered through community mental health settings. For example, the peer-based lifestyle intervention called PeerFIT targets weight loss and improved fitness among individuals living with serious mental illness through a combination of in-person lifestyle classes, exercise groups, and use of digital technologies ( Aschbrenner, Naslund, Shevenell, Kinney, & Bartels, 2016 ; Aschbrenner, Naslund, Shevenell, Mueser, & Bartels, 2016 ). The intervention holds tremendous promise as lack of support is one of the largest barriers toward exercise in patients with serious mental illness ( Firth et al., 2016 ) and it is now possible to use social media to counter such. Specifically, in PeerFIT, a private Facebook group is closely integrated into the program to offer a closed platform where participants can connect with the lifestyle coaches, access intervention content, and support or encourage each other as they work towards their lifestyle goals ( Aschbrenner, Naslund, & Bartels, 2016 ; Naslund, Aschbrenner, Marsch, & Bartels, 2016a ). To date, this program has demonstrate preliminary effectiveness for meaningfully reducing cardiovascular risk factors that contribute to early mortality in this patient group ( Aschbrenner, Naslund, Shevenell, Kinney, et al., 2016 ), while the Facebook component appears to have increased engagement in the program, while allowing participants who were unable to attend in-person sessions due to other health concerns or competing demands to remain connected with the program ( Naslund, Aschbrenner, Marsch, McHugo, & Bartels, 2018 ). This lifestyle intervention is currently being evaluated in a randomized controlled trial enrolling young adults with serious mental illness from a variety of real world community mental health services settings ( Aschbrenner, Naslund, Gorin, et al., 2018 ).

These examples highlight the promise of incorporating the features of popular social media into existing programs, which may offer opportunities to safely promote engagement and program retention, while achieving improved clinical outcomes. This is an emerging area of research, as evidenced by several important effectiveness trials underway ( Alvarez-Jimenez et al., 2019 ; Aschbrenner, Naslund, Gorin, et al., 2018 ), including efforts to leverage online social networking to support family caregivers of individuals receiving first episode psychosis services ( Gleeson et al., 2017 ).

Challenges with Social Media for Mental Health

The science on the role of social media for engaging persons with mental disorders needs a cautionary note on the effects of social media usage on mental health and well being, particularly in adolescents and young adults. While the risks and harms of social media are frequently covered in the popular press and mainstream news reports, careful consideration of the research in this area is necessary. In a review of 43 studies in young people, many benefits of social media were cited, including increased self-esteem, and opportunities for self-disclosure ( Best, Manktelow, & Taylor, 2014 ). Yet, reported negative effects were an increased exposure to harm, social isolation, depressive symptoms and bullying ( Best et al., 2014 ). In the sections that follow (see Table 1 for a summary), we consider three major categories of risk related to use of social media and mental health. These include: 1) Impact on symptoms; 2) Facing hostile interactions; and 3) Consequences for daily life.

Impact on Symptoms

Studies consistently highlight that use of social media, especially heavy use and prolonged time spent on social media platforms, appears to contribute to increased risk for a variety of mental health symptoms and poor wellbeing, especially among young people ( Andreassen et al., 2016 ; Kross et al., 2013 ; Woods & Scott, 2016 ). This may partly be driven by the detrimental effects of screen time on mental health, including increased severity of anxiety and depressive symptoms, which have been well documented ( Stiglic & Viner, 2019 ). Recent studies have reported negative effects of social media use on mental health of young people, including social comparison pressure with others and greater feeling of social isolation after being rejected by others on social media ( Rideout & Fox, 2018 ). In a study of young adults, it was found that negative comparisons with others on Facebook contributed to risk of rumination and subsequent increases in depression symptoms ( Feinstein et al., 2013 ). Still, the cross sectional nature of many screen time and mental health studies makes it challenging to reach causal inferences ( Orben & Przybylski, 2019 ).

Quantity of social media use is also an important factor, as highlighted in a survey of young adults ages 19 to 32, where more frequent visits to social media platforms each week were correlated with greater depressive symptoms ( Lin et al., 2016 ). More time spent using social media is also associated with greater symptoms of anxiety ( Vannucci, Flannery, & Ohannessian, 2017 ). The actual number of platforms accessed also appears to contribute to risk as reflected in another national survey of young adults where use of a large number of social media platforms was associated with negative impact on mental health ( Primack et al., 2017 ). Among survey respondents using between 7 and 11 different social media platforms compared to respondents using only 2 or fewer platforms, there was a 3 times greater odds of having high levels of depressive symptoms and a 3.2 times greater odds of having high levels of anxiety symptoms ( Primack et al., 2017 ).

Many researchers have postulated that worsening mental health attributed to social media use may be because social media replaces face-to-face interactions for young people ( Twenge & Campbell, 2018 ), and may contribute to greater loneliness ( Bucci et al., 2019 ), and negative effects on other aspects of health and wellbeing ( Woods & Scott, 2016 ). One nationally representative survey of US adolescents found that among respondents who reported more time accessing media such as social media platforms or smartphone devices, there was significantly greater depressive symptoms and increased risk of suicide when compared to adolescents who reported spending more time on non-screen activities, such as in-person social interaction or sports and recreation activities ( Twenge, Joiner, Rogers, & Martin, 2018 ). For individuals living with more severe mental illnesses, the effects of social media on psychiatric symptoms have received less attention. One study found that participation in chat rooms may contribute to worsening symptoms in young people with psychotic disorders ( Mittal, Tessner, & Walker, 2007 ), while another study of patients with psychosis found that social media use appeared to predict low mood ( Berry, Emsley, Lobban, & Bucci, 2018 ). These studies highlight a clear relationship between social media use and mental health that may not be present in general population studies ( Orben & Przybylski, 2019 ), and emphasize the need to explore how social media may contribute to symptom severity and whether protective factors may be identified to mitigate these risks.

Facing Hostile Interactions

Popular social media platforms can create potential situations where individuals may be victimized by negative comments or posts. Cyberbullying represents a form of online aggression directed towards specific individuals, such as peers or acquaintances, which is perceived to be most harmful when compared to random hostile comments posted online ( Hamm et al., 2015 ). Importantly, cyberbullying on social media consistently shows harmful impact on mental health in the form of increased depressive symptoms as well as worsening of anxiety symptoms, as evidenced in a review of 36 studies among children and young people ( Hamm et al., 2015 ). Furthermore, cyberbullying disproportionately impacts females as reflected in a national survey of adolescents in the United States, where females were twice as likely to be victims of cyberbullying compared to males ( Alhajji, Bass, & Dai, 2019 ). Most studies report cross-sectional associations between cyberbullying and symptoms of depression or anxiety ( Hamm et al., 2015 ), though one longitudinal study in Switzerland found that cyberbullying contributed to significantly greater depression over time ( Machmutow, Perren, Sticca, & Alsaker, 2012 ).

For youth ages 10 to 17 who reported major depressive symptomatology, there was over 3 times greater odds of facing online harassment in the last year compared to youth who reported mild or no depressive symptoms ( Ybarra, 2004 ). Similarly, in a 2018 national survey of young people, respondents ages 14 to 22 with moderate to severe depressive symptoms were more likely to have had negative experiences when using social media, and in particular, were more likely to report having faced hostile comments, or being “trolled”, from others when compared to respondents without depressive symptoms (31% vs. 14%) ( Rideout & Fox, 2018 ). As these studies depict risks for victimization on social media and the correlation with poor mental health, it is possible that individuals living with mental illness may also experience greater hostility online compared to individuals without mental illness. This would be consistent with research showing greater risk of hostility, including increased violence and discrimination, directed towards individuals living with mental illness in in-person contexts, especially targeted at those with severe mental illnesses ( Goodman et al., 1999 ).

A computational study of mental health awareness campaigns on Twitter reported that while stigmatizing content was rare, it was actually the most spread (re-tweeted) demonstrating that harmful content can travel quickly on social media ( Saha et al., 2019 ). Another study was able to map the spread of social media posts about the Blue Whale Challenge, an alleged game promoting suicide, over Twitter, YouTube, Reddit, Tumblr and other forums across 127 countries ( Sumner et al., 2019 ). These findings show that it is critical to monitor the actual content of social media posts, such as determining whether content is hostile or promotes harm to self or others. This is pertinent because existing research looking at duration of exposure cannot account for the impact of specific types of content on mental health and is insufficient to fully understand the effects of using these platforms on mental health.

Consequences for Daily Life

The ways in which individuals use social media can also impact their offline relationships and everyday activities. To date, reports have described risks of social media use pertaining to privacy, confidentiality, and unintended consequences of disclosing personal health information online ( Torous & Keshavan, 2016 ). Additionally, concerns have been raised about poor quality or misleading health information shared on social media, and that social media users may not be aware of misleading information or conflicts of interest especially when the platforms promote popular content regardless of whether it is from a trustworthy source ( Moorhead et al., 2013 ; Ventola, 2014 ). For persons living with mental illness there may be additional risks from using social media. A recent study that specifically explored the perspectives of social media users with serious mental illnesses, including participants with schizophrenia spectrum disorders, bipolar disorder, or major depression, found that over one third of participants expressed concerns about privacy when using social media ( Naslund & Aschbrenner, 2019 ). The reported risks of social media use were directly related to many aspects of everyday life, including concerns about threats to employment, fear of stigma and being judged, impact on personal relationships, and facing hostility or being hurt ( Naslund & Aschbrenner, 2019 ). While few studies have specifically explored the dangers of social media use from the perspectives of individuals living with mental illness, it is important to recognize that use of these platforms may contribute to risks that extend beyond worsening symptoms and that can affect different aspects of daily life.

In this commentary we considered ways in which social media may yield benefits for individuals living with mental illness, while contrasting these with the possible harms. Studies reporting on the threats of social media for individuals with mental illness are mostly cross-sectional, making it difficult to draw conclusions about direction of causation. However, the risks are potentially serious. These risks should be carefully considered in discussions pertaining to use of social media and the broader use of digital mental health technologies, as avenues for mental health promotion, or for supporting access to evidence-based programs or mental health services. At this point, it would be premature to view the benefits of social media as outweighing the possible harms, when it is clear from the studies summarized here that social media use can have negative effects on mental health symptoms, can potentially expose individuals to hurtful content and hostile interactions, and can result in serious consequences for daily life, including threats to employment and personal relationships. Despite these risks, it is also necessary to recognize that individuals with mental illness will continue to use social media given the ease of accessing these platforms and the immense popularity of online social networking. With this in mind, it may be ideal to raise awareness about these possible risks so that individuals can implement necessary safeguards, while also highlighting that there could also be benefits. For individuals with mental illness who use social media, being aware of the risks is an essential first step, and then highlighting ways that use of these popular platforms could also contribute to some benefits, ranging from finding meaningful interactions with others, engaging with peer support networks, and accessing information and services.

To capitalize on the widespread use of social media, and to achieve the promise that these platforms may hold for supporting the delivery of targeted mental health interventions, there is need for continued research to better understand how individuals living with mental illness use social media. Such efforts could inform safety measures and also encourage use of social media in ways that maximize potential benefits while minimizing risk of harm. It will be important to recognize how gender and race contribute to differences in use of social media for seeking mental health information or accessing interventions, as well as differences in how social media might impact mental wellbeing. For example, a national survey of 14- to 22-year olds in the United States found that female respondents were more likely to search online for information about depression or anxiety, and to try to connect with other people online who share similar mental health concerns, when compared to male respondents ( Rideout & Fox, 2018 ). In the same survey, there did not appear to be any differences between racial or ethnic groups in social media use for seeking mental health information ( Rideout & Fox, 2018 ). Social media use also appears to have a differential impact on mental health and emotional wellbeing between females and males ( Booker, Kelly, & Sacker, 2018 ), highlighting the need to explore unique experiences between gender groups to inform tailored programs and services. Research shows that lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender individuals frequently use social media for searching for health information and may be more likely compared to heterosexual individuals to share their own personal health experiences with others online ( Rideout & Fox, 2018 ). Less is known about use of social media for seeking support for mental health concerns among gender minorities, though this is an important area for further investigation as these individuals are more likely to experience mental health problems and more likely to experience online victimization when compared to heterosexual individuals ( Mereish, Sheskier, Hawthorne, & Goldbach, 2019 ).

Similarly, efforts are needed to explore the relationship between social media use and mental health among ethnic and racial minorities. A recent study found that exposure to traumatic online content on social media showing violence or hateful posts directed at racial minorities contributed to increases in psychological distress, PTSD symptoms, and depression among African American and Latinx adolescents in the United States ( Tynes, Willis, Stewart, & Hamilton, 2019 ). These concerns are contrasted by growing interest in the potential for new technologies including social media to expand the reach of services to underrepresented minority groups ( Schueller, Hunter, Figueroa, & Aguilera, 2019 ). Therefore, greater attention is needed to understanding the perspectives of ethnic and racial minorities to inform effective and safe use of social media for mental health promotion efforts.

Research has found that individuals living with mental illness have expressed interest in accessing mental health services through social media platforms. A survey of social media users with mental illness found that most respondents were interested in accessing programs for mental health on social media targeting symptom management, health promotion, and support for communicating with health care providers and interacting with the health system ( Naslund et al., 2017 ). Importantly, individuals with serious mental illness have also emphasized that any mental health intervention on social media would need to be moderated by someone with adequate training and credentials, would need to have ground rules and ways to promote safety and minimize risks, and importantly, would need to be free and easy to access.

An important strength with this commentary is that it combines a range of studies broadly covering the topic of social media and mental health. We have provided a summary of recent evidence in a rapidly advancing field with the goal of presenting unique ways that social media could offer benefits for individuals with mental illness, while also acknowledging the potentially serious risks and the need for further investigation. There are also several limitations with this commentary that warrant consideration. Importantly, as we aimed to address this broad objective, we did not conduct a systematic review of the literature. Therefore, the studies reported here are not exhaustive, and there may be additional relevant studies that were not included. Additionally, we only summarized published studies, and as a result, any reports from the private sector or websites from different organizations using social media or other apps containing social media-like features would have been omitted. Though it is difficult to rigorously summarize work from the private sector, sometimes referred to as “gray literature”, because many of these projects are unpublished and are likely selective in their reporting of findings given the target audience may be shareholders or consumers.

Another notable limitation is that we did not assess risk of bias in the studies summarized in this commentary. We found many studies that highlighted risks associated with social media use for individuals living with mental illness; however, few studies of programs or interventions reported negative findings, suggesting the possibility that negative findings may go unpublished. This concern highlights the need for a future more rigorous review of the literature with careful consideration of bias and an accompanying quality assessment. Most of the studies that we described were from the United States, as well as from other higher income settings such as Australia or the United Kingdom. Despite the global reach of social media platforms, there is a dearth of research on the impact of these platforms on the mental health of individuals in diverse settings, as well as the ways in which social media could support mental health services in lower income countries where there is virtually no access to mental health providers. Future research is necessary to explore the opportunities and risks for social media to support mental health promotion in low-income and middle-income countries, especially as these countries face a disproportionate share of the global burden of mental disorders, yet account for the majority of social media users worldwide ( Naslund et al., 2019 ).

Future Directions for Social Media and Mental Health

As we consider future research directions, the near ubiquitous social media use also yields new opportunities to study the onset and manifestation of mental health symptoms and illness severity earlier than traditional clinical assessments. There is an emerging field of research referred to as ‘digital phenotyping’ aimed at capturing how individuals interact with their digital devices, including social media platforms, in order to study patterns of illness and identify optimal time points for intervention ( Jain, Powers, Hawkins, & Brownstein, 2015 ; Onnela & Rauch, 2016 ). Given that most people access social media via mobile devices, digital phenotyping and social media are closely related ( Torous et al., 2019 ). To date, the emergence of machine learning, a powerful computational method involving statistical and mathematical algorithms ( Shatte, Hutchinson, & Teague, 2019 ), has made it possible to study large quantities of data captured from popular social media platforms such as Twitter or Instagram to illuminate various features of mental health ( Manikonda & De Choudhury, 2017 ; Reece et al., 2017 ). Specifically, conversations on Twitter have been analyzed to characterize the onset of depression ( De Choudhury, Gamon, Counts, & Horvitz, 2013 ) as well as detecting users’ mood and affective states ( De Choudhury, Gamon, & Counts, 2012 ), while photos posted to Instagram can yield insights for predicting depression ( Reece & Danforth, 2017 ). The intersection of social media and digital phenotyping will likely add new levels of context to social media use in the near future.

Several studies have also demonstrated that when compared to a control group, Twitter users with a self-disclosed diagnosis of schizophrenia show unique online communication patterns ( Michael L Birnbaum, Ernala, Rizvi, De Choudhury, & Kane, 2017 ), including more frequent discussion of tobacco use ( Hswen et al., 2017 ), symptoms of depression and anxiety ( Hswen, Naslund, Brownstein, & Hawkins, 2018b ), and suicide ( Hswen, Naslund, Brownstein, & Hawkins, 2018a ). Another study found that online disclosures about mental illness appeared beneficial as reflected by fewer posts about symptoms following self-disclosure (Ernala, Rizvi, Birnbaum, Kane, & De Choudhury, 2017). Each of these examples offers early insights into the potential to leverage widely available online data for better understanding the onset and course of mental illness. It is possible that social media data could be used to supplement additional digital data, such as continuous monitoring using smartphone apps or smart watches, to generate a more comprehensive ‘digital phenotype’ to predict relapse and identify high-risk health behaviors among individuals living with mental illness ( Torous et al., 2019 ).

With research increasingly showing the valuable insights that social media data can yield about mental health states, greater attention to the ethical concerns with using individual data in this way is necessary ( Chancellor, Birnbaum, Caine, Silenzio, & De Choudhury, 2019 ). For instance, data is typically captured from social media platforms without the consent or awareness of users ( Bidargaddi et al., 2017 ), which is especially crucial when the data relates to a socially stigmatizing health condition such as mental illness ( Guntuku, Yaden, Kern, Ungar, & Eichstaedt, 2017 ). Precautions are needed to ensure that data is not made identifiable in ways that were not originally intended by the user who posted the content, as this could place an individual at risk of harm or divulge sensitive health information ( Webb et al., 2017 ; Williams, Burnap, & Sloan, 2017 ). Promising approaches for minimizing these risks include supporting the participation of individuals with expertise in privacy, clinicians, as well as the target individuals with mental illness throughout the collection of data, development of predictive algorithms, and interpretation of findings ( Chancellor et al., 2019 ).

In recognizing that many individuals living with mental illness use social media to search for information about their mental health, it is possible that they may also want to ask their clinicians about what they find online to check if the information is reliable and trustworthy. Alternatively, many individuals may feel embarrassed or reluctant to talk to their clinicians about using social media to find mental health information out of concerns of being judged or dismissed. Therefore, mental health clinicians may be ideally positioned to talk with their patients about using social media, and offer recommendations to promote safe use of these sites, while also respecting their patients’ autonomy and personal motivations for using these popular platforms. Given the gap in clinical knowledge about the impact of social media on mental health, clinicians should be aware of the many potential risks so that they can inform their patients, while remaining open to the possibility that their patients may also experience benefits through use of these platforms. As awareness of these risks grows, it may be possible that new protections will be put in place by industry or through new policies that will make the social media environment safer. It is hard to estimate a number needed to treat or harm today given the nascent state of research, which means the patient and clinician need to weigh the choice on a personal level. Thus offering education and information is an important first step in that process. As patients increasingly show interest in accessing mental health information or services through social media, it will be necessary for health systems to recognize social media as a potential avenue for reaching or offering support to patients. This aligns with growing emphasis on the need for greater integration of digital psychiatry, including apps, smartphones, or wearable devices, into patient care and clinical services through institution-wide initiatives and training clinical providers ( Hilty, Chan, Torous, Luo, & Boland, 2019 ). Within a learning healthcare environment where research and care are tightly intertwined and feedback between both is rapid, the integration of digital technologies into services may create new opportunities for advancing use of social media for mental health.

As highlighted in this commentary, social media has become an important part of the lives of many individuals living with mental disorders. Many of these individuals use social media to share their lived experiences with mental illness, to seek support from others, and to search for information about treatment recommendations, accessing mental health services, and coping with symptoms ( Bucci et al., 2019 ; Highton-Williamson et al., 2015 ; Naslund, Aschbrenner, et al., 2016b ). As the field of digital mental health advances, the wide reach, ease of access, and popularity of social media platforms could be used to allow individuals in need of mental health services or facing challenges of mental illness to access evidence-based treatment and support. To achieve this end and to explore whether social media platforms can advance efforts to close the gap in available mental health services in the United States and globally, it will be essential for researchers to work closely with clinicians and with those affected by mental illness to ensure that possible benefits of using social media are carefully weighed against anticipated risks.

Acknowledgements

Dr. Naslund is supported by a grant from the National Institute of Mental Health (U19MH113211). Dr. Aschbrenner is supported by a grant from the National Institute of Mental Health (1R01MH110965-01).

Publisher's Disclaimer: This Author Accepted Manuscript is a PDF file of a an unedited peer-reviewed manuscript that has been accepted for publication but has not been copyedited or corrected. The official version of record that is published in the journal is kept up to date and so may therefore differ from this version.

Conflict of Interest

The authors have nothing to disclose.

• Abdel-Baki A, Lai S, D.-Charron O, Stip E, & Kara N, (2017). Understanding access and use of technology among youth with first - episode psychosis to inform the development of technology - enabled therapeutic interventions . Early intervention in psychiatry , 77 ( 1 ), 72–76. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ahmed YA, Ahmad MN, Ahmad N, & Zakaria NH (2019). Social media for knowledge-sharing: A systematic literature review . Telematics and informatics , 37 , 72–112 . [ Google Scholar ]
• Alhajji M, Bass S, & Dai T (2019). Cyberbullying, mental health, and violence in adolescents and associations with sex and race: data from the 2015 Youth Risk Behavior Survey . Global pediatric health , 6 , 2333794X19868887. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Alvarez-Jimenez M, Bendall S, Koval P, Rice S, Cagliarini D, Valentine L, … Penn DL (2019). HORYZONS trial: protocol for a randomised controlled trial of a moderated online social therapy to maintain treatment effects from first-episode psychosis services . BMJ open , 9 ( 2 ), e024104. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Alvarez-Jimenez M, Bendall S, Lederman R, Wadley G, Chinnery G, Vargas S, … Gleeson JF (2013). On the HORYZON: moderated online social therapy for long-term recovery in first episode psychosis . Schizophrenia research , 143 ( 1 ), 143–149. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Alvarez-Jimenez M, Gleeson J, Bendall S, Penn D, Yung A, Ryan R, … Miles C (2018). Enhancing social functioning in young people at Ultra High Risk (UHR) for psychosis: A pilot study of a novel strengths and mindfulness-based online social therapy . Schizophrenia research , 202 , 369–377. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Andreassen CS, Billieux J, Griffiths MD, Kuss DJ, Demetrovics Z, Mazzoni E, & Pallesen S (2016). The relationship between addictive use of social media and video games and symptoms of psychiatric disorders: A large-scale cross-sectional study . Psychology of Addictive Behaviors , 30 ( 2 ), 252. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Aschbrenner KA, Naslund JA, & Bartels SJ (2016). A mixed methods study of peer-to-peer support in a group-based lifestyle intervention for adults with serious mental illness . Psychiatric rehabilitation journal , 39 ( 4 ), 328. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Aschbrenner KA, Naslund JA, Gorin AA, Mueser KT, Scherer EA, Viron M, … Bartels SJ, (2018). Peer support and mobile health technology targeting obesity-related cardiovascular risk in young adults with serious mental illness: Protocol for a randomized controlled trial . Contemporary clinical trials , 74 , 97–106. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Aschbrenner KA, Naslund JA, Grinley T, Bienvenida JCM, Bartels SJ, & Brunette M (2018). A Survey of Online and Mobile Technology Use at Peer Support Agencies . Psychiatric Quarterly , 1–10. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Aschbrenner KA, Naslund JA, Shevenell M, Kinney E, & Bartels SJ (2016). A pilot study of a peer-group lifestyle intervention enhanced with mHealth technology and social media for adults with serious mental illness . The Journal of nervous and mental disease , 204 ( 6 ), 483–486. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Aschbrenner KA, Naslund JA, Shevenell M, Mueser KT, & Bartels SJ (2016). Feasibility of behavioral weight loss treatment enhanced with peer support and mobile health technology for individuals with serious mental illness . Psychiatric Quarterly , 57 ( 3 ), 401–415. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Aschbrenner KA, Naslund JA, Tomlinson EF, Kinney A, Pratt SI, & Brunette MF (2019). Adolescents’ Use of Digital Technologies and Preferences for Mobile Health Coaching in Mental Health Settings . Frontiers in Public Health . [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Badcock JC, Shah S, Mackinnon A, Stain HJ, Galletly C, Jablensky A, & Morgan VA (2015). Loneliness in psychotic disorders and its association with cognitive function and symptom profile . Schizophrenia research , 169 ( 1-3 ), 268–273. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Batterham PJ, & Calear AJ (2017). Preferences for internet-based mental health interventions in an adult online sample: Findings from ann online community survey . JMIR mental health , 4 ( 2 ), e26. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bauer R, Bauer M, Spiessl H, & Kagerbauer T (2013). Cyber-support: an analysis of online self-help forums (online self-help forums in bipolar disorder) . Nordic journal of psychiatry , 67 ( 3 ), 185–190. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Berger M, Wagner TH, & Baker LC (2005). Internet use and stigmatized illness . Social science & medicine , 67 ( 8 ), 1821–1827. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Berry N, Emsley R, Lobban F, & Bucci S (2018). Social media and its relationship with mood, self - esteem and paranoia in psychosis . Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica , 138 , 558–570. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Berry N, Lobban F, Belousov M, Emsley R, Nenadic G, & Bucci S (2017). # Why We Tweet MH: understanding why people use Twitter to discuss mental health problems . Journal of medical Internet research , 19 ( 4 ), e107. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Best P, Manktelow R, & Taylor B (2014). Online communication, social media and adolescent wellbeing: A systematic narrative review . Children and Youth Services Review , 41 , 27–36. [ Google Scholar ]
• Biagianti B, Quraishi SH, & Schlosser DA (2018). Potential benefits of incorporating peer-to-peer interactions into digital interventions for psychotic disorders: a systematic review . Psychiatric Services , 69 ( 4 ), 377–388. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bidargaddi N, Musiat P, Makinen V-P, Ermes M, Schrader G, & Licinio J (2017). Digital footprints: facilitating large-scale environmental psychiatric research in naturalistic settings through data from everyday technologies . Molecular psychiatry , 22 ( 2 ), 164. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Birnbaum ML, Emala SK, Rizvi AF, De Choudhury M, & Kane JM (2017). A Collaborative Approach to Identifying Social Media Markers of Schizophrenia by Employing Machine Learning and Clinical Appraisals . Journal of medical Internet research , 79 ( 8 ), e289. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Birnbaum ML, Rizvi AF, Correll CU, Kane JM, & Confino J (2017). Role of social media and the Internet in pathways to care for adolescents and young adults with psychotic disorders and non - psychotic mood disorders . Early intervention in psychiatry , 77 ( 4 ), 290–295. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Booker CL, Kelly YJ, & Sacker A (2018). Gender differences in the associations between age trends of social media interaction and well-being among 10-15 year olds in the UK . BMC public health , 18 ( 1 ), 321. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Brunette M, Achtyes E, Pratt S, Stilwell K, Opperman M, Guarino S, & Kay-Lambkin F (2019). Use of smartphones, computers and social media among people with SMI: opportunity for intervention . Community mental health journal , 1–6. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Brusilovskiy E, Townley G, Snethen G, & Salzer MS (2016). Social media use, community participation and psychological well-being among individuals with serious mental illnesses . Computers in Human Behavior , 65 , 232–240. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bucci S, Schwannauer M, & Berry N (2019). The digital revolution and its impact on mental health care . Psychology and Psychotherapy: Theory, Research and Practice , 1–21. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Chancellor S, Birnbaum ML, Caine ED, Silenzio V, & De Choudhury M (2019). A taxonomy of ethical tensions in inferring mental health states from social media . Paper presented at the Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency. [ Google Scholar ]
• Chang HJ (2009). Online supportive interactions: Using a network approach to examine communication patterns within a psychosis social support group in Taiwan . Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology , 60 ( 7 ), 1504–1517. [ Google Scholar ]
• Davidson L, Chinman M, Sells D, & Rowe M (2006). Peer support among adults with serious mental illness: a report from the field . Schizophrenia bulletin , 32 ( 3 ), 443–450. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• De Choudhury M, Gamon M, & Counts S (2012). Happy, nervous or surprised? classification of human affective states in social media . Paper presented at the Sixth International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media. [ Google Scholar ]
• De Choudhury M, Gamon M, Counts S, & Horvitz E (2013). Predicting Depression via Social Media . Paper presented at the Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence. [ Google Scholar ]
• Docherty NM, Hawkins KA, Hoffman RE, Quinlan DM, Rakfeldt J, & Sledge WH (1996). Working memory, attention, and communication disturbances in schizophrenia . Journal of Abnormal Psychology , 105 ( 2 ), 212. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Emala SK, Rizvi AF, Birnbaum ML, Kane JM, & De Choudhury M (2017). Linguistic Markers Indicating Therapeutic Outcomes of Social Media Disclosures of Schizophrenia . Proc. ACMHum.-Comput. Interact , 1 ( 1 ), 43. [ Google Scholar ]
• Feinstein BA, Hershenberg R, Bhatia V, Latack JA, Meuwly N, & Davila J (2013). Negative social comparison on Facebook and depressive symptoms: Rumination as a mechanism . Psychology of Popular Media Culture , 2 ( 3 ), 161. [ Google Scholar ]
• Firth J, Cotter J, Torous J, Bucci S, Firth JA, & Yung AR (2015). Mobile phone ownership and endorsement of “mHealth” among people with psychosis: a meta-analysis of cross-sectional studies . Schizophrenia bulletin , 42 ( 2 ), 448–455. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Firth J, Rosenbaum S, Stubbs B, Gorczynski P, Yung AR, & Vancampfort D (2016). Motivating factors and barriers towards exercise in severe mental illness: a systematic review and meta-analysis . Psychological medicine , 46 ( 14 ), 2869–2881. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Gay K, Torous J, Joseph A, Pandya A, & Duckworth K (2016). Digital technology use among individuals with schizophrenia: results of an online survey . JMIR mental health , 3 ( 2 ), el5. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Giacco D, Palumbo C, Strappelli N, Catapano F, & Priebe S (2016). Social contacts and loneliness in people with psychotic and mood disorders . Comprehensive Psychiatry , 66 , 59–66. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Gleeson J, Lederman R, Herrman H, Koval P, Eleftheriadis D, Bendall S, … Alvarez-Jimenez M (2017). Moderated online social therapy for carers of young people recovering from first-episode psychosis: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial . Trials , 75 ( 1 ), 27. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Glick G, Druss B, Pina J, Lally C, & Conde M (2016). Use of mobile technology in a community mental health setting . Journal of telemedicine and telecare , 22 ( 7 ), 430–435. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Goodman LA, Thompson KM, Weinfurt K, Corl S, Acker P, Mueser KT, & Rosenberg SD (1999). Reliability of reports of violent victimization and posttraumatic stress disorder among men and women with serious mental illness . Journal of Traumatic Stress: Official Publication of the International Society for Traumatic Stress Studies , 12 ( 4 ), 587–599. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Gowen K, Deschaine M, Gruttadara D, & Markey D (2012). Young adults with mental health conditions and social networking websites: seeking tools to build community . Psychiatric rehabilitation journal , 35 ( 3 ), 245–250. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Guntuku SC, Yaden DB, Kern ML, Ungar LH, & Eichstaedt JC (2017). Detecting depression and mental illness on social media: an integrative review . Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences , 18 , 43–49. [ Google Scholar ]
• Haker EL, Lauber C, & Rossler W (2005). Internet forums: a self - help approach for individuals with schizophrenia? Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica , 112 ( 6 ), 474–477. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hamm MP, Newton AS, Chisholm A, Shulhan J, Milne A, Sundar P, … Hartling L (2015). Prevalence and effect of cyberbullying on children and young people: A scoping review of social media studies . JAMA pediatrics , 769 ( 8 ), 770–777. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hansen CF, Torgalsboen A-K, Melle I, & Bell MD (2009). Passive/apathetic social withdrawal and active social avoidance in schizophrenia: difference in underlying psychological processes . The Journal of nervous and mental disease , 197 ( 4 ), 274–277. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Highton-Williamson E, Priebe S, & Giacco D (2015). Online social networking in people with psychosis: a systematic review . International Journal of Social Psychiatry , 61 ( 1 ), 92–101. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hilty DM, Chan S, Torous J, Luo J, & Boland RJ (2019). Mobile health, smartphone/device, and apps for psychiatry and medicine: competencies, training, and faculty development issues . Psychiatric Clinics , 42 ( 2 ), 513–534. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hswen Y, Naslund JA, Brownstein JS, & Hawkins JB (2018a). Monitoring online discussions about suicide among Twitter users with schizophrenia: exploratory study . JMIR mental health , 5 ( 4 ), e11483. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hswen Y, Naslund JA, Brownstein JS, & Hawkins JB (2018b). Online communication about depression and anxiety among twitter users with schizophrenia: preliminary findings to inform a digital phenotype using social media . Psychiatric Quarterly , 89 ( 3 ), 569–580. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hswen Y, Naslund JA, Chandrashekar P, Siegel R, Brownstein JS, & Hawkins JB (2017). Exploring online communication about cigarette smoking among Twitter users who self-identify as having schizophrenia . Psychiatry research , 257 , 479–484. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Indian M, & Grieve R (2014). When Facebook is easier than face-to-face: social support dervied from Facebook in socially anxious individuals . Personality and Individual Differences , 59 , 102–106. [ Google Scholar ]
• Jain SH, Powers BW, Hawkins JB, & Brownstein JS (2015). The digital phenotype . Nature Biotechnology , 33 ( 5 ), 462. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kiesler S, Siegel J, & McGuire TW (1984). Social psychological aspects of computer-mediated communication . American Psychologist , 39 , 1123–1134. [ Google Scholar ]
• Kross E, Verduyn P, Demiralp E, Park J, Lee DS, Lin N, … Ybarra O (2013). Facebook use predicts declines in subjective well-being in young adults . PloS one , 5 ( 8 ), e69841. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lai S, Nguyen V, & Theriault J (2018). Seeking mental health information and support online: experiences and perspectives of young people receiving treatment for first - episode psychosis . Early intervention in psychiatry , 72 ( 3 ), 324–330. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lin LY, Sidani JE, Shensa A, Radovic A, Miller E, Colditz JB, … Primack BA (2016). Association between social media use and depression among US young adults . Depression and anxiety , 22 ( 4 ), 323–331. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Machmutow K, Perren S, Sticca F, & Alsaker FD (2012). Peer victimisation and depressive symptoms: can specific coping strategies buffer the negative impact of cybervictimisation? Emotional and Behavioural Difficulties , 17 ( 3-4 ), 403–420. [ Google Scholar ]
• Manikonda L, & De Choudhury M (2017). Modeling and understanding visual attributes of mental health disclosures in social media . Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. [ Google Scholar ]
• Mead S, Hilton D, & Curtis L (2001). Peer support: A theoretical perspective . Psychiatric rehabilitation journal , 25 ( 2 ), 134. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Mereish EH, Sheskier M, Hawthorne DJ, & Goldbach JT (2019). Sexual orientation disparities in mental health and substance use among Black American young people in the USA: effects of cyber and bias-based victimisation . Culture, health & sexuality , 21 ( 9 ), 985–998. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Miller BJ, Stewart A, Schrimsher J, Peeples D, & Buckley PF (2015). How connected are people with schizophrenia? Cell phone, computer, email, and social media use . Psychiatry research , 225 ( 3 ), 458–463. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Mittal VA, Tessner KD, & Walker EF (2007). Elevated social Internet use and schizotypal personality disorder in adolescents . Schizophrenia research , 94 ( 1-3 ), 50–57. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Moorhead SA, Hazlett DE, Harrison L, Carroll JK, Irwin A, & Hoving C (2013). A new dimension of health care: systematic review of the uses, benefits, and limitations of social media for health communication . Journal of medical Internet research , 15 ( 4 ), e85. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Naslund JA, & Aschbrenner KA (2019). Risks to privacy with use of social media: understanding the views of social media users with serious mental illness . Psychiatric Services , appi. ps. 201800520. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Naslund JA, Aschbrenner KA, & Bartels SJ (2016). How people living with serious mental illness use smartphones, mobile apps, and social media . Psychiatric rehabilitation journal , 39 ( 4 ), 364–367. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Naslund JA, Aschbrenner KA, Marsch LA, & Bartels SJ (2016a). Feasibility and acceptability of Facebook for health promotion among people with serious mental illness . Digital health , 2 , 2055207616654822. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Naslund JA, Aschbrenner KA, Marsch LA, & Bartels SJ (2016b). The future of mental health care: peer-to-peer support and social media . Epidemiology and Psychiatric Sciences , 25 ( 2 ), 113–122. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Naslund JA, Aschbrenner KA, Marsch LA, McHugo GJ, & Bartels SJ (2018). Facebook for supporting a lifestyle intervention for people with major depressive disorder, bipolar disorder, and schizophrenia: an exploratory study . Psychiatric Quarterly , 59 ( 1 ), 81–94. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Naslund JA, Aschbrenner KA, McHugo GJ, Unutzer J, Marsch LA, & Bartels SJ (2017). Exploring opportunities to support mental health care using social media: A survey of social media users with mental illness . Early intervention in psychiatry . [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Naslund JA, Gonsalves PP, Gruebner O, Pendse SR, Smith SL, Sharma A, & Raviola G (2019). Digital innovations for global mental health: opportunities for data science, task sharing, and early intervention . Current Treatment Options in Psychiatry , 1–15. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Naslund JA, Grande SW, Aschbrenner KA, & Elwyn G (2014). Naturally occurring peer support through social media: the experiences of individuals with severe mental illness using YouTube . PloS one , 9 ( 10 ), e110171. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Onnela J-P, & Rauch SL (2016). Harnessing smartphone-based digital phenotyping to enhance behavioral and mental health . Neuropsychopharmacology , 41 ( 7 ), 1691. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Orben A, & Przybylski AK (2019). The association between adolescent well-being and digital technology use . Nature Human Behaviour , 3 ( 2 ), 173. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Patel V, Saxena S, Lund C, Thornicroft G, Baingana F, Bolton P, … Eaton J (2018). The Lancet Commission on global mental health and sustainable development . The Lancet . [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Primack BA, Shensa A, Escobar-Viera CG, Barrett EL, Sidani JE, Colditz JB, & James AE (2017). Use of multiple social media platforms and symptoms of depression and anxiety: A nationally-representative study among US young adults . Computers in Human Behavior , 69 , 1–9. [ Google Scholar ]
• Reece AG, & Danforth CM (2017). Instagram photos reveal predictive markers of depression . EPJ Data Science , 6 ( 1 ), 15. [ Google Scholar ]
• Reece AG, Reagan AJ, Lix KL, Dodds PS, Danforth CM, & Langer EJ (2017). Forecasting the onset and course of mental illness with Twitter data . Scientific reports , 7 ( 1 ), 13006. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Rideout V, & Fox S (2018). Digital health practices, social media use, and mental well-being among teens and young adults in the U.S Retrieved from San Francisco, CA: https://www.hopelab.org/reports/pdf/a-national-survey-by-hopelab-and-well-being-trust-2018.pdf [ Google Scholar ]
• Saha K, Torous J, Ernala SK, Rizuto C, Stafford A, & De Choudhury M (2019). A computational study of mental health awareness campaigns on social media . Translational behavioral medicine . [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Schlosser DA, Campellone T, Kim D, Truong B, Vergani S, Ward C, & Vinogradov S (2016). Feasibility of PRIME: a cognitive neuroscience-informed mobile app intervention to enhance motivated behavior and improve quality of life in recent onset schizophrenia . JMIR research protocols , 5 ( 2 ). [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Schlosser DA, Campellone TR, Truong B, Etter K, Vergani S, Komaiko K, & Vinogradov S (2018). Efficacy of PRIME, a mobile app intervention designed to improve motivation in young people with schizophrenia . Schizophrenia bulletin , 44 ( 5 ), 1010–1020. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Schrank B, Sibitz I, Unger A, & Amering M (2010). How patients with schizophrenia use the internet: qualitative study . Journal of medical Internet research , 12 ( 5 ), e70. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Schueller SM, Hunter JF, Figueroa C, & Aguilera A (2019). Use of digital mental health for marginalized and underserved populations . Current Treatment Options in Psychiatry , 6 ( 3 ), 243–255. [ Google Scholar ]
• Shatte AB, Hutchinson DM, & Teague SJ (2019). Machine learning in mental health: a scoping review of methods and applications . Psychological medicine , 49 ( 9 ), 1426–1448. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Spinzy Y, Nitzan U, Becker G, Bloch Y, & Fennig S (2012). Does the Internet offer social opportunities for individuals with schizophrenia? a cross-sectional pilot study . Psychiatry research , 198 ( 2 ), 319–320. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Stiglic N, & Viner RM (2019). Effects of screentime on the health and well-being of children and adolescents: a systematic review of reviews . BMJopen , 9 ( 1 ), e023191. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Sumner SA, Galik S, Mathieu J, Ward M, Kiley T, Bartholow B, … Mork P (2019). Temporal and geographic patterns of social media posts about an emerging suicide game . Journal of Adolescent Health . [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Torous J, Chan SR, Tan SY-M, Behrens J, Mathew I, Conrad EJ, … Keshavan M (2014). Patient smartphone ownership and interest in mobile apps to monitor symptoms of mental health conditions: a survey in four geographically distinct psychiatric clinics . JMIR mental health , 1 ( 1 ), e5. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Torous J, Friedman R, & Keshavan M (2014). Smartphone ownership and interest in mobile applications to monitor symptoms of mental health conditions . JMIR mHealth and uHealth , 2 ( 1 ), e2. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Torous J, & Keshavan M (2016). The role of social media in schizophrenia: evaluating risks, benefits, and potential . Current opinion in psychiatry , 29 ( 3 ), 190–195. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Torous J, Wisniewski H, Bird B, Carpenter E, David G, Elejalde E, … Henson P (2019). Creating a digital health smartphone app and digital phenotyping platform for mental health and diverse healthcare needs: an interdisciplinary and collaborative approach . Journal of Technology in Behavioral Science , 1–13. [ Google Scholar ]
• Trefflich F, Kalckreuth S, Mergl R, & Rummel-Kluge C (2015). Psychiatric patients’ internet use corresponds to the internet use of the general public . Psychiatry research , 226 , 136–141. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Twenge JM, & Campbell WK (2018). Associations between screen time and lower psychological well-being among children and adolescents: Evidence from a population-based study . Preventive medicine reports , 12 , 271–283. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Twenge JM, Joiner TE, Rogers ML, & Martin GN (2018). Increases in depressive symptoms, suicide-related outcomes, and suicide rates among US adolescents after 2010 and links to increased new media screen time . Clinical Psychological Science , 6 ( 1 ), 3–17. [ Google Scholar ]
• Tynes BM, Willis HA, Stewart AM, & Hamilton MW (2019). Race-related traumatic events online and mental health among adolescents of color . Journal of Adolescent Health , 65 ( 3 ), 371–377. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Vannucci A, Flannery KM, & Ohannessian CM (2017). Social media use and anxiety in emerging adults . Journal of affective disorders , 207 , 163–166. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Vayreda A, & Antaki C (2009). Social support and unsolicited advice in a bipolar disorder online forum . Qualitative health research , 19 ( 7 ), 931–942. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ventola CL (2014). Social media and health care professionals: benefits, risks, and best practices . Pharmacy and Therapeutics , 39 ( 7 ), 491. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• We Are Social. (2020). Digital in 2020 . Retrieved from https://wearesocial.com/global-digital-report-2019
• Webb H, Jirotka M, Stahl BC, Housley W, Edwards A, Williams M, … Burnap P (2017). The ethical challenges of publishing Twitter data for research dissemination . Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 2017 ACM on Web Science Conference. [ Google Scholar ]
• Williams ML, Burnap P, & Sloan L (2017). Towards an ethical framework for publishing Twitter data in social research: Taking into account users’ views, online context and algorithmic estimation . Sociology , 57 ( 6 ), 1149–1168. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Woods HC, & Scott H (2016). # Sleepyteens: Social media use in adolescence is associated with poor sleep quality, anxiety, depression and low self-esteem . Journal of adolescence , 57 , 41–49. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ybarra ML (2004). Linkages between depressive symptomatology and Internet harassment among young regular Internet users . Cyber Psychology & Behavior , 7 ( 2 ), 247–257. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]

Appointments at Mayo Clinic

• Tween and teen health

Teens and social media use: What's the impact?

Social media is a term for internet sites and apps that you can use to share content you've created. Social media also lets you respond to content that others post. That can include pictures, text, reactions or comments on posts by others, and links to information.

Online sharing within social media sites helps many people stay in touch with friends or connect with new ones. And that may be more important for teenagers than other age groups. Friendships help teens feel supported and play a role in forming their identities. So, it's only natural to wonder how social media use might affect teens.

Social media is a big part of daily life for lots of teenagers.

How big? A 2022 survey of 13- to 17-year-olds offers a clue. Based on about 1,300 responses, the survey found that 35% of teens use at least one of five social media platforms more than several times a day. The five social media platforms are: YouTube, TikTok, Facebook, Instagram and Snapchat.

Social media doesn't affect all teens the same way. Use of social media is linked with healthy and unhealthy effects on mental health. These effects vary from one teenager to another. Social media effects on mental health depend on things such as:

• What a teen sees and does online.
• The amount of time spent online.
• Psychological factors, such as maturity level and any preexisting mental health conditions.
• Personal life circumstances, including cultural, social and economic factors.

Here are the general pros and cons of teen social media use, along with tips for parents.

Healthy social media

Social media lets teens create online identities, chat with others and build social networks. These networks can provide teens with support from other people who have hobbies or experiences in common. This type of support especially may help teens who:

• Lack social support offline or are lonely.
• Are going through a stressful time.
• Belong to groups that often get marginalized, such as racial minorities, the LGBTQ community and those who are differently abled.
• Have long-term medical conditions.

Sometimes, social media platforms help teens:

• Express themselves.
• Connect with other teens locally and across long distances.
• Learn how other teens cope with challenging life situations and mental health conditions.
• View or take part in moderated chat forums that encourage talking openly about topics such as mental health.
• Ask for help or seek healthcare for symptoms of mental health conditions.

These healthy effects of social media can help teens in general. They also may help teens who are prone to depression stay connected to others. And social media that's humorous or distracting may help a struggling teen cope with a challenging day.

Unhealthy social media

Social media use may have negative effects on some teens. It might:

• Distract from homework, exercise and family activities.
• Disrupt sleep.
• Lead to information that is biased or not correct.
• Become a means to spread rumors or share too much personal information.
• Lead some teens to form views about other people's lives or bodies that aren't realistic.
• Expose some teens to online predators, who might try to exploit or extort them.
• Expose some teens to cyberbullying, which can raise the risk of mental health conditions such as anxiety and depression.

What's more, certain content related to risk-taking, and negative posts or interactions on social media, have been linked with self-harm and rarely, death.

The risks of social media use are linked with various factors. One may be how much time teens spend on these platforms.

In a study focusing on 12- to 15-year-olds in the United States, spending three hours a day using social media was linked to a higher risk of mental health concerns. That study was based on data collected in 2013 and 2014 from more than 6,500 participants.

Another study looked at data on more than 12,000 teens in England between the ages of 13 to 16. The researchers found that using social media more than three times a day predicted poor mental health and well-being in teens.

But not all research has found a link between time spent on social media and mental health risks in teens.

How teens use social media also might determine its impact. For instance, viewing certain types of content may raise some teens' mental health risks. This could include content that depicts:

• Illegal acts.
• Self-harm or harm to other people.
• Encouragement of habits tied to eating disorders, such as purging or restrictive eating.

These types of content may be even more risky for teens who already have a mental health condition. Being exposed to discrimination, hate or cyberbullying on social media also can raise the risk of anxiety or depression.

What teens share about themselves on social media also matters.

With the teenage brain, it's common to make a choice before thinking it through. So, teens might post something when they're angry or upset, and regret it later. That's known as stress posting.

Teens who post content also are at risk of sharing sexual photos or highly personal stories. This can lead to teens being bullied, harassed or even blackmailed.

Protecting your teen

You can take steps to help your teens use social media responsibly and limit some of the possible negative effects.

Use these tips:

Set rules and limits as needed. This helps prevent social media from getting in the way of activities, sleep, meals or homework.

For example, you could make a rule about not using social media until homework is done. Or you could set a daily time limit for social media use.

You also could choose to keep social media off-limits during certain times. These times might include during family meals and an hour before bed.

Set an example by following these rules yourself. And let your teen know what the consequences will be if your rules aren't followed.

• Manage any challenging behaviors. If your teen's social media use starts to challenge your rules or your sense of what's appropriate, talk with your teen about it. You also could connect with parents of your teen's friends or take a look at your teen's internet history.
• Turn on privacy settings. This can help keep your teen from sharing personal information or data that your teen didn't mean to share. Each of your teen's social media accounts likely has privacy setting that can be changed.

Monitor your teen's accounts. The American Psychological Association recommends you regularly review your child's social media use during the early teen years.

One way to monitor is to follow or "friend" your child's social accounts. As your teen gets older, you can choose to monitor your teen's social media less. Your teen's maturity level can help guide your decision.

Have regular talks with your teen about social media. These talks give you chances to ask how social media has been making your teen feel. Encourage your teen to let you know if something online worries or bothers your teen.

Regular talks offer you chances to give your child advice about social media too. For example, you can teach your teen to question whether content is accurate. You also can explain that social media is full of images about beauty and lifestyle that are not realistic.

• Be a role model for your teen. You might want to tell your child about your own social media habits. That can help you set a good example and keep your regular talks from being one-sided.

Explain what's not OK. Remind your teen that it's hurtful to gossip, spread rumors, bully or harm someone's reputation — online or otherwise.

Also remind your teen not to share personal information with strangers online. This includes people's addresses, telephone numbers, passwords, and bank or credit card numbers.

• Encourage face-to-face contact with friends. This is even more important for teens prone to social anxiety.

Talk to your child's healthcare professional if you think your teen has symptoms of anxiety, depression or other mental health concerns related to social media use. Also talk with your child's care professional if your teen has any of the following symptoms:

• Uses social media even when wanting to stop.
• Uses it so much that school, sleep, activities or relationships suffer.
• Often spends more time on social platforms than you intended.
• Lies in order to use social media.

Your teen might be referred to a mental healthcare professional who can help.

There is a problem with information submitted for this request. Review/update the information highlighted below and resubmit the form.

Children’s health information and parenting tips to your inbox.

Sign-up to get Mayo Clinic’s trusted health content sent to your email. Receive a bonus guide on ways to manage your child’s health just for subscribing. Click here for an email preview.

Error Email field is required

Error Include a valid email address

To provide you with the most relevant and helpful information, and understand which information is beneficial, we may combine your email and website usage information with other information we have about you. If you are a Mayo Clinic patient, this could include protected health information. If we combine this information with your protected health information, we will treat all of that information as protected health information and will only use or disclose that information as set forth in our notice of privacy practices. You may opt-out of email communications at any time by clicking on the unsubscribe link in the e-mail.

Thank you for subscribing

Our e-newsletter will keep you up-to-date on the latest health information.

Something went wrong with your subscription.

Please try again in a couple of minutes

• Hagan JF, et al., eds. Promoting the healthy and safe use of social media. In: Bright Futures: Guidelines for Health Supervision of Infants, Children, and Adolescents. 4th ed. https://publications.aap.org/pediatriccare. American Academy of Pediatrics; 2017. Accessed Oct. 3, 2023.
• Social media can help connect: Research-based tips from pediatricians for families. Center of Excellence on Social Media and Youth Mental Health. https://www.aap.org/en/patient-care/media-and-children/center-of-excellence-on-social-media-and-youth-mental-health/. Accessed Oct. 3, 2023.
• Health advisory on social media use in adolescence. American Psychological Association. https://www.apa.org/topics/social-media-internet/health-advisory-adolescent-social-media-use. Accessed Oct. 3, 2023.
• Social media and teens. American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry. https://www.aacap.org/AACAP/Families_and_Youth/Facts_for_Families/FFF-Guide/Social-Media-and-Teens-100.aspx. Accessed Oct. 3, 2023.
• Social media and youth mental health: The U.S. surgeon general's advisory. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. https://www.hhs.gov/surgeongeneral/priorities/youth-mental-health/social-media/index.html. Accessed Oct. 3, 2023.
• Teens, social media and technology 2022. Pew Research Center. https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2022/08/10/teens-social-media-and-technology-2022/. Accessed Oct. 3, 2023.
• Popat A, et al. Exploring adolescents' perspectives on social media and mental health and well-being — A qualitative literature review. Clinical Child Psychology and Psychiatry. 2023; doi:10.1177/13591045221092884.
• Valkenburg PM, et al. Social media use and its impact on adolescent mental health: An umbrella review of the evidence. Current Opinion in Psychology. 2022; doi:10.1016/j.copsyc.2021.08.017.
• Berger MN, et al. Social media use and health and well-being of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer youth: Systematic Review. Journal of Medical Internet Research. 2022; doi:10.2196/38449.
• Self-Harm. Pediatric Patient Education. https://publications.aap.org/patiented. Accessed Oct. 3, 2023.
• Liu M, et al. Time spent on social media and risk of depression in adolescents: A dose-response meta-analysis. 2022; doi:10.3390/ijerph19095164.
• Coyne SM, et al. Does time spent using social media impact mental health? An eight year longitudinal study. Computers in Human Behavior. 2020; doi:10.1016/j.chb.2019.106160.
• Viner RM, et al. Roles of cyberbullying, sleep, and physical activity in mediating the effects of social media use on mental health and wellbeing among young people in England: A secondary analysis of longitudinal data. The Lancet. Child & Adolescent Health. 2019; doi:10.1016/S2352-4642(19)30186-5.
• Riehm KE, et al. Associations between time spent using social media and internalizing and externalizing problems among US youth. JAMA Psychiatry. 2019; doi:10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2019.2325.
• Hoge E, et al. Digital media, anxiety, and depression in children. Pediatrics. 2017; doi:10.1542/peds.2016-1758G.
• How to help kids navigate friendships and peer relationships. American Psychological Association. https://www.apa.org/topics/parenting/navigating-friendships. Accessed Oct. 24, 2023.
• Hoecker JL (expert opinion). Mayo Clinic. Oct. 31, 2023.
• Distracted Driving
• Piercings: How to prevent complications
• Talking to your teen about sex
• Teen drug abuse
• Teen suicide
• Mayo Clinic Minute: Weight loss surgery for kids

Mayo Clinic does not endorse companies or products. Advertising revenue supports our not-for-profit mission.

• Opportunities

Mayo Clinic Press

Check out these best-sellers and special offers on books and newsletters from Mayo Clinic Press .

• Mayo Clinic on Incontinence - Mayo Clinic Press Mayo Clinic on Incontinence
• The Essential Diabetes Book - Mayo Clinic Press The Essential Diabetes Book
• Mayo Clinic on Hearing and Balance - Mayo Clinic Press Mayo Clinic on Hearing and Balance
• FREE Mayo Clinic Diet Assessment - Mayo Clinic Press FREE Mayo Clinic Diet Assessment
• Mayo Clinic Health Letter - FREE book - Mayo Clinic Press Mayo Clinic Health Letter - FREE book
• Healthy Lifestyle
• Teens and social media use Whats the impact

We’re transforming healthcare

Make a gift now and help create new and better solutions for more than 1.3 million patients who turn to Mayo Clinic each year.

• Share full article

Advertisement

Supported by

Everyone Says Social Media Is Bad for Teens. Proving It Is Another Thing.

Parents, scientists and the surgeon general are worried. But there isn’t even a shared definition of what social media is.

By Claire Cain Miller

There have been increasingly loud public warnings that social media is harming teenagers’ mental health — most recently from the United States surgeon general — adding to many parents’ fears about what all the time spent on phones is doing to their children’s brains.

While many scientists share the concern, there is little research to prove that social media is harmful — or to indicate which sites, apps or features are problematic. There isn’t even a shared definition of what social media is. It leaves parents, policymakers and other adults in teenagers’ lives without clear guidance on what to be worried about.

“We have some evidence to guide us, but this is a scenario where we just need to know more,” said Jacqueline Nesi, a psychologist at Brown who studies the topic.

What counts as social media when it comes to teenagers’ health?

The surgeon general, Dr. Vivek Murthy, warned last month that social media carried a “profound risk of harm,” but he didn’t name any apps or websites. His report acknowledged that “there isn’t a single, widely accepted scholarly definition of social media.”

Most studies look at platforms with user-generated content, where people can interact. But that raises a lot of questions. Does it matter if teenagers see posts from people they know or don’t know? Does it make a difference if they post or just view? Do multiplayer games count? Dating apps? Group texts?

YouTube illustrates the challenge. It’s the most popular site among teenagers by far: 95 percent use it, and almost 20 percent say they do so “almost constantly,” Pew Research Center found . It has all the features of social media, yet it hasn’t been included in most studies.

How Often Teens Say They Use Each Platform

How teenage girls believe each social media feature affects them.

We are having trouble retrieving the article content.

Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and  log into  your Times account, or  subscribe  for all of The Times.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access.

Already a subscriber?  Log in .

Want all of The Times?  Subscribe .

Numbers, Facts and Trends Shaping Your World

Read our research on:

Full Topic List

Regions & Countries

• Publications
• Our Methods
• Short Reads
• Tools & Resources

Read Our Research On:

How Pew Research Center will report on generations moving forward

Journalists, researchers and the public often look at society through the lens of generation, using terms like Millennial or Gen Z to describe groups of similarly aged people. This approach can help readers see themselves in the data and assess where we are and where we’re headed as a country.

Pew Research Center has been at the forefront of generational research over the years, telling the story of Millennials as they came of age politically and as they moved more firmly into adult life . In recent years, we’ve also been eager to learn about Gen Z as the leading edge of this generation moves into adulthood.

But generational research has become a crowded arena. The field has been flooded with content that’s often sold as research but is more like clickbait or marketing mythology. There’s also been a growing chorus of criticism about generational research and generational labels in particular.

Recently, as we were preparing to embark on a major research project related to Gen Z, we decided to take a step back and consider how we can study generations in a way that aligns with our values of accuracy, rigor and providing a foundation of facts that enriches the public dialogue.

A typical generation spans 15 to 18 years. As many critics of generational research point out, there is great diversity of thought, experience and behavior within generations.

We set out on a yearlong process of assessing the landscape of generational research. We spoke with experts from outside Pew Research Center, including those who have been publicly critical of our generational analysis, to get their take on the pros and cons of this type of work. We invested in methodological testing to determine whether we could compare findings from our earlier telephone surveys to the online ones we’re conducting now. And we experimented with higher-level statistical analyses that would allow us to isolate the effect of generation.

What emerged from this process was a set of clear guidelines that will help frame our approach going forward. Many of these are principles we’ve always adhered to , but others will require us to change the way we’ve been doing things in recent years.

Here’s a short overview of how we’ll approach generational research in the future:

We’ll only do generational analysis when we have historical data that allows us to compare generations at similar stages of life. When comparing generations, it’s crucial to control for age. In other words, researchers need to look at each generation or age cohort at a similar point in the life cycle. (“Age cohort” is a fancy way of referring to a group of people who were born around the same time.)

When doing this kind of research, the question isn’t whether young adults today are different from middle-aged or older adults today. The question is whether young adults today are different from young adults at some specific point in the past.

To answer this question, it’s necessary to have data that’s been collected over a considerable amount of time – think decades. Standard surveys don’t allow for this type of analysis. We can look at differences across age groups, but we can’t compare age groups over time.

Another complication is that the surveys we conducted 20 or 30 years ago aren’t usually comparable enough to the surveys we’re doing today. Our earlier surveys were done over the phone, and we’ve since transitioned to our nationally representative online survey panel , the American Trends Panel . Our internal testing showed that on many topics, respondents answer questions differently depending on the way they’re being interviewed. So we can’t use most of our surveys from the late 1980s and early 2000s to compare Gen Z with Millennials and Gen Xers at a similar stage of life.

This means that most generational analysis we do will use datasets that have employed similar methodologies over a long period of time, such as surveys from the U.S. Census Bureau. A good example is our 2020 report on Millennial families , which used census data going back to the late 1960s. The report showed that Millennials are marrying and forming families at a much different pace than the generations that came before them.

Even when we have historical data, we will attempt to control for other factors beyond age in making generational comparisons. If we accept that there are real differences across generations, we’re basically saying that people who were born around the same time share certain attitudes or beliefs – and that their views have been influenced by external forces that uniquely shaped them during their formative years. Those forces may have been social changes, economic circumstances, technological advances or political movements.

When we see that younger adults have different views than their older counterparts, it may be driven by their demographic traits rather than the fact that they belong to a particular generation.

The tricky part is isolating those forces from events or circumstances that have affected all age groups, not just one generation. These are often called “period effects.” An example of a period effect is the Watergate scandal, which drove down trust in government among all age groups. Differences in trust across age groups in the wake of Watergate shouldn’t be attributed to the outsize impact that event had on one age group or another, because the change occurred across the board.

Changing demographics also may play a role in patterns that might at first seem like generational differences. We know that the United States has become more racially and ethnically diverse in recent decades, and that race and ethnicity are linked with certain key social and political views. When we see that younger adults have different views than their older counterparts, it may be driven by their demographic traits rather than the fact that they belong to a particular generation.

Controlling for these factors can involve complicated statistical analysis that helps determine whether the differences we see across age groups are indeed due to generation or not. This additional step adds rigor to the process. Unfortunately, it’s often absent from current discussions about Gen Z, Millennials and other generations.

When we can’t do generational analysis, we still see value in looking at differences by age and will do so where it makes sense. Age is one of the most common predictors of differences in attitudes and behaviors. And even if age gaps aren’t rooted in generational differences, they can still be illuminating. They help us understand how people across the age spectrum are responding to key trends, technological breakthroughs and historical events.

Each stage of life comes with a unique set of experiences. Young adults are often at the leading edge of changing attitudes on emerging social trends. Take views on same-sex marriage , for example, or attitudes about gender identity .

Many middle-aged adults, in turn, face the challenge of raising children while also providing care and support to their aging parents. And older adults have their own obstacles and opportunities. All of these stories – rooted in the life cycle, not in generations – are important and compelling, and we can tell them by analyzing our surveys at any given point in time.

When we do have the data to study groups of similarly aged people over time, we won’t always default to using the standard generational definitions and labels. While generational labels are simple and catchy, there are other ways to analyze age cohorts. For example, some observers have suggested grouping people by the decade in which they were born. This would create narrower cohorts in which the members may share more in common. People could also be grouped relative to their age during key historical events (such as the Great Recession or the COVID-19 pandemic) or technological innovations (like the invention of the iPhone).

By choosing not to use the standard generational labels when they’re not appropriate, we can avoid reinforcing harmful stereotypes or oversimplifying people’s complex lived experiences.

Existing generational definitions also may be too broad and arbitrary to capture differences that exist among narrower cohorts. A typical generation spans 15 to 18 years. As many critics of generational research point out, there is great diversity of thought, experience and behavior within generations. The key is to pick a lens that’s most appropriate for the research question that’s being studied. If we’re looking at political views and how they’ve shifted over time, for example, we might group people together according to the first presidential election in which they were eligible to vote.

With these considerations in mind, our audiences should not expect to see a lot of new research coming out of Pew Research Center that uses the generational lens. We’ll only talk about generations when it adds value, advances important national debates and highlights meaningful societal trends.

• Age & Generations
• Demographic Research
• Generation X
• Generation Z
• Generations
• Greatest Generation
• Methodological Research
• Millennials
• Silent Generation

Kim Parker is director of social trends research at Pew Research Center .

Teens and Video Games Today

As biden and trump seek reelection, who are the oldest – and youngest – current world leaders, how teens and parents approach screen time, who are you the art and science of measuring identity, u.s. centenarian population is projected to quadruple over the next 30 years, most popular.

1615 L St. NW, Suite 800 Washington, DC 20036 USA (+1) 202-419-4300 | Main (+1) 202-857-8562 | Fax (+1) 202-419-4372 |  Media Inquiries

Research Topics

• Email Newsletters

ABOUT PEW RESEARCH CENTER  Pew Research Center is a nonpartisan fact tank that informs the public about the issues, attitudes and trends shaping the world. It conducts public opinion polling, demographic research, media content analysis and other empirical social science research. Pew Research Center does not take policy positions. It is a subsidiary of  The Pew Charitable Trusts .

© 2024 Pew Research Center