As the United Kingdom and other countries make moves to follow Australia’s lead in restricting access to social media for under-16s, there is still much we don’t know about how the technology impacts young people’s mental health over time.
For example, does using social media for a certain number of hours each day lead to increased harm? Are younger adolescents more vulnerable than older ones? Is there any difference between boys and girls?
Our new study, published today in the Medical Journal of Australia, provides some important answers to these questions. It found clear risks from heavier social media use on young people’s mental health.
Alongside this, we also undertook a recent poll of Australian parents about efforts to restrict access to social media for young people. The findings suggest the law is changing parents’ views and practices around their children’s social media use.
A debate over age
When Australia restricted access to social media for young people under 16 last December, there was considerable debate about whether 16 was the appropriate age threshold.
There were a number of longitudinal studies that examined associations between adolescent social media use and mental health. But very few had systematically investigated whether risks of social media use differed across age during adolescence.
One large 2022 study from the UK found that increases in adolescents’ social media use over time were associated with lower life satisfaction during specific age periods – 11 to 13 years of age for girls and 14 to 15 years of age for boys. It focused on life satisfaction and did not assess symptoms of mental health.
Digging deeper
Our new study aimed to dig deeper into these trends.
We used data from 1,195 students in Melbourne who researchers have followed annually from 12 to 18 years of age.
We examined whether their social media use was related to later mental health problems, and statistically accounted for a range of individual and family factors that are known to influence both social media use and mental health. Therefore, we were able to reduce alternative explanations and strengthen confidence in our findings – even though we couldn’t prove causation.
We found that adolescents who spent more than two hours per day on social media had a higher risk of developing mental health problems one year later, compared with those using social media for less than one hour per day. The mental health problems included elevated symptoms of depression and poor well-being.
Importantly, the risks of social media use were not evenly experienced across adolescence.
The strongest effects consistently emerged in adolescents aged 12 to 13 for both girls and boys. The estimated risk for symptoms of depression and anxiety, as well as poor well-being and self-harm, was roughly twice as large compared with adolescents aged 14 to 16 and those aged 17 to 18.
Overall, the estimated size of effects was modest. But in girls aged 12 to 13, more than two hours of daily social media use was associated with around 11 additional cases of high depressive symptoms per 100 adolescents.
Even small effects can become meaningful at a population level when large numbers of young people are spending more than two hours a day on social media.
Age-based restrictions alone aren’t enough
Our study cannot determine a precise age at which social media becomes “safe”. Nor should a single study inform national legislation on age-based restrictions.
However, combined with other research, our study suggests that younger adolescents are particularly vulnerable to the potential harms of social media, with the strongest effects emerging during early adolescence.
As a result, we expect that Australia’s social media law will have the greatest impact on the mental health of younger adolescents. But further research is needed to confirm this.
However, age-based restrictions alone are unlikely to eliminate all risks associated with adolescent social media use. We found evidence that some risks for mental health problems – namely, elevated symptoms of depression – persisted for young people up to 18 years of age.
This highlights the need for continued support for older adolescents.
This includes holding social media platforms accountable for algorithms and features that promote compulsive engagement and exposure to harmful content. One way to achieve this is through Australia’s proposed digital duty of care reform.
It also involves improving education on digital literacy and safety at schools and supporting parents to help young people develop healthier online habits.
Changing the norm
We also recently undertook a poll of more than 2,000 parents of 0- to 17-year-olds about the law restricting access to social media in Australia.
The survey found that 59% of parents felt the law supported them in setting rules around social media use. Also, 39% of parents reported that the law has changed their view on when children should first have their social media accounts, with 16 years being the most commonly endorsed age (38%).
These findings, which are yet to be published, demonstrate that public health policies can influence what is considered appropriate or expected behaviour.
While evidence on the impacts of Australia’s social media law is still emerging, it has already influenced global discussions on adolescent social media use.
Debates about age-based social media restrictions are now occurring in many countries. And the conversation is increasingly shifting from whether social media affects young people’s mental health to when young people may be most vulnerable and how we as a society should respond.
- is a Research Fellow, School of Psychology, Deakin University
- is a Professor of Adolescent Health at The University of Melbourne; Director, Royal Children’s Hospital Centre for Adolescent Health; and Murdoch Children’s Research Institute, The University of Melbourne
- is a Postdoctoral research fellow, Deakin University; Murdoch Children’s Research Institute
- This article first appeared in The Conversation
