The time someone spends on social media is not enough to describe the relationship between its use and mental health, according to a new study from the University of Exeter. How much it occupies their thoughts, how they behave while using it and how emotionally invested they are in what happens online also appear to matter. The research suggests that focusing exclusively on reducing time spent using social media may overlook psychological factors associated with symptoms of depression and anxiety.
Dr. Jason Hill conducted the study using data from 304 adults. Participants reported their own daily time spent on social media, how they used it and the symptoms of depression and anxiety they experienced. They also provided information about aspects of their mindfulness. The analysis examined the relationships between these factors, combining duration of use with cognitive, emotional and behavioral engagement.
As Hill explains, two people may spend exactly the same amount of time on social media and have very different psychological experiences. One person’s thoughts may be more absorbed in what happens there, while another may feel a stronger urge to check or use the platforms. The degree of emotional investment in online developments also varies. These dimensions, the researcher argues, need to be examined alongside the minutes or hours of use.
For depression, the study found an association between time spent on social media and depressive symptoms. Duration of use also appeared to play a more important role in explaining the relationships between symptoms and cognitive and behavioral engagement. Time therefore remains part of the picture examined by the research. However, the findings suggest that this picture becomes more complete when it also takes account of how someone thinks about and uses social media.
For anxiety, the pattern was different: emotional engagement appeared more important, while time spent using social media played a smaller role in the relationships examined. This suggests that reducing overall use may not address all forms of psychological distress in the same way. Hill draws particular attention to cases where use involves strong emotional investment. In these cases, interventions based exclusively on time limits may prove insufficient.
The research also examined how mindfulness related to these findings. Some associations between social media engagement and depressive symptoms were statistically explained by aspects of mindfulness: greater awareness, the ability to describe internal experiences and a less judgmental attitude toward thoughts and feelings. The corresponding relationships were less consistent for anxiety. These results concern the statistical associations between the factors measured and do not prove that any one of them causes changes in the others.
The main limitation is that the study was cross-sectional, meaning it examined the variables at a single point in time. It therefore cannot show that specific ways of using social media cause changes in mindfulness or symptoms of depression and anxiety. As the research acknowledges, the relationships may work in both directions. This distinction is essential for interpreting the findings and what they can support regarding possible interventions.
With these caveats, the study suggests that users and policymakers should consider both the quantity and quality of use. Time limits could be combined with approaches that help people recognize when they become mentally absorbed or intensely emotionally engaged in social media. According to the research, such approaches are worth investigating. The question Hill raises is which people, and under what circumstances, may experience social media use that is associated with a burden on their mental health.
Comments