5 min read
Large-scale scientific studies have found no clear causal link between social media use and widespread harm among teenagers, challenging narratives that single out platforms as primary drivers of adolescent mental health crises. Researchers and academic institutions involved in the reviews say evidence does not support sweeping claims that time spent on platforms such as Instagram, TikTok, or Snapchat directly causes anxiety, depression, or other long-term psychological damage.
According to a comprehensive review of current research led by Ben Singh, PhD et al., including data from longitudinal cohort studies and meta-analyses, associations between social media engagement and teen wellbeing tend to be small, inconsistent, and context dependent rather than definitively causal.
In this study, the term “wellbeing” is scored across eight indicators, i.e., happiness, optimism, satisfaction with life, worry, sadness, perseverance, emotional regulation, and cognitive engagement. The study found moderate use, which it labelled as more than zero but less than 12.5 hours a week after school with the “best wellbeing”, while both heavy use (12.5 hours or more per week) and no use at all were linked with poorer outcomes.
Experts stress that while some individuals who experience negative effects are those with pre-existing vulnerabilities, meaning there is not enough evidence to justify broad generalizations about harm for all teens.
The research says:
Moderate social media use was associated with the best well-being outcomes, while both no use and highest use were associated with poorer well-being. For girls, moderate use became most favorable from middle adolescence onward, while for boys, no use became increasingly problematic from mid-adolescence, exceeding risks of high use by late adolescence.
However, from mid-adolescence onward, boys who did not use social media were increasingly likely to report poorer outcomes, surpassing the risk of high use by late adolescence. The researchers said this showed “both heavy social use and abstinence” might have risks for young people who are vulnerable to not only social comparison but also social isolation.
The findings align with multiple academic assessments that highlight a complex relationship between technology use and youth wellbeing. For example, researchers from Oxford, Harvard, and multiple European universities have concluded that social media’s impact varies greatly depending on how, why, and in what context teenagers engage with platforms. Activities like active communication with friends, creative expression, and educational content are associated with neutral or even positive outcomes in some studies.
In another research, conducted by the University of Manchester, looked at the social media usage habits of 25 kids aged between 11 and 14, and it also concluded that there’s no definitive link between social media and gaming time spent, and negative mental health outcomes.
As per the report:
The lack of evidence linking social media use or gaming frequency to later internalizing symptoms suggests that these activities may not play a causal role in the development of adolescent mental health difficulties. Our findings challenge the widespread assumption that time spent on these technologies is inherently harmful and highlight the need for more nuanced perspectives that consider the context and individual differences in their use.
In contrast, selective negative effects tend to emerge in specific contexts, such as exposure to harmful or stressful content, online harassment, or compulsive comparison behaviors. However, these factors are not unique to social media and can occur in offline environments as well.
The research consensus contrasts with policy proposals in several countries that have called for age-based restrictions or limits on teenage access to digital platforms. Some lawmakers have cited social media usage statistics and correlational findings as justification for intervention.
Australia has implemented the world’s first outright ban on social media for under-16s, while other nations like Denmark, Malaysia, and the UK are introducing strict age verification, parental consent rules (e.g., France, Germany, Italy), or time limits, with many more countries looking to Australia as a model to curb online harms and protect youth mental health.
Those who use social platforms for connection and community building tend to report better social integration and access to support networks, while those engaging primarily through passive scrolling or as an escape from stress are more likely to report negative feelings, a distinction that complicates simple narratives about overall harm. This mindset is what prompted Meta and Mark Zuckerberg to doll out a statement regarding the ban, which TechJuice covered earlier.
Researchers also agree that open dialogue, digital literacy education, and supportive offline environments remain critical components of healthy adolescent development. Rather than focusing solely on screen time quotas, many experts call for conversations that help young people navigate online spaces responsibly and critically.
“Policies and parenting advice should move beyond simple screen-time limits and instead focus on balanced, age-appropriate, and purposeful use of social media,” the Australian research concluded.
The absence of a definitive causal link between social media use and teen harm does not imply that individual negative experiences do not occur, but it does challenge policy frameworks that treat digital platforms as inherently dangerous.
One thing is for certain: No matter how much you might think it’s better for children to not be near smart devices, they are not automatically running back to building blocks and kicking balls. They will just find another online service which enables them to connect.
