CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 429Impact of Technology on AdolescentsChild Development and Digital TechnologyDigital Media and Philosophy

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 60 of the 61 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Media Use Is Linked to Lower Psychological Well-Being: Evidence from Three Datasets

Twenge, Jean M., Campbell, W. Keith·2019·Psychiatric Quarterly
DOI 10.1007/s11126-019-09630-7
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Adolescents spend a substantial and increasing amount of time using digital media (smartphones, computers, social media, gaming, Internet), but existing studies do not agree on whether time spent on digital media is associated with lower psychological well-being (including happiness, general well-being, and indicators of low well-being such as depression, suicidal ideation, and suicide attempts). Across three large surveys of adolescents in two countries (n = 221,096), light users (<1 h a day) of digital media reported substantially higher psychological well-being than heavy users (5+ hours a day). Datasets initially presented as supporting opposite conclusions produced similar effect sizes when analyzed using the same strategy. Heavy users (vs. light) of digital media were 48% to 171% more likely to be unhappy, to be in low in well-being, or to have suicide risk factors such as depression, suicidal ideation, or past suicide attempts. Heavy users (vs. light) were twice as likely to report having attempted suicide. Light users (rather than non- or moderate users) were highest in well-being, and for most digital media use the largest drop in well-being occurred between moderate use and heavy use. The limitations of using percent variance explained as a gauge of practical impact are discussed.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s11126-019-09630-7

Cites

60 of 60 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Benoit D. iPhones and children are a toxic pair, say two big Apple investors. Wall Street Journal. 2018.
  2. Brodwin E. There’s no solid evidence that people get addicted to social media – and using it could actually be beneficial. In: Business Insider; 2018.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 429

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Twenge, J. M., & Campbell, W. K.
Affiliations
  • San Diego State University (US)
  • University of Georgia (US)
Corresponding author
Twenge, Jean M.
ORCID
Venue
Psychiatric Quarterly
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2019-03-11
Volume
90
Issue
2
Pages
311-331
ISSN
  • 0033-2720 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-6709
DOI
10.1007/s11126-019-09630-7
OpenAlex
W2921374582
Cited by
429
References
61
Citations by year
2026: 79 · 2025: 81 · 2024: 67 · 2023: 53 · 2022: 48 · 2021: 56 · 2020: 37 · 2019: 8
FWCI
74.85
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
Locations
  • Psychiatric Quarterly (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Impact of Technology on Adolescents
  • Social Sciences › Education › Child Development and Digital Technology
  • Social Sciences › Communication › Digital Media and Philosophy
Keywords
digital media use, adolescents, psychological well-being, happiness, depression, suicidal ideation, suicide attempts, social media, smartphone use, gaming, effect size interpretation
MeSH terms
Smartphone, Adolescent, Adolescent Behavior, Computers, Depression, Female, United Kingdom, Happiness, Humans, Male, Personal Satisfaction, Suicide, United States, Video Games, Internet, Social Media, Datasets as Topic

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review