CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 24Impact of Technology on AdolescentsDigital Media and PhilosophyPersonal Information Management and User Behavior

Explaining variation in adolescents’ social media-related distraction: The role of social connectivity and disconnectivity factors

Open access
Siebers, Teun, Beyens, Ine, Pouwels, J. Loes, Valkenburg, Patti M.·2023·Current Psychology
DOI 10.1007/s12144-022-03844-yPMC PMC9684974

Published version of a preprint

Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Abstract Social media are often believed to distract adolescents’ attention. While existing research has shown that some adolescents experience more social media-related distraction than others, the explanations for these differences remain largely unknown. Based on Self-Determination Theory, this preregistered study investigated two social connectivity factors (fear of missing out [FoMO] and friendship accessibility expectations) and two disconnectivity factors (self-control strategies and parental restrictions) that may explain heterogeneity in social media-related distraction. We used data collected through a measurement burst design, consisting of a three-week experience sampling method study among 300 adolescents (21,970 assessments) and online surveys. Using N = 1 analyses, we found that most adolescents (77%) experienced social media-related distraction. Contrary to expectations, none of the connectivity or disconnectivity factors explained differences in social media-related distraction. The findings indicate that social media are a powerful distractor many adolescents seem to struggle with.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s12144-022-03844-y

Cites

73 of 73 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Studies show that social media, particularly when used for multitasking, can impair attention and increase distraction.

    “Studies show that social media, particularly when used for multitasking, can impair attention and increase distraction [25, 29].”

    From Impact of social media on cognitive development of children and young adults: a systematic review (2025) · cites this paper as [25]

    The Abstract reports that social media use is associated with increased distraction and lack of concentration, including distraction while doing homework. The Discussion reports more distraction for most adolescents who used more social media, but says it remains unclear whether social media itself causes the distraction. The paper does not establish that distraction is particularly greater during multitasking. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Two studies reported that social media can facilitate communication and collaboration, which could benefit language development and peer relationships.

    “Two studies reported that social media can facilitate communication and collaboration, which could benefit language development and peer relationships [25, 33].”

    From Impact of social media on cognitive development of children and young adults: a systematic review (2025) · cites this paper as [25]

    The Friendship accessibility expectations section describes adolescents sending messages to friends and receiving replies through social media, which supports the communication aspect. It does not report that social media facilitates collaboration or benefits language development or peer relationships; the paper examines social media-related distraction. No page numbers were provided for these passages. (LLM, conf=0.78)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • One study demonstrated that the majority of adolescents experienced distraction while using social media (β > 0.05, n = 230).

    “One study demonstrated that the majority of adolescents experienced distraction while using social media (β > 0.05, n = 230) [25].”

    From Impact of social media on cognitive development of children and young adults: a systematic review (2025) · cites this paper as [25]

  • Data handling was mostly appropriate, though some studies lacked transparency in managing missing data or confounding variables.

    “Data handling was mostly appropriate, though some studies lacked transparency in managing missing data or confounding variables, raising concerns about the validity of their results [10, 22–26].”

    From Impact of social media on cognitive development of children and young adults: a systematic review (2025) · cites this paper as [25]

    The Methods sections on Statistical analyses and Data availability describe this paper’s own analysis and publicly available materials, not an assessment of data handling across studies. Searches for missing data, confounding variables, and transparency found no passage evaluating whether other studies handled them appropriately or whether their results were valid. Page numbers were not available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.76)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 74 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Perrone, M. P. (2016). #FoMO: Establishing validity of the Fear of Missing Out Scale with an adolescent population [Doctoral Dissertation]. School Psychology Alfred. http://hdl.handle.net/10829/7399. Accessed 8 Oct 2020.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Siebers, T., Beyens, I., Pouwels, J. L., & Valkenburg, P. M.
Affiliations
  • University of Amsterdam (NL)
  • Radboud University Nijmegen (NL)
Corresponding author
Siebers, Teun
ORCID
Venue
Current Psychology
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2022-11-24
Volume
42
Issue
34
Pages
29955-29968
ISSN
  • 1046-1310 (ISSN-L)
  • 1936-4733
DOI
10.1007/s12144-022-03844-y
PMC
PMC9684974
OpenAlex
W4309885782
Cited by
24
References
74
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 4
FWCI
6.85
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Current Psychology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • UvA-DARE (University of Amsterdam) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Lirias (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Radboud Repository (Radboud University) (submittedVersion)
  • PsyArXiv (OSF Preprints) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • PsyArXiv (OSF Preprints) (submittedVersion)
  • Radboud Repository (Radboud University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
NWO (024.001.003)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Impact of Technology on Adolescents
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Science Applications › Digital Media and Philosophy
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Personal Information Management and User Behavior
Keywords
social media distraction, adolescents, attention, fear of missing out, self-control strategies, parental restriction, social connectedness, self-determination theory

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