Cited by 162Body Image and Dysmorphia StudiesImpact of Technology on AdolescentsEating Disorders and Behaviors

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 82 of the 82 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 170 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.

The use of social networking sites, body image dissatisfaction, and body dysmorphic disorder: A systematic review of psychological research

Ryding, Francesca C., Kuss, Daria J.·2020·Psychology of Popular Media

Abstract

The escalation of social networking site (SNS) usage has led to much research examining both the positive and negative implications SNS can have on well-being. However, whilst many studies have investigated the relationship between SNS usage and body image, there remains a paucity of research in regards to SNS usage and Body Dysmorphic Disorder (BDD). A systematic search was undertaken using Web of Science, PsychInfo and PubMed databases to identify SNS usage and patterns, SNS features and mediating factors contributing towards body image dissatisfaction, resulting in 40 studies meeting specific inclusion criteria. Findings identified passive SNS use and appearance-focused SNS use as particularly influential. Appearance-based comparisons were also found to be a strong mediator between SNS use and body image dissatisfaction. Using the current knowledge, parallels were highlighted in terms of body image dissatisfaction and BDD symptomatology, suggesting frequent SNS usage as a potential risk factor in the development of BDD symptoms.

Overview

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

This systematic review of 40 studies found that passive and appearance-focused SNS use, mediated by appearance comparisons, is associated with greater body image dissatisfaction, and it draws parallels to BDD symptomatology. It concludes frequent SNS use may be a risk factor for BDD symptoms but notes that no included study explicitly tested SNS use and BDD, and calls for standardised definitions of excessive SNS use.

Key findings

  • Across 40 included studies, average SNS time was 1.5–2 hours per day; one older study reported 45 minutes per day on Facebook. In one study, 94% of respondents used Facebook at least once daily, 80.8% used it more than 15 minutes per day, and 20% spent more than two hours per day; 29.1% used highly visual social media more than two hours per day, and four respondents reported more than 11 hours per day.
  • Passive SNS use and appearance-focused SNS use were particularly influential; appearance-based comparisons were a strong mediator between SNS use and body image dissatisfaction, with upward comparisons associated with greater body dissatisfaction and body checking.
  • Parallels were highlighted between body image dissatisfaction and BDD symptomatology, such as reassurance-seeking and comparison, suggesting frequent SNS use as a potential risk factor for BDD symptoms; however, BDD was not explicitly compared with body image dissatisfaction and SNS use in any included study.
  • Gender differences were reported: females showed higher SNS use/excessive time (e.g., social media addiction mean 26.2 vs. 22.8; excessive time 13.79 vs. 11.71), and 20 studies used young female samples with limited male inclusion.

Methods

  • PRISMA-guided systematic review; searched Web of Science, PsychInfo, and PubMed using terms including social networking sites, social media, body image, comparison, self-esteem, body dysmorphic disorder, Facebook, Instagram, and body dissatisfaction; reference lists were also scanned.
  • Inclusion required empirical data and measures of SNS use, SNS features, body image, and BDD; exclusions were non-English studies, reviews, commentaries, book chapters, published abstracts, and non-peer-reviewed articles. Screening identified 9,095 records; 4,955 duplicates were removed, 4,140 were screened, 4,059 were excluded, 81 full texts were assessed, 41 were excluded (21 no body image measure, 14 no SNS use measure, 6 reviews), leaving 40 studies.
  • Data were extracted on sample characteristics, methodology and measures, and mediating processes; findings were synthesised narratively and presented in Table 1.

Limitations

  • Stated: social media and SNS are often used interchangeably but are not the same; included studies did not always define social media and spanned multiple SNS platforms rather than one, which may affect conclusions; the growing literature means relevant studies in submission or published since may have been missed.
  • Stated: many included studies used self-report perceived time online, subject to social desirability and recall bias; most were correlational/cross-sectional, so causal inferences cannot be drawn and bidirectional relationships are likely; longitudinal designs were lacking.
  • Stated/evident: samples were predominantly female, with 20 studies using young female samples and limited male inclusion; BDD was not explicitly compared with SNS use and body image dissatisfaction in any included study, so BDD conclusions are inferential.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/ppm0000264

Cites

82 of 82 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

175 Not checked yet · 17 Own interpretation · 9 No basis given · 8 Own method · 6 Own result

Verify all 170 references — free account

Show all 133 claims

  • It may state two separate claims as one. 54
  • Probably not a substantial claim. 36
  • The quote only partly states this claim. 3
82 of 82
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The included studies' measures of SNS use and body image are valid and comparable enough to synthesize across studies.

    “Features of SNS use were predominantly assessed using a number of self-report methods”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The reviewed literature is representative of the broader research on SNS and body image.

    “A total of 40 empirical studies were identified”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The relationship between SNS use and body image concerns has clinical implications worth assessing.

    “if SNS research aims to extend into clinical assessment, a standardised baseline regarding SNS usage time needs to be implemented”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Body image dissatisfaction and BDD symptoms are parallel enough to discuss together.

    “Parallels between body image dissatisfaction and BDD symptoms are also discussed”
4 of 4

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?

Self-check

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

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

5 of 5

Citations

Cites

Show all 82 references

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Ryding, F. C., & Kuss, D. J.
Venue
Psychology of Popular Media
Published
2020-10
Volume
9
Issue
4
Pages
412-435
ISSN
  • 2689-6567 (ISSN-L)
  • 2689-6575
OpenAlex
W2989773729
Cited by
162
References
82
Citations by year
2026: 18 · 2025: 39 · 2024: 31 · 2023: 31 · 2022: 22 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 7
FWCI
1.70
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Psychology of Popular Media (publishedVersion)
  • Nottingham Trent University's Institutional Repository (Nottingham Trent Repository) (acceptedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Body Image and Dysmorphia Studies
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Impact of Technology on Adolescents
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Eating Disorders and Behaviors
Keywords
social networking sites, body dissatisfaction, body dysmorphic disorder, passive social media use, mediators

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.

A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-10, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).

A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-10 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).

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