Cited by 260Impact of Technology on AdolescentsMedia and Digital CommunicationTechnology Use by Older Adults

Retracted: Digital Communication Media Use and Psychological Well-Being: A Meta-Analysis

Open access
Liu, Dong, Baumeister, Roy F, Yang, Chia-chen, Hu, Baijing·2019·Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication

Abstract

The puzzle of whether digital media are improving or harming psychological well-being has been plaguing researchers and the public for decades. Derived from media richness theory, this study proposed that phone calls and texting improve well-being, while use of social network sites (SNSs), instant messaging (IM), and online gaming may displace other social contacts and, thereby, impair well-being. To test this hypothesis, a meta-analysis of 124 studies was conducted. The results showed that phone calls and texting were positively correlated with well-being, whereas online gaming was negatively associated with well-being. Furthermore, the relationship between digital media use and well-being was also contingent upon the way the technology was used. A series of meta-analyses of different types of SNS use and well-being was used to elucidate this point: interaction, self-presentation, and entertainment on SNSs were associated with better well-being, whereas consuming SNSs’ content was associated with poorer well-being.

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 · 10.1093/jcmc/zmz013This paper is marked retracted.

Cites

61 of 61 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?

  • A power analysis based on a small-to-medium effect size (f2 = 0.09) indicated that a sample size of 200 provides 90 percent power (α = 0.05) to detect a significant effect, and the authors aimed to recruit 250 participants.

    “A power analysis using G*Power based on a small-to-medium effect size (f2 = 0.09) between social media use and each of our dependent variables indicated that a sample size of 200 provides 90 percent power (α = 0.05) to detect a significant effect; we intentionally oversampled and aimed to recruit 250 participants to account for participants who opt out of providing blood samples.”
  • The displacement hypothesis posits that time spent on social media may have detrimental effects by displacing activities beneficial to well-being and health, such as sleep, exercise, or face-to-face interactions.

    “This perspective aligns with the displacement hypothesis, which posits that time spent on social media may have detrimental effects by displacing activities that are beneficial to well-being and health—for example, sleep, exercise, or face-to-face interactions.7,26”
  • A large body of research indicates a small, negative association between social media use and psychological well-being.

    “Although there is no consensus, a large body of research indicates a small, negative association between social media use and psychological well-being (Liu et al., 2019; Kross et al., 2021; also see Orben et al., 2019).”

    From Social media use and systemic inflammation: The moderating role of self-esteem (2021) · cites this paper as Liu et al., 2019

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

3 of the 64 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [33]33. LaRose, R., Wohn, D. Y., Ellison, N., & Steinfield, C. (2011). Facebook fiends: Compulsive social net- working and adjustment to college. Proceedings of the international association for the development of the information society. ICT 2011.
  2. [47]47. Simonsohn, U., Nelson, L. D., & Simmons, J. P. (2014b). P-curve and effect size: Correcting for publication bias using only significant results. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 9(6), 666-681. doi:10.1177/1745691614553988 · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Liu, D., Baumeister, R. F., Yang, C.-C., & Hu, B.
Affiliations
  • Renmin University of China (CN)
  • The University of Queensland (AU)
  • Oklahoma State University (US)
Corresponding author
Baumeister, Roy F
Venue
Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication
Published
2019-09-01
Volume
24
Issue
5
Pages
259-273
ISSN
1083-6101 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2979901578
Cited by
260
References
64
Citations by year
2026: 13 · 2025: 17 · 2024: 34 · 2023: 62 · 2022: 69 · 2021: 46 · 2020: 19
FWCI
8.60
Type
journal article
Language
en
Status
Retracted
Open access
Locations
Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication (publishedVersion)
Funders
Key Research Institute of Humanities and Social Sciences in Universities (16JJD860008)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Impact of Technology on Adolescents
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Networks and Communications › Media and Digital Communication
  • Social Sciences › Demography › Technology Use by Older Adults
Keywords
digital media use, psychological well-being, media richness theory, telephone calls, text messaging, social network sites, instant messaging, online games, self-presentation, media interaction, media use, entertainment use

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