Cited by 88Impact of Technology on AdolescentsMental Health via WritingSchizophrenia research and treatment

Social media and its relationship with mood, self‐esteem and paranoia in psychosis

Open access
Berry, N., Emsley, R., Lobban, F., Bucci, S.·2018·Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica

Abstract

Objective: An evidence‐base is emerging indicating detrimental and beneficial effects of social media. Little is known about the impact of social media use on people who experience psychosis. Method: Forty‐four participants with and without psychosis completed 1084 assessments of social media use, perceived social rank, mood, self‐esteem and paranoia over a 6‐day period using an experience sampling method ( ESM ). Results: Social media use predicted low mood, but did not predict self‐esteem and paranoia. Posting about feelings and venting on social media predicted low mood and self‐esteem and high paranoia, whilst posting about daily activities predicted increases in positive affect and self‐esteem and viewing social media newsfeeds predicted reductions in negative affect and paranoia. Perceptions of low social rank when using social media predicted low mood and self‐esteem and high paranoia. The impact of social media use did not differ between participants with and without psychosis; although, experiencing psychosis moderated the relationship between venting and negative affect. Social media use frequency was lower in people with psychosis. Conclusion: Findings show the potential detrimental impact of social media use for people with and without psychosis. Despite few between‐group differences, overall negative psychological consequences highlight the need to consider use in clinical practice.

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 · 10.1111/acps.12953

Cites

31 of 31 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?

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

Research works printed but not linked: 36

  1. [1]Boyd DM, Ellison NB. Social network sites: definition, history, and scholarship. J Comput Mediat Commun 2007; 13: 210– 230.
  2. [2]Brusilovskiy E, Townley G, Snethen G, Salzer MS. Social media use, community participation and psychological well‐being among individuals with serious mental illnesses. Comput Human Behav 2016; 65: 232– 240.
  3. [3]Miller BJ, Stewart A, Schrimsher J, Peeples D, Buckley PF. How connected are people with schizophrenia? Cell phone, computer, email and social media use. Psychiatry Res 2015; 225: 458– 463. 25563669
  4. [6]Matthews M, Murnane E, Snyder J et al. The double‐edged sword: a mixed methods study of the interplay between bipolar disorder and technology use. Comput Human Behav 2017; 75: 288– 300.
  5. [8]Birnbaum ML, Rizvi AF, Correll CU, Kane JM, Confino J. Role of social media and the Internet in pathways to care for adolescents and young adults with psychotic disorders and non‐psychotic mood disorders. Early Interv Psychiatry 2017; 11: 290– 295. 25808317 PMC4580496
  6. [9]Berry N, Lobban F, Emsley R, Bucci S. Acceptability of interventions delivered online and through mobile phones for people who experience severe mental health problems: a systematic review. J Med Internet Res 2016; 18: e121. 27245693 PMC4908305
  7. [10]Pantic I, Damjanovic A, Todorovic J et al. Association between online social networking and depression in high school students: behavioural physiology viewpoint. Psychiatr Danub 2012; 24: 90– 93. 22447092
  8. [16]Gonzales AL, Hancock JT. Mirror, mirror on my Facebook wall: effects of exposure to Facebook on self‐esteem. Cyberpsychol Behav Soc Netw 2011; 14: 79– 83. 21329447
  9. [21]Torous J, Keshavan M. The role of social media in schizophrenia: evaluating risks, benefits, and potential. Curr Opin Psychiatry 2016; 29: 190– 195. 26967314
  10. [22]Kalbitzer J, Mell T, Bermpohl F, Rapp M, Heinz A. Twitter psychosis: a rare variation or a distinct syndrome. J Nerv Ment Dis 2014; 202: 623. 25075647
  11. [23]Krishna N, Fischer BA, Miller M, Register‐Brown K, Patchan K, Hackman A. The role of social media networks in psychotic disorders: a case report. Gen Hosp Psychiatry 2013; 35: 323– 331. 23174460
  12. [24]Nitzan U, Shoshan E, Lev‐Ran S, Fennig S. Internet‐related psychosis‐a sign of the times. Isr J Psychiatry Relat Sci 2011; 48: 207– 211. 22141146
  13. [25]Veretilo P, Billick SB. Psychiatric illness and Facebook: a case report. Psychiatr Q 2012; 83: 385– 389. 22274630
  14. [26]Bird JC, Waite F, Rowsell E, Fergusson EC, Freeman D. Cognitive, affective, and social factors maintaining paranoia in adolescents with mental health problems: a longitudinal study. Psychiatry Res 2017; 257: 34– 39. 28715666
  15. [28]Festinger L. A theory of social comparison processes. Human Relations 1954; 7: 117.
  16. [31]Zhao S, Grasmuck S, Martin J. Identity construction on Facebook: digital empowerment in anchored relationships. Comput Human Behav 2008; 24: 1816– 1836.
  17. [32]Gilbert P. The relationship of shame, social anxiety and depression: the role of the evaluation of social rank. Clin Psychol Psychother 2000; 7: 174– 189.
  18. [36]Steers M‐LN, Wickham RE, Acitelli LK. Seeing everyone else's highlight reels: how Facebook usage is linked to depressive symptoms. J Soc Clin Psychol 2014; 33: 701– 731.
  19. [37]Vogel EA, Rose JP, Okdie BM, Eckles K, Franz B. Who compares despairs? The effect of social comparison orientation on social media use and its outcomes. Pers Individ Dif 2015; 86: 249– 256.
  20. [38]Østergaard SD. Taking Facebook at face value: why the use of social media may cause mental disorder. Acta Psychiatr Scand 2017; 136: 439– 440. 28940179
  21. [41]Kross E, Verduyn P, Demiralp E et al. Facebook use predicts declines in subjective well‐being in young adults. PLoS ONE 2013; 8: e69841. 23967061 PMC3743827
  22. [43]Csikszentmihalyi M, Larson R. Validity and reliability of the experience‐sampling method In: Csikszentmihalyi M, ed. Flow and foundations of positive psychology. Dordrecht: Springer, 2014.
  23. [44]Watson D, Clark LA, Tellegen A. Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: the PANAS scales. J Pers Soc Psychol 1988; 54: 1063– 1070. 3397865
  24. [47]Fenigstein A, Vanable PA. Paranoia and self‐consciousness. J Pers Soc Psychol 1992; 62: 129– 138. 1538311
  25. [52]Fuller‐Tyszkiewicz M, McCabe M, Skouteris H et al. Does body satisfaction influence self‐esteem in adolescents' daily lives? An experience sampling study J Adolesc 2015; 45: 11– 19. 26356806
  26. [55]Carter LA. Rigorous methods for the analysis, reporting and evaluation of ESM style data. PhD dissertation. Manchester (UK): University of Manchester, 2016. https://www.research.manchester.ac.uk/portal/files/54589387/FULL_TEXT.PDF
  27. [56]Seidman G. Self‐presentation and belonging on Facebook: how personality influences social media use and motivations. Pers Individ Diff 2013; 54: 402– 407.
  28. [58]Greene K, Derlega VL, Mathews A. Self‐disclosure in personal relationships In: Vangelisti A, Perlman D, editors. Cambridge handbook of personal relationships. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2006.
  29. [60]Al‐Kandari A, Melkote SR, Sharif A. Needs and motives of Instagram users that predict self‐disclosure use: a case study of young adults in Kuwait. J Creative Commun 2016; 11: 85– 101.
  30. [61]Bazarova NN, Choi YH. Self‐disclosure in social media: extending the functional approach to disclosure motivations and characteristics on social network sites. J Commun 2014; 64: 635– 657.
  31. [62]Hollenbaugh EE, Ferris AL. Facebook self‐disclosure: examining the role of traits, social cohesion, and motives. Comput Human Behav 2014; 30: 50– 58.
  32. [63]Orben AC, Dunbar RIM. Social media and relationship development: the effect of valence and intimacy of posts. Comput Human Behav 2017; 73: 489– 498.
  33. [68]Aschbrenner KA, Naslund JA, Shevenell M, Kinney E, Bartels SJ. A pilot study of a peer‐group lifestyle intervention enhanced with mHealth technology and social media for adults with serious mental illness. J Nerv Ment Dis 2016; 204: 483– 486. 27233056 PMC4887192
  34. [69]Naslund JA, Aschbrenner KA, Marsch LA, Bartels SJ. The future of mental health care: peer‐to‐peer support and social media. Epidemiol Psychiatr Sci 2016; 25: 113– 122. 26744309 PMC4830464
  35. [70]Naslund JA, Aschbrenner KA, Marsch LA, Bartels SJ. Feasibility and acceptability of Facebook for health promotion among people with serious mental illness. Digital Health 2016; 2: 1– 10. PMC5370548 28367321
  36. [72]Välimäki M, Athanasopoulou C, Lahti M, Adams CE. Effectiveness of social media interventions for people with schizophrenia: a systematic review and meta‐analysis. J Med Internet Res 2016; 18: e92. 27105939 PMC4859871

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Berry, N., Emsley, R., Lobban, F., & Bucci, S.
Affiliations
  • Manchester Academic Health Science Centre (GB)
  • King's College London (GB)
  • Lancaster University (GB)
  • Greater Manchester Mental Health NHS Foundation Trust (GB)
Corresponding author
Berry, N.
Venue
Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2018-09-10
Volume
138
Issue
6
Pages
558-570
ISSN
  • 0001-690X (ISSN-L)
  • 1600-0447
OpenAlex
W2890285745
Cited by
88
References
31
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 26 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 1
FWCI
14.76
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Lancaster EPrints (Lancaster University) (submittedVersion)
  • Research Portal (King's College London) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Research Explorer (The University of Manchester) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • MRC Health eResearch Centre (HeRC)
  • Farr Institute (MR/K006665/1)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Impact of Technology on Adolescents
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health via Writing
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Schizophrenia research and treatment
Keywords
social media use, psychosis, mood, self-esteem, paranoia, social rank, venting, positive and negative affect
MeSH terms
Ecological Momentary Assessment, Adult, Affect, Female, Hierarchy, Social, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Paranoid Disorders, Psychotic Disorders, Schizophrenia, Self Concept, Social Behavior, Young Adult, Social Media

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