Menu
  • CPD online - National Elf Service
  • Take your event #BeyondTheRoom
  • Training
  • #ElfHelp
  • Contact us
  • News

No bias. No misinformation. No spin. Just what you need!

The Mental Elf

  • Home
  • About
  • Categories
      • Cost effectiveness
      • Evaluation and impact assessment
      • Financial management
      • Financial sustainability
      • Integration
      • Needs assessment
      • Outcomes based commissioning
      • Partnership working
      • Population health
      • Resource allocation
      • Service reconfiguration
      • Service review and improvement
      • Specialised commissioning
      • Strategy development and planning
      • Technology
      • Urgent care
      • Variation
      • caries
      • cleft lip and palate
      • dental workforce
      • endodontics
      • oral and maxillofacial surgery
      • oral cancer
      • oral health
      • oral medicine and pathology
      • orthodontics
      • periodontal disease
      • restorative dentistry
      • temporomandibular joint disorders
      • tooth surface loss
    • Diagnosis
      • brain imaging
      • diagnostic test
      • risk factors
      • screening programme
      • screening test
      • behaviour
      • ICT
      • learning styles
      • numeracy
      • phonics
      • reading
      • science
      • social emotional
      • social skills
      • wellbeing
      • autistic spectrum disorder
      • challenging behaviour
      • communication
      • down syndrome
      • parents with learning disabilities
      • prader-willi syndrome
      • profound and multiple learning disability
    • Mental health
      • ADHD
      • anxiety
      • bipolar disorder
      • dementia
      • depression
      • eating disorders
      • OCD
      • panic disorder
      • personality disorders
      • psychosis
      • PTSD
      • schizophrenia
      • self-harm
      • sleep disorders
      • substance misuse
      • suicide
      • autoimmune and inflammatory diseases
      • fibromyalgia
      • fractures and dislocations
      • musculoskeletal pain
      • neck and back pain
      • osteoarthritis
      • osteoporosis
      • rheumatoid arthritis
      • soft tissue injuries
      • spinal conditions
      • spondyloarthropathies
    • Other health conditions
      • blood-borne viruses
      • cancer
      • cardiovascular disease
      • chronic fatigue syndrome
      • comorbidity
      • epilepsy
      • multiple sclerosis
      • sleep apnoea
      • traumatic brain injury
    • Populations and settings
      • advocacy
      • black and minority ethnic
      • caregivers
      • child and adolescent
      • commissioning
      • community settings
      • crime
      • deinstitutionalisation
      • employment
      • end of life
      • family carers
      • hospital admissions
      • housing
      • later life
      • LGBTQ+
      • liaison psychiatry
      • loneliness
      • older adult
      • parenting
      • patient safety
      • perinatal mental health
      • poverty
      • pregnancy
      • primary care
      • quality of life
      • schools
      • secondary care
      • service user involvement
      • shared care
      • sport
      • training
      • vulnerable people
      • young adult
    • Publication types
      • appraisal
      • audit
      • case study
      • case-control
      • cohort study
      • consultation
      • cross-sectional
      • economic analysis
      • economic evaluation
      • guideline
      • legislation
      • literature review
      • meta-analysis
      • mixed methods
      • observational study
      • patient information
      • policy
      • prospective study
      • qualitative
      • questionnaire
      • randomised controlled trial
      • report
      • scoping review
      • statistics
      • survey
      • systematic review
      • technology assessment
      • training resource
      • umbrella review
      • website
      • coproduction
      • equality and diversity
      • evidence based social care
      • home care
      • integration
      • local authorities
      • nursing homes
      • personal budgets and direct payments
      • personalisation
      • reablement
      • residential care
      • safeguarding
      • social care decision making
      • social care training
      • social care workforce
      • social work
      • support planning
      • user led organisations
      • voluntary and community sector
    • Treatment
      • antidepressants
      • antipsychotics
      • CBT
      • cognitive bias modification (cbm)
      • complementary and alternative
      • digital health
      • exercise
      • medicines
      • mental illness prevention
      • mindfulness
      • other
      • psychotherapy
      • rehabilitation
      • self-management
      • surgical
      • systems
      • telehealth
      • topical
  • Podcasts
Search

Home » Posts » Treatment » digital health » Just how problematic is ‘Problematic Facebook Use’?

Just how problematic is ‘Problematic Facebook Use’?

2 Responses »
Jan 11 2018
Profile photo of Lisa Marzano
Posted by
Lisa Marzano>,
Andrea Cipriani
jacob-ufkes-195221

Around a quarter of the world’s population has an active Facebook account. The latest statistics (released in June 2017) showed that 2.07 billion people had logged into their Facebook account in the previous month, a much greater number than for any other social networking site.

As in relation to Internet use more generally, there has been much concern surrounding the potential psychological harm of Facebook use, particularly in relation to younger users, and when such use becomes excessive, intrusive, compulsive or even addictive. ‘Problematic Facebook Use’ (PFU), a wider umbrella term for “addictive-like symptoms and/or scarce self-regulation related to Facebook use reflecting in social and personal problems”, is reportedly an issue for up to 1 in 10 adolescents and young adults worldwide, and has become the focus of a growing body of research focusing on potential associations with psychological distress (including depression and anxiety) and, to a lesser extent, general well-being (e.g. reduced subjective happiness and life satisfaction) (Marino et al, 2016).

In a recent systematic review and meta-analysis (Marino et al, 2018), Marino and colleagues aimed to synthesise this literature, in order to:

  • Estimate the strength of the association between PFU and i) psychological distress and ii) general well-being;
  • Explore the role of potential moderators for these associations, including age, gender and geographic location.
Problematic Facebook Use (PFU) has been defined as Facebook use that "creates impairments and problems in users’ life, such as psychological, emotional, social, school, or work difficulties" (Marino et al, 2016).

Problematic Facebook Use (PFU) has been defined as Facebook use that “creates impairments and problems in users’ life, such as psychological, emotional, social, school, or work difficulties” (Marino et al, 2016).

Methods

The authors carried out a systematic review and random-effects meta-analysis of observational studies. They searched for published and unpublished data (up to September 2016), contacted the study authors and did not limit the search to English language.

Unfortunately, the protocol of this review is not available, so it is not possible to gather full information about important methodological issues, such as the full search strategy, the list of a priori moderators, how the authors rated the quality of the included studies, and the pre-specified criteria to average studies which reported correlations for more than one psychological problem (i.e. anxiety and depression) when they analysed psychological distress.

Results

The final sample included 23 independent studies (of which 19 published), from 11 different countries (total N=13,929; 60.7% females; average age=21.93 years (SD=3.97)). The description of characteristics of included studies and the results from the meta-analysis are presented in tables that are overall clear and informative.

The key finding from this meta-analysis is that there is very high (possibly too high) heterogeneity in the sample of included studies, even when mean age and gender were factored in as potential moderators (I2 ranging between 62 and 89%).

As predicted (and perhaps predictably given the very definition of PFU), the results showed a positive correlation between PFU and depression, anxiety, and psychological distress more generally. The latter association did not appear to be influenced by the proportion of females in the sample or publication status, but was significantly larger in samples with a higher mean age, and somewhat greater in samples from Western as opposed to Asian countries.

Smaller but significant associations were also found in relation to PFU and general well-being and life satisfaction; this time as negative correlations (i.e., greater PFU was associated with decreased well-being). Sample characteristics and publication status did not appear to moderate these associations.

The associations between PFU and both psychological distress and general well-being remained significant, and were in fact slightly higher, when only higher quality studies (n=15) were considered (respectively r = 0.33 (uncorrected r = 0.29), 95% CI (0.25 to 0.41); and r = -0.22 (uncorrected r = -.19), 95% CI (-0.32 to -0.11).

This review suggests that there is a positive correlation between problematic Facebook use and depression, anxiety, and psychological distress more generally. However, there is significant heterogeneity in the included studies. 

This review suggests that there is a positive correlation between problematic Facebook use and depression, anxiety, and psychological distress more generally. However, there is significant heterogeneity in the included studies.

Conclusions

Although fairly moderate, the associations between PFU and psychological distress and well-being are significant, and comparable to those reported in relation to problematic smartphone use and so called internet addiction. Whilst acknowledging that it is impossible to establish cause and effect relationships given the cross-sectional nature of the studies reviewed, the authors speculate that “the addictive-like symptoms presented by problematic users could be strictly linked to perceived psychological distress and also have a negative impact on general well-being”, and that this effect might be cumulative.

In other words, it is possible that prolonged exposure to PFU is associated with more negative outcomes, which would explain why the association between PFU and psychological distress appears to be larger in young adults than amongst adolescents. However, in the absence of more longitudinal research, and more studies with a clear developmental focus, alternative explanations for such age-related differences cannot currently be ruled out, and very little is known about whether and how these then play out into adulthood and later life.

Similarly, despite the inclusion of Asian as well as Western samples in the review, the conclusions that may be drawn regarding the differential impact of PFU in different cultural and socio-economic contexts are limited by the relative lack of research in Asian and other non-Western countries. The authors therefore conclude with a call for more cross-cultural, as well as longitudinal research, and further studies to help determine whether PFU can (as they suggest) be recognised as a standalone psychological disorder. In their own words, “research on PFU is still in its infancy”.

Strengths and limitations

This study is the first systematic review and meta-analysis of PFU. Amongst its strengths are the focus on age (although limited to relatively young participants) and on studies from both high and low and medium income countries (LMIC), and the inclusion of unpublished as well as published reports (to counter the risk of publication bias).

However, and whilst we concur with the authors that this is an area worthy of continued investigation, the decision to focus specifically on Facebook (as opposed to other/all social media) may have benefited from further justification. More importantly, the authors should have mentioned the significant heterogeneity as a potentially important limitation, which should be taken into account when interpreting the findings from this review. Also, the circular nature of the concept being investigated (Problematic Facebook Use) may have warranted some discussion, and not only in relation to issues of directionality/causality.

Both theoretically and methodologically, the field would arguably benefit from a more nuanced understanding of what PFU is and means. Marino et al. argue that this partly rests on developing “a more thorough understanding of how Facebook, and other social media, are used in general and how they may influence users’ lives in ways that are not necessarily ‘problematic’”. For example, despite the authors making references to online vs. offline relationships, and ‘real life problems’, such distinctions may well be increasingly meaningless for those ‘growing up digital’ and perhaps also for older generations.

What is also needed is more qualitative research on how people experience PFU and its effects (such studies were not included in the review, nor mentioned as a recommendation), and more research – also, but not exclusively qualitative – on what support may be safe, effective, and acceptable to PFUsers, and helpful in preventing the occurrence of PFU. Indeed, this may well be a more useful focus for further research than more studies confirming a link between psychological problems and behaviour, which is by its very definition problematic.

Both theoretically and methodologically, the field would arguably benefit from a more nuanced understanding of what Problematic Facebook Use is and means.

Both theoretically and methodologically, the field would arguably benefit from a more nuanced understanding of what Problematic Facebook Use is and means.

Implications for practice

Marino and colleagues conclude that:

from a clinical perspective […] psychological evidence-based interventions (e.g. cognitive-behavioral therapy/motivational interviewing) which have been successfully applied to addictive behaviours generally, and specifically to problematic Internet use, may be of potential benefit in helping individuals overcoming problematic Facebook use.

However, it also important to consider what these findings imply in terms of less traditional interventions, particularly online ones. Sites such as Facebook are (too) able to track (on a much wider scale and more reliably than any research study or clinical intervention) how and how often individuals use social media, including by the tone and language of their online posts and interactions. The potential for (early) identification of PFU and other difficulties and to reach those who may not otherwise seek or have access to psychological support (including in LMIC) is therefore considerable, but far from straightforward. Recent controversy over the use of Artificial Intelligence to detect and respond to (potentially) suicidal Facebook posts is the most recent example (but by no means the only one) of how difficult it can be to strike a balance between promising, well-meaning interventions and initiatives that could well do more harm than good.

There's huge potential for social media to identify people who are in the early stages of psychological distress, but such initiatives are complex and must be sensitively developed and rolled-out.

There’s huge potential for social media to identify people who are in the early stages of psychological distress, but such initiatives are complex and must be sensitively developed and rolled-out.

Conflicts of interest

None

Links

Primary paper

Marino C, Gini G, Vieno A, Spada MM et al. (2018) The associations between problematic Facebook use, psychological distress and well-being among adolescents and young adults: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Affective Disorders 2018 Jan 15;226:274-281. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2017.10.007. Epub 2017 Oct 3. [PubMed abstract]

Other references

https://www.statista.com/statistics/264810/number-of-monthly-active-facebook-users-worldwide/

Marino C, Vieno A, Moss AC, Caselli G, Nikčević AV, Spada MM. (2016) Personality, motives and metacognitions as predictors of problematic facebook use in university students (PDF). Personal. Individ. Differ. 101, 70–77.

Commentary: Using AI to Prevent Suicides? Bad Idea, Facebook. http://fortune.com/2017/11/30/facebook-ai-suicide-prevention/

Children’s Commissioner (2017). Growing up Digital https://www.childrenscommissioner.gov.uk/publication/growing-up-digital/

Marchant A, Hawton K, Stewart A, Montgomery P, Singaravelu V, Lloyd K, Purdy N, Daine K, John A. (2017). A systematic review of the relationship between internet use, self-harm and suicidal behaviour in young people: The good, the bad and the unknown. PLoS one, 12(8), p.e0181722.

Lee N. (2014) Trouble on the radar. Lancet, 384, p.1917.

Spada MM. (2014) An overview of problematic Internet use. Addictive Behaviors, 39(1), pp.3-6. [PubMed abstract]

Photo credits

  • Photo by Jacob Ufkes on Unsplash
  • Photo by rawpixel.com on Unsplash
  • Photo by Courtney Clayton on Unsplash
Share on Facebook Tweet this on Twitter Share on LinkedIn Share on Google+
Mark as read

Share this post:

Share on Facebook Tweet this on Twitter Share on LinkedIn Share on Google+ Share via email
Create a personal elf note about this blog
Tagged with: adverse effects, facebook, harm, heterogeneity, internet addiction, Journal of Affective Disorders, meta-analysis, problematic facebook use, social media, systematic review, youth mental health
Profile photo of Lisa Marzano

Lisa Marzano

Lisa is Associate Professor in Psychology at Middlesex University, where she specialises in mental health and suicide research. Formerly a Research Fellow at the Oxford University Centre for Suicide Research, she re-joined Middlesex University in 2012, having previously studied there. Lisa is Editor of the Digital section in the Evidence-Based Mental Health journal published by the BMJ. She currently leads the INSIGHT collaboration with colleagues in the School of Science and Technology, the Institute of Psychology, Psychiatry and Neuroscience, and the University of Bristol (http://insight.mdx.ac.uk/), which applies technological innovations to mental health research and clinical practice; the QUEST study (http://www.thequeststudy.org/), a project commissioned by Samaritans to inform new approaches to suicide prevention; and research with colleagues at the Glasgow University Suicidal Behaviour Research Lab investigating public attitudes towards self-injury. Having previously developed training in suicide prevention for front-line police officers, she is also conducting a wider study of mental health training for emergency services with colleagues in the Department of Psychology, and is the author of a Continuing Professional Development module on suicides in prison for the Royal College of Psychiatrists (with Professor Seena Fazel of Oxford University).

More posts - Website

Follow me here –

  • Twitter
Profile photo of Andrea Cipriani

Andrea Cipriani

Andrea is NIHR Research Professor at the Department of Psychiatry, University of Oxford, and Honorary Consultant Psychiatrist at Oxford Health NHS Foundation Trust. His main interest in psychiatry is evidence-based mental health and his research focuses on the evaluation of treatments in psychiatry, mainly major depression, bipolar disorder and schizophrenia. He has carried out many systematic reviews, meta-analyses and randomised controlled trials in psychopharmacology, however in the past few years he has also been investigating relevant issues in epidemiological psychiatry and public health, like patterns of drug consumption, risk of serious adverse events (most of all, suicide and deliberate self harm) and implementation of treatment guidelines. His interest in the methodology of evidence synthesis has now a specific focus on individual patient data network meta-analysis and data science, trying to assess the validity, breadth, structure and interpretation of innovative statistical and machine learning approaches to better inform the decision-making process between patients and clinicians and personalise treatment indications in routine clinical care. Andrea has been working closely with world class academic institutions in the UK, Europe, US, Canada, Japan, China and Australia, and also with important organisations, such as the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence in the UK, the Istituto Superiore di Sanità in Italy, the United Nations in Vienna and the World Health Organization (WHO) in Geneva. Together with the Department of Mental Health and Substance Abuse at WHO he has co-authored a manual on psychopharmacology, which provided evidence-based information to health care professionals in primary care especially in low- and middle-income countries. This manual is part of the Gap Action Programme of the WHO and is distributed by WHO as a reference source to assist physicians working in the primary health care through increasing their knowledge and improving their routine clinical practice in using evidence-based medicines for mental disorders. Andrea is currently Editor in Chief of Evidence-Based Mental Health (https://ebmh.bmj.com/); he is also on the Editorial Boards of The Lancet Psychiatry, the Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry and Bipolar Disorders.

More posts - Website

Follow me here –

  • Twitter
Logging In...

Profile cancel

Sign in with Twitter Sign in with Facebook
or

Not published

  • 2 Replies
  • 0 Comments
  • 0 Tweets
  • 0 Facebook
  • 2 Pingbacks
Last reply was January 31, 2018
  1. Adult Mental Health Update
    View January 18, 2018

    […] Just how problematic is ‘Problematic Facebook use’? […]

    Reply
  2. Just how problematic is ‘Problematic Facebook Use’? | Paediatrics
    View January 31, 2018

    […] Link to article here […]

    Reply
Try out our members features!

Sign up now. It’s free! Or Sign in

We can help you:

  • 1Keep up to date with the latest research
  • 2Connect with experts and colleagues
  • 3Contribute to your professional development
Tell me more about the benefits of membership

FOLLOW the Mental Elf

  • Find us on Facebook
  • Follow us on Twitter
  • Follow us on Google+
  • Read our RSS feed
  • Find us on LinkedIn

Twitter

  • "Compassionate public policy needs to promote collaborative care teams to support patients’ optimal overall health.… https://t.co/RjmnquqZ5p about 25 minutes ago Reply Retweet Favorite
  • "Being diagnosed with a severe physical illness can have fatal psychological consequences for some people."… https://t.co/81adLcJgxr about 3 hours ago Reply Retweet Favorite
  • @talkJenny But @donamatthews touches on this in her blog and asks: "Might the findings suggest an important role fo… https://t.co/Z6HlmrFst3 about 3 hours ago Reply Retweet Favorite
  • @talkJenny "The authors don’t address the deeper philosophical, ethical, and legal questions implicit in a study li… https://t.co/Nbap7v15zY about 3 hours ago Reply Retweet Favorite
  • "Clinicians need to consider the elevated suicide risk of patients recently diagnosed with severe physical health c… https://t.co/pOpimUcmlX about 4 hours ago Reply Retweet Favorite
Mental_Elf

Recent Posts

  • Does a diagnosis of severe physical illness elevate suicide risk?
  • Trauma transmission in the children of trauma-affected refugees: risk and protective factors
  • Ketamine and suicidal ideation: French trial finds modest short-term effects
  • Mental disorder and homicide: are rates and sentencing patterns changing?
  • Can social recovery therapy improve social disability in young people?

Recent Comments

  • julian on Mental disorder and homicide: are rates and sentencing patterns changing?
  • Lorna on Is it bipolar disorder or borderline personality disorder?
  • Jean Sellar-Edmunds on Antidepressant withdrawal or depression relapse? International guidelines on antidepressant discontinuation are unclear

Suggest a paper

Do you have a suggestion for a paper? Then let us know.

Click here

Watch our 2 minute promo video!

Visit our other Elf blogs

  • Commissioning
  • Dentistry
  • Education
  • Learning Disabilities
  • Mental Health
  • Musculoskeletal
  • Social Care

Free trial

Close
Ready to get started? It's free!
Sign up now No thanks Tell me more about the benefits of membership

Free email newsletter

FOLLOW the Mental Elf

  • Find us on Facebook
  • Follow us on Twitter
  • Follow us on Google+
  • Read our RSS feed
  • Find us on LinkedIn
© 2023 National Elf Service is brought to you by Minervation Ltd
Email: info@nationalelfservice.net
  • About
  • Evaluation
  • Site Map
  • Terms
  • Privacy
  • Cookies
  • Log In