Similarly, have you received funding, directly or indirectly, from pharmaceutical companies?
I ask because academics in this space are typically focused on increasing trust in medical products like vaccines, and often place the erosion of public trust on "misinformation" related to the dangers and efficacy of vaccines. But I've seen very few people in your position acknowledge and take any accountability for that erosion of trust.
For instance people suffering from vaccine injuries such as myocarditis, or blood clots from the recently discontinued AZ vaccine, were for a long time discredited and had their experiences and claims denied and deleted on all types of media including this site. You would think that these experiences would need to be welcomed for discussion if we're to maintain any semblance of informed consent. Also, how are you suggesting that vaccine injured people are treated and compensated to ensure public trust in the event that their lives are impacted by these products?
At the same time, the medical establishment made many false claims about the safety and efficacy of vaccines. For example the head of the CDC claimed that vaccinated people could not spread the virus to others, a false claim which could clearly result in consequences. The CDC also referred to ivermectin as horse paste, which is obviously a misleading medical claim intended to influence behaviors. The establishment blamed lack of vaccine efficacy on viral mutations, as if we didn't know that respiratory viruses mutate quickly.
These are all things which add to the erosion of public trust in claims by the medical community and corporate/political/ academic establishments, but yet I've never seen people in your position (other than Paul Offit, a staunch vaccination advocate who did come out and point to their being a political motive behind pushing these vaccines to healthy children) take responsibility for the decreased transparency smd misleading claims in the name of combatting vaccine hesitancy.
How have you addressed this in your consulting and messaging to avoid what seems to be a massive conflict of interest between professional vaccine advocates and honest discourse?
Id urge that you not counter this comment by claiming the popular talking point that side effects are rare and a hazard of most medical products while these products saved billions of lives, given that this response does not reflect the experiences of many of us who have been denied and victims of censorship and lack of transparency.
Social media has undoubtedly played a large role in facilitating the spread of misinformation and disinformation about vaccines. The virality and reach platforms allows misinformation to spread rapidly and widely. The social media landscape also continues to change; prior to COVID; misinformation tended to be spread by users with moderate or small followings; during and after COVID, health misinformation spread was concentrated to a few accounts with large reach and influence, as you noted. This continues to change as we have entered into an influencer economy
Great question on a topic of ongoing debate! We've seen through the research that that there are several potential risks to introducing social media during childhood and adolescence, including exposure to inappropriate content, cyberbullying, and cyberstalking. Many experts recommend setting age-appropriate guidelines and parental supervision for younger users.
What is the best way to explain the dangers of social media to parents that are less technologically savvy than their children?
How can we balance using social media to promote positive mental health with the real dangers to mental health most social media platforms have?
Great question. It's important to highlight specific risks such as cyberbullying, comparison culture, and privacy concerns. Using real-life examples or news stories, such as the one by the New York Times (https://www.nytimes.com/2024/02/22/us/instagram-child-influencers.html) can be helpful to illustrate these dangers in a relatable way.
While social media can facilitate connections, offer support networks, and provide valuable resources for mental well-being, it's important to acknowledge and address the potential negative impacts. This means using social media in moderation (if you already have accounts) and responsibly. To minimize negative impacts, users can curate their feeds to prioritize positive content, set time limits, and engage in offline activities that promote mental health.
How much of the harm of social networks comes from algorithms that are optimized for engagement? Is there any research into how you could reshape the typical news feed to promote better mental health instead?
It is unclear exactly how much harm comes from these algorithms, as social media companies are not fully transparent about how algorithms are developed and refined over time. We do know that the impact from engagement-optimized algorithms is significant, as the purpose is to prioritize content that keeps users on the platforms. The NYT covered research from Harvard last year on how academics can partner with influencers to promote evidence-based mental health content. Check it out! [https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/06/learning/would-you-take-mental-health-advice-from-tiktok.html](https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/06/learning/would-you-take-mental-health-advice-from-tiktok.html)
In a world where we have such a hard time trusting many sources for health or news, how can we best assist people in finding credible sources or prevent cherry-picking sources?
It's important to encourage people to seek information from reputable sources such as government health agencies, scientific institutions, and established news organizations. Check out some tips for filtering through information here! [https://theconversation.com/health-misinformation-is-rampant-on-social-media-heres-what-it-does-why-it-spreads-and-what-people-can-do-about-it-217059](https://theconversation.com/health-misinformation-is-rampant-on-social-media-heres-what-it-does-why-it-spreads-and-what-people-can-do-about-it-217059)
Great question. For those who may not be familiar, social psychologist Jonathan Haidt came out with a book called “[The Anxious Generation](https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/729231/the-anxious-generation-by-jonathan-haidt/).” As noted in an NBC article, he argues that "the smartphone-driven great rewiring of childhood” is causing an “epidemic of mental illness.” He also recommends four ways to combat this: "no smartphones before high school, no social media before age 16, no phones in schools; and prioritizing real-world play and independence."
Having seen the recent research on social media among different age groups, I agree generally with his advice. Children and adolescents have developing brains that make it very difficult, if not impossible, to regulate their use of apps and social media on smartphones, which can be very addictive. Real-world play and real-life connections are essential during childhood and adolescence to help them develop positive social relationship skills that they can bring into adulthood.
How can we differentiate potential real harm social media is doing to youth vs a repeating cycle of moral panics? While I certainly feel social media is bad (broadly speaking) for kids, when I try to articulate the reasons why it sounds a lot like the people who said TV, movies, video games, writing, etc were going to destroy kids brains
Great question. Research indicates that excessive or unguided social media use can have adverse effects on youth mental health, including increased risk of depression, anxiety, and cyberbullying. However, it's essential to recognize that social media's influence is multifaceted and varies depending on individual factors such as age, developmental stage, and usage patterns. For example, people use social media platforms for different reasons (e.g., get information, connect with others, meet people, text, entertainment...etc). It matters what people use the platforms for, and the extent to which it may lead to harm.
Two things to look out for among youth and social media use:
1. Is it leading to distress (e.g., FOMO, bullying, mental health social comparison, exposure to harmful disordered eating behaviors)?
2. Is it undermining their ability to participate in other, real-life engagements (e.g., they spend so much time scrolling that they don't get enough sleep, are late for school and homework assignments, would rather be online than go to an important family social event)?
What is considered the "most positive" app is subjective and may vary depending on preferences and experiences. More specific apps like mindfulness apps, mental health support platforms, and community-based social networks focused on positivity and inspiration are catered to positive content and interactions, compared with large platforms that have diverse content, usage, and features.
It's important to set boundaries for oneself with social media. She used up her allotted social media time to create the post, and will be answering one question per day until all of them have been answered.
This largely depends on individual needs and what people are using social media for. Babies and young children generally do not need to have accounts on social media. This is particularly important because before the age of 9 or 10, children do not have the cognitive development in place to have media literacy or understand safety and privacy concerns.
As children grow into adolescence, using social media platforms (if at all) in a way that prioritizes safety, privacy, and positive peer interactions can build social skills and self-expression while minimizing risks. For adults, platforms that facilitate meaningful connections, professional networking, and access to reliable information can support mental well-being and personal growth.
The research continues to evolve, so stay tuned. Many adolescents and adults are also taking strategic social media breaks to preserve their mental health, and that seems to be working for many who have been entrenched in social media.
what role do you think social media has played in the use of the term "CPTSD" evolving?
for additional context if needed: cptsd is used as an informal diagnosis to reference people with severe ptsd, involving long-term entrapment, such as survivors of genocide, cults, and extreme child or domestic abuse (https://icd.who.int/browse/2024-01/mms/en#2070699808).
my most recent therapist several years ago referenced that my ptsd diagnosed many years ago was specifically cptsd due to my experiences and symptomology. we both go online to find additional resources for me, and find the definition used online, and with therapists such as Pete Walker, did not seem to fit what he was taught. it seemed more concerned with parenting styles and attachment issues. growing up with mild support needs autism is another reasoning i have seen, as well. the timeline of it changing to us seemed like it had something to do with social media being more prevalent.
i noticed on tiktok many therapists seem to discuss it a lot with that definition as well.
As with many other health conditions that are under-discussed, under-funded, and under-prioritized (e.g., women's health, menopause, PCOS), social media has provided a platform for people to connect on complex health conditions. This can be helpful in increasing awareness and advocacy for conditions previously under-reported. It is also important for people to continue these discussions with their providers and health care professionals, so that these issues continue to be surfaced and on their radars as scientific and clinical knowledge evolves.
but what role do you think social media has played in misinformation in general wrt mental health? i have also seen people shifting the definitions of serious, serious terms such as gaslighting and narcissist.
Social media has undoubtedly played a large role in facilitating the spread of misinformation across several domains (health, politics, society), because anyone can share information without having credentials or expertise. The virality and reach platforms allows misinformation to spread rapidly and widely. The dynamics continue to change as we have entered into an influencer economy - users (whether they are influencers or not) may be incentivized to create content that is controversial, generates engagement, and elicits strong emotion, whether this is accurate or inaccurate information.
What actions can individual users take to help combat the spread of misinformation (health-related or otherwise) across social media platforms? On an adjacent note, how can the individual user contribute to positive outcomes that enhance different aspects of well-being? It often feels easier and healthier (for the individual) to just not participate at all; but I would love to learn some actionable techniques that I can leverage to help make social media a landscape for boosting well-being rather than one that has a largely negative impact on mental/emotional health. Thanks!
Great question! One rule of thumb is to pause and fact-check before you share. It is important to prioritize information from credible sources such as reputable news outlets, government health agencies, and scientific organizations. Be wary of sensationalized content - this is meant to engage you and keep you on the platform.
You can also follow accounts that promote mental health awareness, positivity, and self-care - make sure they are from reputable sources and users with expertise. Additional tips can be found here: [https://theconversation.com/health-misinformation-is-rampant-on-social-media-heres-what-it-does-why-it-spreads-and-what-people-can-do-about-it-217059](https://theconversation.com/health-misinformation-is-rampant-on-social-media-heres-what-it-does-why-it-spreads-and-what-people-can-do-about-it-217059)
Thanks for hosting this AMA, Dr. Wang!
What are some ways social media is having a positive impact on mental health? We constantly hear about the bad, but I'm curious about the positive outcomes. Are there social media apps that are doing a better job than others?
Thank you!
Glad to have you here! Some ways social media can have positive impacts on mental health are to serve as sources of inspiration, creativity, and social support. For example, people may have hard time finding support on stigmatized mental health topics in-person, but may find community online. Another way social media can help in the health realm is by providing structured community groups based on health interests and concerns (e.g., cancer, chronic diseases). Social media allows people to connect and removes barriers such as scheduling, transportation...etc, and in this way can bring expertise and people together.
I'm wondering if you could share how 'bad' different platforms are. I browse Reddit, TikTok, and Facebook. I've noticed that TikTok seems to be the worst offender here, but I could be wrong. What do you think?
The "badness" of a platform can vary depending on individual experiences, preferences, and use. What may be harmful or unhelpful to one user can be very positive for another depending on what they use it for, how long they are on the platform, and their goals. Each platform has strengths and weaknesses and has had their share of criticisms:
As one of the largest social media platforms, Facebook has faced scrutiny for its role in facilitating the spread of misinformation, polarizing content, and privacy concerns. Instagram has faced criticism for fueling harmful social comparisons and negative mental health, particularly among youth and females. Because of its short form nature by design, Twitter/X has faced criticism for the ease and speed with which misinformation can be spread. TikTok has also been criticized for amplifying certain content. All platforms lack adequate transparency about their algorithms.
- What advice would you give to marginalised people in the use of social media?
- What, if anything, does the evidence base say on the impact social media has on shaping attitudes and beliefs about particular groups? For example: the abilities or needs of people with disabilities or chronic conditions?
Marginalized people can experience a distinct set of stressors in person and online. Prioritizing self-care, setting boundaries, and seeking supportive online communities can help in integrating social media in a positive way. This can also mean taking social media breaks (e.g., Saturday social media-free day).
Research shows that social media can both challenge and reinforce stereotypes and biases about certain groups. I view social media as a tool - it can be used for harm or good, whether intentionally or unintentionally. On the one hand, it can be used to amplify marginalized voices, share untold stories, and raise awareness about issues affecting specific groups. On the other hand, it can also be used to amplify misinformation, discrimination, and stigmatization.
Do you advocate for the censoring of individuals and groups on social media, under the guise of "misinformation".
If yes (and it's a yes or no), can you give examples of when censorship has benefited a population, with the specific outcomes achieved via the censorship?
Good question, and one that requires sensitivity and nuance. I believe in having an important, delicate balance between protecting public discourse and preserving freedom of expression. On the one hand, addressing harmful misinformation (e.g., false advertising for supplements that can cause organ damage, are unregulated and can lead to physical harm) is crucial for safeguarding public health. On the other hand, for issues that the science is ongoing and evidence is evolving, thoughtful and productive discourse can be beneficial. Decisions about content moderation must be approached thoughtfully and transparently, and most importantly weighing the relative risks and benefits.
Hello Doctor! Thank you for taking time to answer questions!
In regards to spreading misinformation, I have seen a rise of people advocating for self diagnoses and claiming to have multiple mental health problems (common ones are BPD, Split-personalities that they call them 'Systems',OCD,Autism,Tourettes). They collect these titles like bracelets.
The problem when you try to call them out is they just block you and reinforce their little echo chamber and with how companies use automated support systems they have enough followers to mass-report any accounts and drive them from the platform.
My question is this: Is there any way to work with social media companies to discourage this type of behavior or do you think it will silence people trying to acutally bring light to living with these disorders?
(If you want more examples of what I am talking about you can easily search up "systems" on TikTok and you will find a mountain of accounts).
This can be tricky, because we need to strike a delicate balance to avoid silencing genuine discussions about living with mental health disorders, which may present differently across gender, ethnicity, religion, culture, language, and other demographic identities. Social media companies can emphasize that seeking help from a trusted professional is essential and provide resources that are readily accessible. Mental health professionals have the expertise and training to accurately assess and diagnose mental health conditions. They can provide personalized treatment plans tailored to individual needs.
How do you define Social Media? What qualifies something as being Social Media? As it's a relatively new phenomena, it helps the discussion to have a common understanding of what is meant by it.
Social media refers to websites, online platforms and applications that allow users to create, share, and interact with content, as well as connect with others in virtual communities. More information can be found here: [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8064945/](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8064945/)
Hi Dr. Wang! Thanks for doing this AMA. I want to understand more about heath misinformation spreading online. Are there any easy ways to spot these types of articles or posts? If you do see content containing misinformation, should you address it in any way? Or just ignore it?
Here are some strategies to navigate the info scape (more can be found in my article here: https://theconversation.com/health-misinformation-is-rampant-on-social-media-heres-what-it-does-why-it-spreads-and-what-people-can-do-about-it-217059). Engagement with misinformed content can also backfire, as it increases visibility and spread and can fuel unproductive conversation.
* Check the source.
* Examine author credentials.
* Pay attention to the date.
* Cross-reference to determine scientific consensus.
* Question sensational claims.
* Weigh scientific evidence over individual anecdotes.
* Talk with a health care professional.
* When in doubt, don’t share.
its usually the negative things that gain traction in the social media algorithms, what should be done or how can these hurdles be overcome to promote positive mental health?
A study from Twitter data found that posts with misinformation that generated strong emotions (e.g., disgust, fear, and surprise) were more likely to be shared. [https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.aap9559](https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.aap9559)
One way social media companies could explore different approaches is to prioritize the sharing of accurate content (regardless of the type of emotion it engenders). Algorithms can also be adjusted to give equal, appropriate visibility to uplifting and inspiring posts.
The immune system is at the core of our health. Unfortunately, some of us are equipped with a faulty unit.
What advice would you give people with heavy allergies & social interactions?
How could social media help, for instance, someone with a hikikomori hermit lifestyle to reintegrate into real-life society?
To what extent is mental health discourse entwined with political discourse on social media and other popular media?
To what extent are dating apps taken into consideration as a form of social media, when it comes to mental health research?
The intersection can be seen when politics can shape discussions around mental health policies, funding, and access to care. In addition, mental health issues can become politicized topics, with debates surrounding topics such as stigma, health care reform (e.g., if and to what extent mental health services are covered under insurance), and social determinants of health.
Women and people of color experience harassment and death threats online at a much higher rate than other populations. What can platforms do to decrease endemic harassment? Is there anything that we, as individuals, can do?
edit: This getting downvoted just proves my point
This is an unfortunate reality. Platforms can implement stricter policies against harassment and hate speech, with clear guidelines on what constitutes unacceptable behavior. This includes promptly addressing reports of harassment and taking appropriate action against perpetrators, such as deleting accounts or removing users.
With the advancement of AI, platforms can test and refine more robust moderation tools and resources (e.g., blocking, muting, and filtering features) to improve the online environment for users more likely to experience harassment. It's important for technology and social media platform teams to engage in decision-making processes to ensure that policies and practices are sensitive to the needs of marginalized groups. As individual users, we can speak out, flag, and report harassment when see it.
> Platforms can implement stricter policies against harassment and hate speech, with clear guidelines on what constitutes unacceptable behavior.
I keep hoping it will happen, but there seems to be some perverse incentives around harassment, as implementing moderation policies drives down overall engagement. Maybe machine learning can provide some of the moderation tools that are needed, but even well-funded platforms aren't considering marginalized communities unless they are getting bad PR, and implementing those tools on an individual basis goes against the data collection policies of most platforms.
Thanks for answering my question! I am so happy that there are actually people taking an academic look at the effect of social media on our lives. Are you publishing research anywhere? I'd love to read it!
Thanks for your note! Here are some links to my research in this area:
[https://pediatrics.jmir.org/2023/1/e43961](https://pediatrics.jmir.org/2023/1/e43961)
[https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38079180/](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38079180/)
How far from rock bottom are we as our society continues its social downward spiral? Do you see anything changing or just getting worse as younger generations become more engrossed in social media?
I can certainly understand the challenges we face in today's digital landscape. However, I believe there's also reason for optimism and hope. With advancements in technology and communication, we're also witnessing a growing awareness and collective effort to address important issues.
For example, social media platforms have allowed greater coverage of issues like climate change, mental health, or humanitarian crises that may not have received as much coverage in traditional media outlets. This has also created opportunities for people to mobilize and advocate on issues that they care about. For example, social media allowed for fundraising of millions of dollars for crises like the Australian wildfires or for the bucket challenge to raise research money for ALS.
I also see younger generations demonstrating remarkable resilience, creativity, and empathy in their online interactions. Many are using social media as a tool for positive change, advocating for social justice, mental health awareness, and community support.
In essense, I believe social media is a tool that can be used for good with the appropriate guardrails in place. Like fire, it can be used to keep us warm and cook our food. When used with recklessness, it can burn our house down.
Pretty sure a better comparison would be nuclear energy. Yea lots of people have used it to spread information but even more use it to spread disinformation. You mention younger generations having positive interactions but the statistics show the rise of youth self harm correlates with social media use. Is there any chance of regulation or is the solution lying elsewhere?
Fantastic question. It's important to have open, ongoing, and nonjudgemental communication with your children about their online activities. Encourage dialogue about the potential risks and benefits of social media, and establish clear expectations and boundaries for its use. This includes pointing to real life examples where children and families have been harmed by ill-intended users on social media. For example, it can be easy for children to unknowingly share personal information like home addresses, phone numbers, and other sensitive information that families want to keep private.
The second is to understand what children want to use social media for, because different platforms are built for different purposes. Knowing what they want to use it for can help families decide which ones are right for their child at a specific time. For example, younger children may simply want to play Roblox and do not need accounts on TikTok or Instagram. Older children may want to use Snap for purposes of texting.
Parents and caregivers can be involved by becoming familiar with different platforms' features, privacy settings, and safety protocols. This can help families make informed decisions that prioritize safety and well-being.
Lastly, parents can lead by example by using social media in moderation and demonstrating positive online behavior. It's important to point out the importance of critical thinking, media literacy, and respectful communication online. For example, you can explain that on Instagram, what you are seeing is a carefully curated, filtered snapshot of someone's life. This is likely not their everyday life, and people may say things online they would not say in real life.
Do you accept funding from any social media companies? If so, which ones?
My research is funded by NIH; I am not funded by social media or pharmaceutical companies for my research
Similarly, have you received funding, directly or indirectly, from pharmaceutical companies? I ask because academics in this space are typically focused on increasing trust in medical products like vaccines, and often place the erosion of public trust on "misinformation" related to the dangers and efficacy of vaccines. But I've seen very few people in your position acknowledge and take any accountability for that erosion of trust. For instance people suffering from vaccine injuries such as myocarditis, or blood clots from the recently discontinued AZ vaccine, were for a long time discredited and had their experiences and claims denied and deleted on all types of media including this site. You would think that these experiences would need to be welcomed for discussion if we're to maintain any semblance of informed consent. Also, how are you suggesting that vaccine injured people are treated and compensated to ensure public trust in the event that their lives are impacted by these products? At the same time, the medical establishment made many false claims about the safety and efficacy of vaccines. For example the head of the CDC claimed that vaccinated people could not spread the virus to others, a false claim which could clearly result in consequences. The CDC also referred to ivermectin as horse paste, which is obviously a misleading medical claim intended to influence behaviors. The establishment blamed lack of vaccine efficacy on viral mutations, as if we didn't know that respiratory viruses mutate quickly. These are all things which add to the erosion of public trust in claims by the medical community and corporate/political/ academic establishments, but yet I've never seen people in your position (other than Paul Offit, a staunch vaccination advocate who did come out and point to their being a political motive behind pushing these vaccines to healthy children) take responsibility for the decreased transparency smd misleading claims in the name of combatting vaccine hesitancy. How have you addressed this in your consulting and messaging to avoid what seems to be a massive conflict of interest between professional vaccine advocates and honest discourse? Id urge that you not counter this comment by claiming the popular talking point that side effects are rare and a hazard of most medical products while these products saved billions of lives, given that this response does not reflect the experiences of many of us who have been denied and victims of censorship and lack of transparency.
Followup question, what about social medias role in spreading vaccine disinformation from a vocal minority? Ie the Disinformation Dozen.
Social media has undoubtedly played a large role in facilitating the spread of misinformation and disinformation about vaccines. The virality and reach platforms allows misinformation to spread rapidly and widely. The social media landscape also continues to change; prior to COVID; misinformation tended to be spread by users with moderate or small followings; during and after COVID, health misinformation spread was concentrated to a few accounts with large reach and influence, as you noted. This continues to change as we have entered into an influencer economy
Do you think there should be an age threshold reached before someone uses social media?
Great question on a topic of ongoing debate! We've seen through the research that that there are several potential risks to introducing social media during childhood and adolescence, including exposure to inappropriate content, cyberbullying, and cyberstalking. Many experts recommend setting age-appropriate guidelines and parental supervision for younger users.
What is the best way to explain the dangers of social media to parents that are less technologically savvy than their children? How can we balance using social media to promote positive mental health with the real dangers to mental health most social media platforms have?
Great question. It's important to highlight specific risks such as cyberbullying, comparison culture, and privacy concerns. Using real-life examples or news stories, such as the one by the New York Times (https://www.nytimes.com/2024/02/22/us/instagram-child-influencers.html) can be helpful to illustrate these dangers in a relatable way. While social media can facilitate connections, offer support networks, and provide valuable resources for mental well-being, it's important to acknowledge and address the potential negative impacts. This means using social media in moderation (if you already have accounts) and responsibly. To minimize negative impacts, users can curate their feeds to prioritize positive content, set time limits, and engage in offline activities that promote mental health.
How much of the harm of social networks comes from algorithms that are optimized for engagement? Is there any research into how you could reshape the typical news feed to promote better mental health instead?
It is unclear exactly how much harm comes from these algorithms, as social media companies are not fully transparent about how algorithms are developed and refined over time. We do know that the impact from engagement-optimized algorithms is significant, as the purpose is to prioritize content that keeps users on the platforms. The NYT covered research from Harvard last year on how academics can partner with influencers to promote evidence-based mental health content. Check it out! [https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/06/learning/would-you-take-mental-health-advice-from-tiktok.html](https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/06/learning/would-you-take-mental-health-advice-from-tiktok.html)
In a world where we have such a hard time trusting many sources for health or news, how can we best assist people in finding credible sources or prevent cherry-picking sources?
It's important to encourage people to seek information from reputable sources such as government health agencies, scientific institutions, and established news organizations. Check out some tips for filtering through information here! [https://theconversation.com/health-misinformation-is-rampant-on-social-media-heres-what-it-does-why-it-spreads-and-what-people-can-do-about-it-217059](https://theconversation.com/health-misinformation-is-rampant-on-social-media-heres-what-it-does-why-it-spreads-and-what-people-can-do-about-it-217059)
What are your thoughts on Jonathan Haidt's recent work in this area?
Great question. For those who may not be familiar, social psychologist Jonathan Haidt came out with a book called “[The Anxious Generation](https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/729231/the-anxious-generation-by-jonathan-haidt/).” As noted in an NBC article, he argues that "the smartphone-driven great rewiring of childhood” is causing an “epidemic of mental illness.” He also recommends four ways to combat this: "no smartphones before high school, no social media before age 16, no phones in schools; and prioritizing real-world play and independence." Having seen the recent research on social media among different age groups, I agree generally with his advice. Children and adolescents have developing brains that make it very difficult, if not impossible, to regulate their use of apps and social media on smartphones, which can be very addictive. Real-world play and real-life connections are essential during childhood and adolescence to help them develop positive social relationship skills that they can bring into adulthood.
How can we differentiate potential real harm social media is doing to youth vs a repeating cycle of moral panics? While I certainly feel social media is bad (broadly speaking) for kids, when I try to articulate the reasons why it sounds a lot like the people who said TV, movies, video games, writing, etc were going to destroy kids brains
Great question. Research indicates that excessive or unguided social media use can have adverse effects on youth mental health, including increased risk of depression, anxiety, and cyberbullying. However, it's essential to recognize that social media's influence is multifaceted and varies depending on individual factors such as age, developmental stage, and usage patterns. For example, people use social media platforms for different reasons (e.g., get information, connect with others, meet people, text, entertainment...etc). It matters what people use the platforms for, and the extent to which it may lead to harm. Two things to look out for among youth and social media use: 1. Is it leading to distress (e.g., FOMO, bullying, mental health social comparison, exposure to harmful disordered eating behaviors)? 2. Is it undermining their ability to participate in other, real-life engagements (e.g., they spend so much time scrolling that they don't get enough sleep, are late for school and homework assignments, would rather be online than go to an important family social event)?
What's the most positive app? Does that change by region? Does the political landscape affect positive sentiment on the app?
What is considered the "most positive" app is subjective and may vary depending on preferences and experiences. More specific apps like mindfulness apps, mental health support platforms, and community-based social networks focused on positivity and inspiration are catered to positive content and interactions, compared with large platforms that have diverse content, usage, and features.
So...Do you plan on answering any questions??
hehe, her post says she'll be answering on 05/09.
I am an illiterate jackass, if you hadn't guessed based on context.
It's important to set boundaries for oneself with social media. She used up her allotted social media time to create the post, and will be answering one question per day until all of them have been answered.
😂 lol
What kind of social media is good for each level of our psychological development? for babies, children, teenagers and adults.
This largely depends on individual needs and what people are using social media for. Babies and young children generally do not need to have accounts on social media. This is particularly important because before the age of 9 or 10, children do not have the cognitive development in place to have media literacy or understand safety and privacy concerns. As children grow into adolescence, using social media platforms (if at all) in a way that prioritizes safety, privacy, and positive peer interactions can build social skills and self-expression while minimizing risks. For adults, platforms that facilitate meaningful connections, professional networking, and access to reliable information can support mental well-being and personal growth. The research continues to evolve, so stay tuned. Many adolescents and adults are also taking strategic social media breaks to preserve their mental health, and that seems to be working for many who have been entrenched in social media.
what role do you think social media has played in the use of the term "CPTSD" evolving? for additional context if needed: cptsd is used as an informal diagnosis to reference people with severe ptsd, involving long-term entrapment, such as survivors of genocide, cults, and extreme child or domestic abuse (https://icd.who.int/browse/2024-01/mms/en#2070699808). my most recent therapist several years ago referenced that my ptsd diagnosed many years ago was specifically cptsd due to my experiences and symptomology. we both go online to find additional resources for me, and find the definition used online, and with therapists such as Pete Walker, did not seem to fit what he was taught. it seemed more concerned with parenting styles and attachment issues. growing up with mild support needs autism is another reasoning i have seen, as well. the timeline of it changing to us seemed like it had something to do with social media being more prevalent. i noticed on tiktok many therapists seem to discuss it a lot with that definition as well.
As with many other health conditions that are under-discussed, under-funded, and under-prioritized (e.g., women's health, menopause, PCOS), social media has provided a platform for people to connect on complex health conditions. This can be helpful in increasing awareness and advocacy for conditions previously under-reported. It is also important for people to continue these discussions with their providers and health care professionals, so that these issues continue to be surfaced and on their radars as scientific and clinical knowledge evolves.
but what role do you think social media has played in misinformation in general wrt mental health? i have also seen people shifting the definitions of serious, serious terms such as gaslighting and narcissist.
Social media has undoubtedly played a large role in facilitating the spread of misinformation across several domains (health, politics, society), because anyone can share information without having credentials or expertise. The virality and reach platforms allows misinformation to spread rapidly and widely. The dynamics continue to change as we have entered into an influencer economy - users (whether they are influencers or not) may be incentivized to create content that is controversial, generates engagement, and elicits strong emotion, whether this is accurate or inaccurate information.
that makes a lot of sense, thank you.
What actions can individual users take to help combat the spread of misinformation (health-related or otherwise) across social media platforms? On an adjacent note, how can the individual user contribute to positive outcomes that enhance different aspects of well-being? It often feels easier and healthier (for the individual) to just not participate at all; but I would love to learn some actionable techniques that I can leverage to help make social media a landscape for boosting well-being rather than one that has a largely negative impact on mental/emotional health. Thanks!
Great question! One rule of thumb is to pause and fact-check before you share. It is important to prioritize information from credible sources such as reputable news outlets, government health agencies, and scientific organizations. Be wary of sensationalized content - this is meant to engage you and keep you on the platform. You can also follow accounts that promote mental health awareness, positivity, and self-care - make sure they are from reputable sources and users with expertise. Additional tips can be found here: [https://theconversation.com/health-misinformation-is-rampant-on-social-media-heres-what-it-does-why-it-spreads-and-what-people-can-do-about-it-217059](https://theconversation.com/health-misinformation-is-rampant-on-social-media-heres-what-it-does-why-it-spreads-and-what-people-can-do-about-it-217059)
Thanks for hosting this AMA, Dr. Wang! What are some ways social media is having a positive impact on mental health? We constantly hear about the bad, but I'm curious about the positive outcomes. Are there social media apps that are doing a better job than others? Thank you!
Glad to have you here! Some ways social media can have positive impacts on mental health are to serve as sources of inspiration, creativity, and social support. For example, people may have hard time finding support on stigmatized mental health topics in-person, but may find community online. Another way social media can help in the health realm is by providing structured community groups based on health interests and concerns (e.g., cancer, chronic diseases). Social media allows people to connect and removes barriers such as scheduling, transportation...etc, and in this way can bring expertise and people together.
I'm wondering if you could share how 'bad' different platforms are. I browse Reddit, TikTok, and Facebook. I've noticed that TikTok seems to be the worst offender here, but I could be wrong. What do you think?
The "badness" of a platform can vary depending on individual experiences, preferences, and use. What may be harmful or unhelpful to one user can be very positive for another depending on what they use it for, how long they are on the platform, and their goals. Each platform has strengths and weaknesses and has had their share of criticisms: As one of the largest social media platforms, Facebook has faced scrutiny for its role in facilitating the spread of misinformation, polarizing content, and privacy concerns. Instagram has faced criticism for fueling harmful social comparisons and negative mental health, particularly among youth and females. Because of its short form nature by design, Twitter/X has faced criticism for the ease and speed with which misinformation can be spread. TikTok has also been criticized for amplifying certain content. All platforms lack adequate transparency about their algorithms.
- What advice would you give to marginalised people in the use of social media? - What, if anything, does the evidence base say on the impact social media has on shaping attitudes and beliefs about particular groups? For example: the abilities or needs of people with disabilities or chronic conditions?
Marginalized people can experience a distinct set of stressors in person and online. Prioritizing self-care, setting boundaries, and seeking supportive online communities can help in integrating social media in a positive way. This can also mean taking social media breaks (e.g., Saturday social media-free day). Research shows that social media can both challenge and reinforce stereotypes and biases about certain groups. I view social media as a tool - it can be used for harm or good, whether intentionally or unintentionally. On the one hand, it can be used to amplify marginalized voices, share untold stories, and raise awareness about issues affecting specific groups. On the other hand, it can also be used to amplify misinformation, discrimination, and stigmatization.
Do you advocate for the censoring of individuals and groups on social media, under the guise of "misinformation". If yes (and it's a yes or no), can you give examples of when censorship has benefited a population, with the specific outcomes achieved via the censorship?
Good question, and one that requires sensitivity and nuance. I believe in having an important, delicate balance between protecting public discourse and preserving freedom of expression. On the one hand, addressing harmful misinformation (e.g., false advertising for supplements that can cause organ damage, are unregulated and can lead to physical harm) is crucial for safeguarding public health. On the other hand, for issues that the science is ongoing and evidence is evolving, thoughtful and productive discourse can be beneficial. Decisions about content moderation must be approached thoughtfully and transparently, and most importantly weighing the relative risks and benefits.
Hello Doctor! Thank you for taking time to answer questions! In regards to spreading misinformation, I have seen a rise of people advocating for self diagnoses and claiming to have multiple mental health problems (common ones are BPD, Split-personalities that they call them 'Systems',OCD,Autism,Tourettes). They collect these titles like bracelets. The problem when you try to call them out is they just block you and reinforce their little echo chamber and with how companies use automated support systems they have enough followers to mass-report any accounts and drive them from the platform. My question is this: Is there any way to work with social media companies to discourage this type of behavior or do you think it will silence people trying to acutally bring light to living with these disorders? (If you want more examples of what I am talking about you can easily search up "systems" on TikTok and you will find a mountain of accounts).
This can be tricky, because we need to strike a delicate balance to avoid silencing genuine discussions about living with mental health disorders, which may present differently across gender, ethnicity, religion, culture, language, and other demographic identities. Social media companies can emphasize that seeking help from a trusted professional is essential and provide resources that are readily accessible. Mental health professionals have the expertise and training to accurately assess and diagnose mental health conditions. They can provide personalized treatment plans tailored to individual needs.
How do you define Social Media? What qualifies something as being Social Media? As it's a relatively new phenomena, it helps the discussion to have a common understanding of what is meant by it.
Social media refers to websites, online platforms and applications that allow users to create, share, and interact with content, as well as connect with others in virtual communities. More information can be found here: [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8064945/](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8064945/)
Hi Dr. Wang! Thanks for doing this AMA. I want to understand more about heath misinformation spreading online. Are there any easy ways to spot these types of articles or posts? If you do see content containing misinformation, should you address it in any way? Or just ignore it?
Here are some strategies to navigate the info scape (more can be found in my article here: https://theconversation.com/health-misinformation-is-rampant-on-social-media-heres-what-it-does-why-it-spreads-and-what-people-can-do-about-it-217059). Engagement with misinformed content can also backfire, as it increases visibility and spread and can fuel unproductive conversation. * Check the source. * Examine author credentials. * Pay attention to the date. * Cross-reference to determine scientific consensus. * Question sensational claims. * Weigh scientific evidence over individual anecdotes. * Talk with a health care professional. * When in doubt, don’t share.
its usually the negative things that gain traction in the social media algorithms, what should be done or how can these hurdles be overcome to promote positive mental health?
A study from Twitter data found that posts with misinformation that generated strong emotions (e.g., disgust, fear, and surprise) were more likely to be shared. [https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.aap9559](https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.aap9559) One way social media companies could explore different approaches is to prioritize the sharing of accurate content (regardless of the type of emotion it engenders). Algorithms can also be adjusted to give equal, appropriate visibility to uplifting and inspiring posts.
The immune system is at the core of our health. Unfortunately, some of us are equipped with a faulty unit. What advice would you give people with heavy allergies & social interactions?
How could social media help, for instance, someone with a hikikomori hermit lifestyle to reintegrate into real-life society? To what extent is mental health discourse entwined with political discourse on social media and other popular media? To what extent are dating apps taken into consideration as a form of social media, when it comes to mental health research?
The intersection can be seen when politics can shape discussions around mental health policies, funding, and access to care. In addition, mental health issues can become politicized topics, with debates surrounding topics such as stigma, health care reform (e.g., if and to what extent mental health services are covered under insurance), and social determinants of health.
Women and people of color experience harassment and death threats online at a much higher rate than other populations. What can platforms do to decrease endemic harassment? Is there anything that we, as individuals, can do? edit: This getting downvoted just proves my point
This is an unfortunate reality. Platforms can implement stricter policies against harassment and hate speech, with clear guidelines on what constitutes unacceptable behavior. This includes promptly addressing reports of harassment and taking appropriate action against perpetrators, such as deleting accounts or removing users. With the advancement of AI, platforms can test and refine more robust moderation tools and resources (e.g., blocking, muting, and filtering features) to improve the online environment for users more likely to experience harassment. It's important for technology and social media platform teams to engage in decision-making processes to ensure that policies and practices are sensitive to the needs of marginalized groups. As individual users, we can speak out, flag, and report harassment when see it.
> Platforms can implement stricter policies against harassment and hate speech, with clear guidelines on what constitutes unacceptable behavior. I keep hoping it will happen, but there seems to be some perverse incentives around harassment, as implementing moderation policies drives down overall engagement. Maybe machine learning can provide some of the moderation tools that are needed, but even well-funded platforms aren't considering marginalized communities unless they are getting bad PR, and implementing those tools on an individual basis goes against the data collection policies of most platforms. Thanks for answering my question! I am so happy that there are actually people taking an academic look at the effect of social media on our lives. Are you publishing research anywhere? I'd love to read it!
Thanks for your note! Here are some links to my research in this area: [https://pediatrics.jmir.org/2023/1/e43961](https://pediatrics.jmir.org/2023/1/e43961) [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38079180/](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38079180/)
How far from rock bottom are we as our society continues its social downward spiral? Do you see anything changing or just getting worse as younger generations become more engrossed in social media?
I can certainly understand the challenges we face in today's digital landscape. However, I believe there's also reason for optimism and hope. With advancements in technology and communication, we're also witnessing a growing awareness and collective effort to address important issues. For example, social media platforms have allowed greater coverage of issues like climate change, mental health, or humanitarian crises that may not have received as much coverage in traditional media outlets. This has also created opportunities for people to mobilize and advocate on issues that they care about. For example, social media allowed for fundraising of millions of dollars for crises like the Australian wildfires or for the bucket challenge to raise research money for ALS. I also see younger generations demonstrating remarkable resilience, creativity, and empathy in their online interactions. Many are using social media as a tool for positive change, advocating for social justice, mental health awareness, and community support. In essense, I believe social media is a tool that can be used for good with the appropriate guardrails in place. Like fire, it can be used to keep us warm and cook our food. When used with recklessness, it can burn our house down.
Pretty sure a better comparison would be nuclear energy. Yea lots of people have used it to spread information but even more use it to spread disinformation. You mention younger generations having positive interactions but the statistics show the rise of youth self harm correlates with social media use. Is there any chance of regulation or is the solution lying elsewhere?
Hello and thanks for doing this AmA! What is some good advice for parents of children that are starting to have an interest in social media?
Fantastic question. It's important to have open, ongoing, and nonjudgemental communication with your children about their online activities. Encourage dialogue about the potential risks and benefits of social media, and establish clear expectations and boundaries for its use. This includes pointing to real life examples where children and families have been harmed by ill-intended users on social media. For example, it can be easy for children to unknowingly share personal information like home addresses, phone numbers, and other sensitive information that families want to keep private. The second is to understand what children want to use social media for, because different platforms are built for different purposes. Knowing what they want to use it for can help families decide which ones are right for their child at a specific time. For example, younger children may simply want to play Roblox and do not need accounts on TikTok or Instagram. Older children may want to use Snap for purposes of texting. Parents and caregivers can be involved by becoming familiar with different platforms' features, privacy settings, and safety protocols. This can help families make informed decisions that prioritize safety and well-being. Lastly, parents can lead by example by using social media in moderation and demonstrating positive online behavior. It's important to point out the importance of critical thinking, media literacy, and respectful communication online. For example, you can explain that on Instagram, what you are seeing is a carefully curated, filtered snapshot of someone's life. This is likely not their everyday life, and people may say things online they would not say in real life.
Is it pronounced with a short A or the long A?