119
Behavioral Addictions © 2014 Elsevier Inc.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-407724-9.00006-9 All rights reserved.
CHAPTER
Social Networking Addiction: An
Overview of Preliminary Findings
Mark D. Griths
1
, Daria J. Kuss
1
, Zsolt Demetrovics
2
1
International Gaming Research Unit, Psychology Division, Nottingham Trent University, Nottingham, UK,
2
Department of Clinical Psychology and Addiction, Institute of Psychology, Eötvös Loránd University,
Budapest, Hungary
BRIEF HISTORY OF SOCIAL NETWORKING
Social networking sites (SNSs) are virtual communities where users can
create individual public profiles, interact with real-life friends, and meet
other people based on shared interests (Kuss & Griffiths, 2011). According
to Boyd and Ellison (2008), SNSs are web-based services that allow indi-
viduals to (1) construct a public or semipublic profile within a bounded
system, (2) articulate a list of other users with whom they share a connec-
tion, and (3) view and traverse their list of connections and those made by
others within the system.
In terms of SNS history, the first social networking site (i.e., SixDegrees)
was launched in 1997, based on the idea that everybody is linked with
everybody else via six degrees of separation (Boyd & Ellison, 2008), and
initially referred to as the “small world problem” (Milgram, 1967). In 2004,
the most successful current SNS (i.e., Facebook) was established as a closed
virtual community for Harvard students. The site expanded very quickly,
and Facebook currently has more than 1.19 billion users, of whom 50% log
on daily (Protalinski, 2013).
SNS usage patterns from both consumer research and empirical research
indicate that overall, regular SNS use has increased substantially over the last
few years (Kuss & Griffiths, 2011). This supports the availability hypothesis
that where there is increased access and opportunity to engage in an activity
(in this case SNSs), there is an increase in the numbers of people who
engage in the activity (Griffiths, 2003). Research also indicates that com-
pared to the general population, teenagers and students make the most use
of SNSs (Kuss & Griffiths, 2011).
SNSs are predominantly used for social purposes, mostly related to the
maintenance of established offline networks, relative to individual ones
6
Mark D. Griths etal.
120
(Kuss & Griffiths, 2011). However, recent evidence suggests that individuals
may feel compelled to maintain their online social networks in a way that
may, in some circumstances, lead to using SNSs excessively. The mainten-
ance of already established offline networks itself can therefore be seen as an
attraction factor, which according to
Sussman et al. (2011) is related to the
etiology of specific addictions. For instance, a number of addictive behaviors
(e.g., alcoholism, video game addiction) may be maintained and hard to
break because of the social ties that the addict has with others that engage
in the activity (Griffiths, 1996).
In addition to presenting the risks and downsides of social networking,
it should also be noted that the phenomenon itself might have developed
along basic evolutionary drives. Humans as social beings have always lived
in a community throughout evolution (i.e., a small and closed community
offering security). However, with greater rates of migration to cities, these
small, traditional communities declined, and in recent decades a whole new,
more individualized way of life has been formed. However, the need for a
secure and predictable community life that has evolved over millions of
years has not changed. For this reason, human beings who have lost their
traditional small communities make various attempts to compensate for this
loss and among these (in addition to sports, hobbies, and many other social
activities), one can find social networking activities. SNSs provide a means
of secure and predictable communal space, which is in many aspects similar
to the communal spaces of traditional communities (such as modern pubs
or bars), where one can meet familiar faces with whom there is a possibility
to share experiences as well as to live the experience of being a part of the
community.
Many organizational employers have claimed that social networking
addiction may be a concern, particularly among young people. For instance,
in a survey of 120 youth work managers and practitioners, Davies and
Cranston (2008) reported that their participants feared that use of online
social networking displaces other activities and face-to-face social interac-
tion. When asked to identify specific risks relating to online social network-
ing, 23% reported addiction as being a concern, with other risks being
bullying (53%), disclosing personal information (35%), and sexual predators
(22%).
In many areas of behavioral addiction, there has been debate about
whether some excessive behaviors should even be considered as genuine
addictions (e.g., video games, Internet use, sex, exercise) and the same debate
holds for addiction to social networking. Griffiths (2005) has operationally
Social Networking Addiction: An Overview of Preliminary Findings
121
defined addictive behavior as any behavior that features what he believes are
the six core components of addiction (i.e., salience, mood modification,
tolerance, withdrawal symptoms, conflict, and relapse). Griffiths argues that
any behavior (e.g., social networking) that fulfills these six criteria can be
operationally defined as an addiction. In relation to social networking, the
six components are as follows:
• Salience—This occurs when social networking becomes the single most
important activity in a person’s life and dominates his or her thinking
(preoccupations and cognitive distortions), feelings (cravings), and
behavior (deterioration of socialized behavior). For instance, even if
people are not actually engaged in social networking, they will be con-
stantly thinking about the next time that they will be (i.e., a total pre-
occupation with social networking).
• Mood modification—This refers to the subjective experiences that people
report as a consequence of social networking and can be seen as a cop-
ing strategy (i.e., they experience an arousing “buzz” or a “high” or,
paradoxically, a tranquilizing feeling of “escape” or “numbing”).
• Tolerance—This is the process whereby increasing amounts of social net-
working activity are required to achieve the former mood-modifying
effects. This basically means that for people engaged in social network-
ing, they gradually build up the amount of the time they spend social
networking every day.
• Withdrawal symptoms—These are the unpleasant feeling states and/or
physical effects (e.g., the shakes, moodiness, irritability) that occur when
people are unable to engage in social networking because they are ill, on
vacation, etc.
• Conflict—This refers to the conflicts between a person and those around
that person (interpersonal conflict), conflicts with other activities (social
life, hobbies, and interests), or from within the individual him- or herself
(intrapsychic conflict and/or subjective feelings of loss of control) that
are concerned with spending too much time social networking.
• Relapse—This is the tendency for repeated reversions to earlier patterns
of excessive social networking to recur and for even the most extreme
patterns typical of the height of excessive social networking to be
quickly restored after periods of control.
It should also be noted that Griffiths (2010a) asserts that excessive use of
an activity (e.g., social networking) does not necessarily equate with addic-
tion, as he has published case studies of excessive Internet users (i.e., up to 14
hours a day) who have few negative consequences in their lives (i.e., the time
Mark D. Griths etal.
122
spent engaged in an activity does not always mean that it is problematic and/
or addictive). Furthermore, Griffiths has also pointed out on numerous occa-
sions (e.g., 2000; Widyanto & Griffiths, 2006) that there is a fundamental dif-
ference between addictions to the Internet and addictions on the Internet.
ETIOLOGY AND THEORIES OF SOCIAL NETWORKING
ADDICTION
Researchers have suggested that the excessive use of new technologies (and
especially online social networking) may be particularly problematic to
young people (Echeburua & de Corral, 2010). In accordance with the bio-
psychosocial framework for the etiology of addictions (Griffiths, 2005) and
the syndrome model of addiction (
Shaffer, et al., 2004), it is claimed that
those people addicted to using SNSs experience symptoms similar to those
experienced by individuals who suffer from addictions to substances or other
behaviors (Echeburua & de Corral, 2010). This has significant implications
for clinical practice because unlike treatment for other addictions, the goal of
SNS addiction treatment cannot be total abstinence from using the Internet
per se, as it is an integral element of today’s professional and leisure culture
(Kuss & Griffiths, 2011). Instead, the ultimate therapy aim is controlled use of
the Internet and its respective functions, particularly social networking appli-
cations, and relapse prevention using strategies developed within cognitive-
behavioral therapies (Echeburua & de Corral, 2010). Additionally, some
researchers have hypothesized that young vulnerable people with narcissistic
tendencies are particularly prone to engaging with SNSs in an addictive way
(La Barbera, La Paglia, & Valsavoia, 2009). More specifically, the structural
characteristics of these Internet applications, (i.e., their egocentric construc-
tion) appear to allow favorable self-disclosure that draws narcissists to use it.
To explain the formation of SNS addiction, Turel and Serenko (2012)
summarized three overarching theoretical perspectives that may not be
mutually exclusive:
• Cognitive-behavioral model—This model emphasizes that “abnormal”
social networking arises from maladaptive cognitions and is amplified by
various environmental factors, and eventually leads to compulsive and/
or addictive social networking.
• Social skill model—This model emphasizes that “abnormal” social net-
working arises because people lack self-presentational skills and prefer
virtual communication to face-to-face interactions, and it eventually
leads to compulsive and/or addictive use of social networking.
Social Networking Addiction: An Overview of Preliminary Findings
123
• Socio-cognitive model—This model emphasizes that “abnormal” social net-
working arises due to the expectation of positive outcomes, combined with
Internet self-efficacy and deficient Internet self-regulation, and it eventually
leads to compulsive and/or addictive social networking behavior.
Based on these three models, Xu and Tan (2012) suggest that the transi-
tion from normal to problematic social networking use occurs when social
networking is viewed by the individual as an important (or even exclusive)
mechanism to relieve stress, loneliness, or depression. They contend that
those who frequently engage in social networking are poor at socializing in
real life. For these people, social media use provides such people continuous
rewards (e.g. self-efficacy, satisfaction), and they end up engaging in the activ-
ity more and more, eventually leading to many problems (e.g., ignoring real-
life relationships, work/educational conflicts). The resulting problems may
then exacerbate individuals’ undesirable moods. This then leads such indi-
viduals to engage in the social networking behavior even more as a way of
relieving dysphoric mood states. Consequently, when social network users
repeat this cyclical pattern of relieving undesirable moods with social media
use, the level of psychological dependency on social networking increases.
The rapid rise of online social networking—particularly in relation to the
increasing amounts of time people spend online—has led some to claim that
excessive SNS use may be addictive to some individuals (Kuss & Griffiths, 2011).
Online, individuals engage in a variety of activities, some of which have the
potential to be addictive, including the potentially excessive use of SNSs. Rather
than becoming addicted to the medium per se, a minority of Internet users may
develop an addiction to specific online activities (Griffiths, 2000). Yo u n g ( 1 9 9 9 )
has argued that there are five different types of Internet addiction, namely
computer addiction (i.e., computer game addiction), information overload (i.e., Web
surfing addiction), net compulsions (i.e., online gambling or online shopping
addiction), cybersexual addiction (i.e., online pornography or online sex addic-
tion), and cyber-relationship addiction (i.e., an addiction to online relationships).
Social networking addiction arguably falls into the cyber-relationship
addiction category of Young’s typology given that the primary purpose and
main motivation to use SNSs is to establish and maintain both online and
offline relationships. However, it is worth noting that if social networking
addiction is a cyber-relationship addiction, then it does not include activities
such as playing Farmville on Facebook (Griffiths, 2012b). In such typologies,
playing Farmville would be classed by Griffiths (2010b) as a gaming addiction
rather than “Facebook addiction.” Any further development of the Facebook
addiction scales (discussed later) need to take this distinction into account.