Passive Facebook usage undermines affective well-being: Experimental and longitudinal evidence
Citations
Using social and behavioural science to support COVID-19 pandemic response.
Do Social Network Sites Enhance or Undermine Subjective Well‐Being? A Critical Review
No More FOMO: Limiting Social Media Decreases Loneliness and Depression
The Relationship between Facebook Use and Well-Being depends on Communication Type and Tie Strength
The interplay between Facebook use, social comparison, envy, and depression
References
Facebook’s emotional consequences: Why Facebook causes a decrease in mood and why people still use it
Envy on Facebook:a hidden threat to users' life satisfaction?
Social Comparison Theory Psychology from the Lost and Found
Ratings of social support by adolescents and adult informants: degree of correspondence and prediction of depressive symptoms.
Growing closer on facebook: changes in tie strength through social network site use
Related Papers (5)
Frequently Asked Questions (9)
Q2. What future works have the authors mentioned in the paper "Passive facebook usage undermines affective well-being: experimental and longitudinal evidence" ?
A key challenge for future research is to identify when ( and why ) interacting with this technology leads to positive versus negative socioemotional outcomes. Together, these results suggest that passive Facebook usage predicts substantive declines in subjective well-being in both the lab and in daily life. First, a growing literature suggests that Facebook ( and social network sites more generally ) have addictive properties ( Ryan, Chester, Reece, & Xenos, 2014 ).
Q3. How many observations were used for the nonlagged analysis?
For the nonlagged analysis 2,084 observations were used whereas for the lagged analysis only 1,609 observations were entered into the analysis (because between-day lags were excluded).
Q4. What was the effect of the last text message on the participants’ well-being?
When noncompliant cases were observed, the authors used participants’ responses to the last text message they answered to maximize power when examining the lagged effect of type of Facebook usage on well-being.
Q5. What other social interaction variables were not significantly related to affective well-being?
Passive Facebook usage also remained a significant predictor of changes in affective well-being when controlling for the other social interaction variables the authors assessed: non-Facebook online social network usage, active Facebook use and direct social interaction.
Q6. What is the key challenge for future research?
A key challenge for future research is to identify when (and why) interacting with this technology leads to positive versus negative socioemotional outcomes.
Q7. How many participants were aware of the study hypotheses?
Eight participants (three in the active condition, five in the passive condition) were aware of the study hypotheses and were thus excluded from all analyses on a priori grounds leaving 67 participants (34 in the active and 33 in the passive condition).
Q8. What did the authors find out about the effect of type of Facebook on people’s happiness?
In Study 1, the authors did not observe an effect of type of Facebook usage on people’s tendency to view their life as worse off than others, which the authors thought would exacerbate envy and lead to emotional declines.
Q9. What is the effect of a delay on affect?
These findings, in conjunction with the absence of an immediate effect of manipulating Facebook usage on affect in Study 1, suggest that although some delay is necessary for passive Facebook usage to influence affect, the exact duration of this delay is less important.