Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T13:43:16.732Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

14 - Digital Media, Suicide, and Self-Injury

from Part III - Digital Media and Adolescent Mental Disorders

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 June 2022

Jacqueline Nesi
Affiliation:
Brown University, Rhode Island
Eva H. Telzer
Affiliation:
University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill
Mitchell J. Prinstein
Affiliation:
University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill

Summary

The relationship between social media use, suicide, and self-injurious behaviors has received public and academic attention. Social media are platforms that facilitate social connection and support around life challenges, including self-injurious thoughts and behaviors, and spaces where they may encounter content or interactions increasing risk. This chapter’s purposes are twofold: (1) to summarize research on the risks and benefits of social media use for SITB-related outcomes, including what is and is not known about primary mechanisms in these relationships; (2) to identify high-level implications, including opportunities and challenges for future research, intervention and prevention efforts. The first section overviews the prevalence and presentation of SITB in adolescence and the role of social media in SITB, while the second section summarizes findings on risks and benefits of social media use for SITB, and key mechanisms involved in these relationships. The final section covers implications for research, practice, and policy, through high-level opportunities.

Type
Chapter
Information
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2022
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NCCreative Common License - ND
This content is Open Access and distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 https://creativecommons.org/cclicenses/

While interest in the relationship between media use and young people’s mental health is not new, the complexity of newer media technologies present novel research challenges – largely due to the interactive, multidimensional nature of contemporary communication technologies, such as those typified by social media environments. While early media studies focused primarily on effects of “screen time,” studies of modern-day social media must grapple with a number of overlapping and influential factors since effects are no longer related to mere exposure to potentially harmful content, but to the interactions that take place as individuals use and shape these platforms, as well.

The relationship between social media and self-injurious behaviors – specifically suicidal thoughts and behaviors and nonsuicidal self-injury (NSSI) – emerged as a primary research focus soon after social media came into widespread use, perhaps due to the well-established links between both media exposure and well-being (Wartella & Reeves, Reference Wartella and Reeves1985) and to media effects and suicidal thoughts and behaviors (Phillips, Reference Phillips1974). This focus was reinforced by studies linking widely covered suicides (Niederkrotenthaler et al., Reference Niederkrotenthaler, Fu and Yip2012) and popular shows depicting suicide (Swedo et al., Reference Swedo, Beauregard and de Fijter2020) to upticks in self-injury and suicide-related activity.

This chapter is devoted to examining the relationship between social media and self-injurious thoughts and behaviors. Self-injurious thoughts and behaviors (SITB) describe thoughts and behaviors with (e.g., suicidal ideation, suicide plans, gestures, and behaviors) and without (e.g., NSSI) suicidal intent (Miller & Prinstein, Reference Miller and Prinstein2019). While the developmental trajectories of NSSI and suicidal thoughts and behaviors differ from one another (Fox et al., Reference Fox, Franklin, Ribeiro, Kleiman, Bentley and Nock2015), SITB are not always clearly delineated from one another in the literature, in part because they commonly co-occur and in part because they each contribute to an increased risk for future suicide attempts (Kiekens et al., Reference Kiekens, Hasking and Boyes2018). Such conflation applies to the literature on which this chapter draws. For simplicity, we will use the term SITB to refer to self-injury with, and without, intent in this chapter and we will refer to more specific constructs within this broader term when studies focus on a narrower sample.

Chapter Aims

This chapter includes two overarching aims: (1) to summarize research on the risks and benefits of social media use for SITB-related outcomes, including what is and is not known about primary mechanisms at play in these relationships and (2) to identify high-level implications, including opportunities and challenges for future research, intervention, and prevention efforts. The first section provides an overview on the prevalence and presentation of SITB in adolescence and the role of social media in SITB, while the second section summarizes findings related to the risks and benefits of social media use for SITB, and key mechanisms involved in these relationships. The final section covers implications for research, practice, and policy, through high-level opportunities and challenges.

Background

Adolescence and SITB

Understanding and addressing SITB is of major public health importance. Suicide is the second leading cause of death among young people between the ages of 10 and 24 globally (Curtin et al., Reference Curtin, Warner and Hedegaard2016). Among US-based adolescent populations, lifetime prevalence of suicidal thoughts and behaviors is between 3.1% and 8.8% for suicide attempts and between 19.8% and 24.0% for suicidal ideation, with a marked increase in both suicidal ideation and behavior between the ages of 12 and 17 (Nock et al., Reference Nock, Borges and Bromet2008). Rates of NSSI – “the deliberate, self-inflicted damage of body tissue without suicidal intent and for purposes not socially or culturally sanctioned” (International Society for the Study of Self-Injury, 2018) – range from 17% to 37% among adolescents and young adults (Jacobson & Gould, Reference Jacobson and Gould2007; Swannell et al., Reference Swannell, Martin, Page, Hasking and St John2014).

Self-injurious thoughts and behaviors typically emerge in early- to mid-adolescence, with average age of onset for NSSI between 13 and 15 (Gillies et al., Reference Gillies, Christou and Dixon2018), and mid- to late-adolescence for suicidal thoughts and behaviors (Nock et al., Reference Nock, Green and Hwang2013). Older adolescents and young adults are more likely to die by suicide (Cha et al., Reference Cha, Franz, Guzmán, Glenn, Kleiman and Nock2018), when compared to younger adolescents – a pattern consistent with the idea that risk of engagement in serious suicide-related behaviors increases over time as experience of trauma and/or distress accumulates and interacts with bio-psycho-social developmental changes in ways that enhance vulnerability to cognitive and emotional challenges (Steinberg, Reference Steinberg2010). Adolescence is also characterized by a highly social orientation, increased propensity for risk taking, and individuation/identity formation – each of which may interact with social media use in ways that amplify, or increase susceptibility to, potential media effects.

The Role of Social Media and SITB

Three decades of experience with, and empirical study of, unidirectional media affirms the potency of media influence on behavior, particularly for adolescents and children (Brown et al., Reference Brown, L’Engle, Pardun, Guo, Kenneavy and Jackson2006). The empirical link between exposure to violent media content and child and adolescent aggression was central to early media concerns and resulted in coordinated policy responses (US Senate, 2000). More recent efforts to understand the effects of social media on youth mental health retain a heightened focus on the potential adverse effects, such as: cybervictimization (John et al., Reference John, Glendenning and Marchant2018; Massing-Schaffer & Nesi, Reference Massing-Schaffer and Nesi2020), internet addiction (Jasso-Medrano & López-Rosales, Reference Jasso-Medrano and López-Rosales2018), and exposure to graphic self-injury and suicidal content (Arendt et al., Reference Arendt, Scherr and Romer2019). It is thus not surprising that there are serious concerns about the impact that social media may have on individuals who bring preexisting vulnerabilities to online exchanges, such as SITB-vulnerable young people.

While attention to each of these domains has translated into research on social media effects of value to professionals, researchers, and platform designers, it has not yet led to robust understanding of the precise risks that social media pose to youth mental health – largely due to the number of contingencies that require disentangling and a need for methodological innovation (Whitlock & Masur, Reference Whitlock and Masur2019). Moreover, while concern about the impact of social media on youth continues to be a regular feature of public worry and headlines, it is also recognized that social media offers important support to users, including SITB-vulnerable individuals, by (1) facilitating social connection (Duggan et al., Reference Duggan, Heath, Lewis and Baxter2012), (2) extending the reach of prevention/intervention efforts (Thorn et al., Reference Thorn, Hill and Lamblin2020), (3) linking young people who are already engaging in SITB with much needed information and support (Lavis & Winter, Reference Lavis and Winter2020; Lewis & Michal, Reference Lewis and Michal2016), and (4) increasing public awareness of SITB and reducing stigma (Li et al., Reference Li, Huang, Jiao, O’Dea, Zhu and Christensen2018; Nathan & Nathan, Reference Nathan and Nathan2020). A balanced and nuanced approach that takes into account both the risk and benefits of social media for SITB outcomes is needed to effectively consider the many factors that likely mediate and moderate social media effects.

Brief Overview of Methods Used to Study the Relationship Between SITB and Social Media

A brief historical overview on the methodological approaches most commonly used in social media and SITB research is both helpful in contextualizing the risks and benefits and in surfacing methodological frontiers in this domain. In general, SITB-focused research aims have (1) described online content and activity related to SITB, (2) explored the relationship between online activity and SITB, and (3) identified risks germane to intervention efforts. While these efforts have laid the theoretical and empirical foundations necessary for inferring and anticipating risks and benefits and for understanding key mechanisms, they have been less effective in surfacing and disentangling clear causal relationships between social media use and SITB behaviors or in describing the moderating role preexisting SITB vulnerability plays in these relationships.

In general, research documenting potential effects of SITB-related content and exchange has been more straightforward to generate than research aimed at understanding causal relationships between online activity and SITB; in part because the latter requires innovative methods that balance privacy and ethical concerns with the need for cross-ecological and granular approaches capable of disentangling effects. Moreover, because the nature of communication technologies is so dynamic, the research methods required to understand effects must also be dynamic. Most early work focused on content and thematic analyses to investigate common themes in online discussions about self-injury and suicide (Rodham et al., Reference Rodham, Gavin and Miles2007; Whitlock et al., Reference Whitlock, Powers and Eckenrode2006). Surveys were (and still are) used to assess motives for social media use and to understand the perceived effects of use (Lewis & Michal, Reference Lewis and Michal2016).

Recent advances in the application of computational methods to social media research have paved the way for investigation of links between online activities and SITB risk, largely through tracking patterns in linguistic and behavioral markers (De Choudhury et al., Reference De Choudhury, Kiciman, Dredze, Coppersmith and Kumar2016; Du et al., Reference Du, Zhang and Luo2018). Ecological momentary assessments (EMA), or diary methodologies, have been used to understand the relationship between social media use and outcomes related to mental health. For example, EMA methods were used to understand what behaviors young people engage in instead of self-injury (Fitzpatrick et al., Reference Fitzpatrick, Kranzler, Fehling, Lindqvist and Selby2020). Longitudinal studies have begun yielding results, but even these are limited by challenges in disentangling between- from within-effects of media use, understanding risks and benefits accrued to vulnerable subgroups, and the way that both developmental stage and specific social media affordances interact with social media use (Schemer et al., Reference Schemer, Masur, Geiß, Müller and Schäfer2020). In sum, research focused on the intersection of SITB and social media use has evolved from a focus on more static content in online communities (precursors to social media) to more dynamic interactions between user behaviors, content, and offline markers over time. While important methodological challenges remain, much has been learned; this is the focus of the following sections.

Risks of Social Media for Self-Injury and Suicide

Study of the ways in which use of social media increases SITB risk reveals a complex portrait of effects, some of which clearly enhance risk of SITB behavior and others that may protect against such risk. This section details the dominant categories of risk identified thus far including: (1) exposure to SITB content, (2) normalization and narrative reinforcement, (3) contagion, (4) cyberbullying, and (5) heavy social media use.

Exposure to Suicide and Self-Injury Content

As with traditional media, at least some research documents a link between exposure to suicidal and self-injury social media content and increased risk for SITB experiences. Exposure to digital SITB-related content is not infrequent – in one study, 25% of young people were exposed to suicide stories through social media (Dunlop et al., Reference Dunlop, More and Romer2011). This is concerning because increased exposure to self-injury-related content has been associated with decreased aversion to self-injury and to future suicidal ideation in past work (Franklin et al., Reference Franklin, Fox and Franklin2016) and because habituation to SITB content may reduce barriers to, and increase the acquired capability for, suicide (Massing-Schaffer & Nesi, Reference Massing-Schaffer and Nesi2020). Moreover, such risks may not diminish over time. For example, in a study of effects of exposure to self-harm content on Instagram, researchers found that lifetime exposure to self-harm content was associated with increased SITB risk. Furthermore, exposure was related to an increase in self-harm behaviors, suicidal ideation, and hopelessness one month later, even when controlling for preexisting SITB vulnerability (Arendt et al., Reference Arendt, Scherr and Romer2019).

While it is possible that well-moderated sites could minimize harm resulting from unregulated exposure to triggering content, empirical evidence suggests that even with site moderation individuals can be exposed to triggering graphic or emotional images or text (Baker & Lewis, Reference Baker and Lewis2013; Lewis & Michal, Reference Lewis and Michal2016), including tips on concealment, suicidal ideation, or plans (Dyson et al., Reference Dyson, Hartling and Shulhan2016). Indeed, in the aforementioned Instagram study, only 20% of those who reported seeing self-harm content intentionally searched for it (Arendt et al., Reference Arendt, Scherr and Romer2019). Further, some studies indicate that a subgroup of individuals access online communities in order to sustain or trigger self-injury and share maladaptive techniques (Lewis & Seko, Reference Lewis and Seko2016; Whitlock et al., Reference Whitlock, Powers and Eckenrode2006).

Awareness of the potential for social media content to have harmful effects has led to an increase in moderation efforts, often by platform developers themselves. Popular social media platforms like Instagram, for example, have built in “sensitivity screens” (i.e., trigger warnings) that are meant to shield content related to self-injury and other harmful behaviors enabling users to view content if they clear the shield (Carman, Reference Carman2019). However, even these efforts require empirical study since, in this case, evidence suggests that use of trigger warnings to decrease risk of SITB-related harm has relatively limited effects on distress (Sanson et al., Reference Sanson, Strange and Garry2019) and may increase anticipatory anxiety in some cases (Gainsburg & Earl, Reference Gainsburg and Earl2018). Effects of what a user does in response to a trigger warning is also less intuitive than it might seem. For example, a study focused on self-injury related activity on TalkLife, a mobile peer-support app, showed that choosing to dismiss a trigger warning and view self-injury content was related both to greater intentions to injure and greater ability to resist injuring within a week’s time (Kruzan et al., Reference Kruzan, Whitlock and Bazarova2021). Notably, posting triggering content was related to increased odds of both self-injury thoughts and behaviors. In sum, more work is needed to explicate both the factors that contribute to effects related to exposure to SITB content and the potential protective value of moderation efforts, like trigger warnings.

The Downside of Social Connection on Social Media: Normalization and Narrative Reinforcement

The fact that self-injury and suicide-related posts so frequently co-occur with themes of loneliness underscores the important role that social connection plays in mental health and well-being (Cavazos-Rehg et al., Reference Cavazos-Rehg, Krauss and Sowles2017). Indeed, the promise of rich social connection is one of the factors that makes participation in social media so appealing. However, empirical evidence suggests that the “social” part of social media is simultaneously a risk and a protective factor for SITB. While the perceived and actual social support that comes from social media’s ability to connect young people struggling with self-injury and suicide can be beneficial and SITB-protective, regular exposure to SITB content and association with other individuals struggling with SITB may expose vulnerable adolescents to communities where self-injury is normalized or encouraged, even if not overtly or consciously (Rodham et al., Reference Rodham, Gavin and Miles2007; Whitlock et al., Reference Whitlock, Powers and Eckenrode2006). This “normalization effect” is commonly seen in studies of online communication about self-injury where young people discuss self-injury thoughts and behaviors in detail and often minimize the severity of self-injury and its consequences (Dyson et al., Reference Dyson, Hartling and Shulhan2016). Moreover, the tendency for individuals to co-construct and then reinforce foundational narratives, sometimes termed “narrative reinforcement,” that essentially justifies the need for and use of SITB-linked activities, can lead to desensitization and normalization of behavior, especially when self-injury is depicted as painless and effective (Whitlock et al., Reference Whitlock, Lader and Conterio2007).

Even when a user is trying to minimize exposure to triggering content, most studies show that it is common for pro-recovery messages and encouragement to occur alongside pro-self-injury posts and comments, such as advice on how to injure safely and how to conceal wounds (Lavis & Winter, Reference Lavis and Winter2020; Whitlock et al., Reference Whitlock, Powers and Eckenrode2006). This may not only normalize self-injury, but may also trigger SITB-impulses or discourage use of alternative coping strategies or professional help seeking (Dyson et al., Reference Dyson, Hartling and Shulhan2016; Smithson et al., Reference Smithson, Sharkey and Hewis2011). In sum, while the emotional support received through social media sites can positively influence the recovery process, this support may detract from the severity of the behavior, potentially slowing the change process (Dyson et al., Reference Dyson, Hartling and Shulhan2016).

Contagion: Spread and Scale of Social Media Messages

The idea that exposure to a behavior through media may be “contagious” is a subject of long-standing research interest. Research shows both an increase in the number of SITB themes in on- and offline media, and concomitant concern that such content may contribute to onset or maintenance of SITB among vulnerable individuals, mostly likely through social modelling (Jarvi et al., Reference Jarvi, Jackson, Swenson and Crawford2013). While the adverse impact of SITB social media content on individuals with existing vulnerabilities is intuitive, recent work suggests that even individuals without existing vulnerabilities may be at risk of adverse outcomes from SITB-related themes in social media. For example, there is evidence that viewing suicide-cluster-related posts (e.g., vigils, memorials), online news articles related to suicide, and watching the Netflix series 13 Reasons Why (which features suicidal content) is associated with increased odds of suicidal ideation and attempts, among students both with and without prior self-injury history (Swedo et al., Reference Swedo, Beauregard and de Fijter2020). This study did not control for other known risk factors, like depression or anxiety, and it cannot rule out the possibility that other important preexisting vulnerabilities exist, but it does suggest that even individuals without prior self-injury history are adversely affected by some media content. This possibility is also implicit in research that finds an over 14% increase in population-based suicide trends for young people between 10 and 19 (Niederkrotenthaler et al., Reference Niederkrotenthaler, Stack and Till2019) and “excess” hospitalizations for suicide attempts among young people (Cooper et al., Reference Cooper, Bard, Wallace, Gillaspy and Deleon2018) following the release of 13 Reasons Why.

In a similar vein, research reveals that individuals who post suicidal content are more tightly clustered in friend, or reposting groups, than users who do not post suicide-related content. This supports the idea that individuals tend to gravitate to like-minded others online in ways that may heighten likelihood of narrative reinforcement, and concomitantly, risk of spread among those most vulnerable (Colombo et al., Reference Colombo, Burnap, Hodorog and Scourfield2016). However, the authors also note that re-tweeting behavior connects users whose posts contain suicidal ideation with users whose posts do not, providing evidence for the potential of contagion across diverse networks.

Contagion and Social Media “Challenges”

Social media challenges allow users to pose a behavioral challenge to followers who then receive online community recognition for meeting the challenge – most often over a series of days or weeks. While potentially harmless, or even beneficial, challenges can also heighten individual SITB risk. The Blue Whale Challenge, which occurred through social media from 2013 to 2017, is purported to encourage youth to participate in a series of tasks over 50 days that involve self-harm and culminate in a suicide challenge (Sumner et al., Reference Sumner, Galik and Mathieu2019). Not only is the challenge itself associated with heightened SITB risk, but YouTube media covering this challenge often violated Suicide Prevention Resource Center guidelines (Khasawneh et al., Reference Khasawneh, Madathil, Dixon, Wiśniewski, Zinzow and Roth2020). Such challenges also underscore the ways in which the very features that make social media so attractive also present novel risks.

Cyberbullying

Bullying is a long-standing source of stress for young people and this holds as true in online social settings as it does in offline social settings (John et al., Reference John, Glendenning and Marchant2018). Cyberbullying, a term used to describe bullying that occurs online, is also associated with heightened risk for SITB. Notably, it is not just the victims of cyberbullying who are at elevated SITB risk. A recent meta-analysis shows that youth victims of cyberbullying are over twice likely to engage in self-harm, to report a suicide attempt, and to report suicidal thoughts, when compared to nonvictims (John et al., Reference John, Glendenning and Marchant2018). Even one episode of cybervictimization increases risk of suicidal ideation (Hirschtritt et al., Reference Hirschtritt, Ordóñez, Rico and LeWinn2015). Moreover, the risk of SITB after a cyberbullying incident increases significantly among individuals with existing vulnerabilities. Indeed, in a study of adolescents presenting to Canadian emergency departments for mental health complaints, those reporting histories of cybervictimization were over 11 times more likely to report suicidal ideation (Alavi et al., Reference Alavi, Reshetukha and Prost2017). Also, being both a victim and perpetrator of cyberbullying doubles the risk of reporting suicidal thoughts when compared to those who have one of these experiences (Bonanno & Hymel, Reference Bonanno and Hymel2013; John et al., Reference John, Glendenning and Marchant2018).

Heavy Social Media Use

Research has also shown that risk of NSSI and SITB increases with heavy social media use (Lee et al., Reference Lee, Park, Han, Kim, Chun and Park2016; Twenge & Campbell, Reference Twenge and Campbell2019). Indeed, in a study of Canadian high school students, those who spent more than two hours a day on social media had were five times more likely to experience suicidal ideation when compared to peers reporting fewer than two hours of social media use a day (Sampasa-Kanyinga & Lewis, Reference Sampasa-Kanyinga and Lewis2015). Similarly, adolescents who report heavy digital media use are twice as likely to report suicidal thoughts, suicide plans, and suicide attempts when compared to light users, according to a large survey study (Twenge & Campbell, Reference Twenge and Campbell2019). And, in a recent review of seven studies researchers documented a direct association between heavy social media/internet use and suicide attempts (Sedgwick et al., Reference Sedgwick, Epstein, Dutta and Ougrin2019).

Interestingly, some studies show that some social media use is better than no use (Kim, Reference Kim2012; Lee et al., Reference Lee, Park, Han, Kim, Chun and Park2016). These findings are consistent with broader literature on social media use and well-being that suggests curvilinear relationships between social media use and well-being with benefits derived from some use, versus no use, and risks increasing most significantly from low or moderate to heavy use (Kim, Reference Kim2012; Przybylski & Weinstein, Reference Przybylski and Weinstein2017; Twenge & Campbell, Reference Twenge and Campbell2019). Specifically, risks increase most significantly from low (<1 hour a day) or moderate to heavy use (>5 hours a day) (Twenge & Campbell, Reference Twenge and Campbell2019). One explanatory theory is that time spent on social media displaces other activities that could be beneficial for mental health, such as physical activity, in-person social interaction, and sleep – all risk factors for suicide (Porras-Segovia et al., Reference Porras-Segovia, Pérez-Rodríguez and López-Esteban2019; Sedgwick et al., Reference Sedgwick, Epstein, Dutta and Ougrin2019; Verkooijen et al., Reference Verkooijen, de Vos and Bakker-Camu2018).

Benefits of Social Media for Reducing Self-Injury and Suicide

While risks associated with social media use are a focus of continued empirical investigation, salutary effects have also been documented. Reviews focused on social media and SITB (deliberate self-harm: Biernesser et al., Reference Biernesser, Sewall, Brent, Bear, Mair and Trauth2020; Dyson et al., Reference Dyson, Hartling and Shulhan2016 and self-harm and suicide: Daine et al., Reference Daine, Hawton, Singaravelu, Stewart, Simkin and Montgomery2013; Marchant et al., Reference Marchant, Hawton and Stewart2017; Memon et al., Reference Memon, Sharma, Mohite and Jain2018) converge in their identification of tangible benefits, including enhanced: (1) social support and connectedness, (2) self-knowledge/expression, and (3) access/exchange of resources/information. Key empirical findings for each area are described below.

Social Support and Connectedness

One of the primary perceived benefits of social media use is the exchange of social support not bounded by time or geography. This is important because social support is known to buffer effects of negative life events, enhance mental health and well-being (Cutrona & Suhr, Reference Cutrona and Suhr1992), decrease feelings of isolation, lead to sense of purpose, and to promote feelings of acceptance or being understood (Daine et al., Reference Daine, Hawton, Singaravelu, Stewart, Simkin and Montgomery2013). Opportunities for social support through social media can be powerful for young people with SITB, since stigma is often an impediment to offline help and support seeking. Online environments allow for anonymity and carry few clear social penalties for candid sharing, which makes such environments particularly attractive to individuals concerned about disclosing SITB-related behaviors or impulses to people in their offline lives (Duggan et al., Reference Duggan, Heath, Lewis and Baxter2012). And, since social support is a critical protective factor for SITB (Joiner et al., Reference Joiner, Ribeiro and Silva2012), social exchange in social media forums offers a promising alternative to offline sharing.

It is thus unsurprising that empirical evidence suggests that young people with SITB histories use the Internet more often than their peers (De Riggi et al., Reference De Riggi, Lewis and Heath2018; Memon et al., Reference Memon, Sharma, Mohite and Jain2018) and that it is a preferred means for seeking and receiving help (Frost & Casey, Reference Frost and Casey2016). For example, youth with suicidal ideation are more likely to report online-only friendships, relative to those without suicidal ideation, and these friendships appear to buffer the harmful effects of relational victimization and stress (Massing-Schaffer et al., Reference Massing-Schaffer and Nesi2020). Nearly one-third of young people with a history of self-injury had reported online help seeking in one study – and those who sought help online were more distressed and suicidal than those who had not (Frost & Casey, Reference Frost and Casey2016). Additionally, adolescents with more recent NSSI have higher levels of online support seeking, compared to those with past or no NSSI history (De Riggi et al., Reference De Riggi, Lewis and Heath2018). Even when individuals have a strong support system offline, they may have trouble accessing support in times when they need it (Kruzan et al., Reference Kruzan, Whitlock and Bazarova2021; Lavis & Winter, Reference Lavis and Winter2020). The immediate nature of social support exchange on social media may be important for individuals who struggle with SITB given that intense urges are commonly cited as a key barrier to behavior change (Kruzan & Whitlock, Reference Kruzan and Whitlock2019) and findings showing that young people frequently look for, and receive, emotional support online when they are experiencing an urge (Lewis & Michal, Reference Lewis and Michal2016; Rodham et al., Reference Rodham, Gavin and Miles2007).

Not all social support is equal, however. While some work suggests that young people perceive benefits from participation (Brown et al., Reference Brown, Fischer, Goldwich and Plener2020; Lewis & Michal, Reference Lewis and Michal2016), others note the “mundane” or safe nature of the advice, which leads to questions of actual utility (Smithson et al., Reference Smithson, Sharkey and Hewis2011). The availability and immediate accessibility of such support is nonetheless quite appealing – as is the fact that support is exchanged among peers with shared experience and experiential knowledge (Marchant et al., Reference Marchant, Hawton and Stewart2017; Thoits, Reference Thoits2011). Research consistently documents a preference for peer versus professional support for NSSI and the tendency for young people to confide SITB in peers versus others in their social network (De Riggi et al., Reference De Riggi, Lewis and Heath2018), something social media facilitates organically.

The question of whether such peer support is helpful for SITB outcomes remains nascent. Early work showed positive associations between social support received and decreased self-injury behaviors (Murray & Fox, Reference Murray and Fox2006), but research directly connecting social support through social media use to its effects on SITB outcomes is limited. One experimental study varying exposure to hopeful or hopeless YouTube videos, found that hopeful messages were associated with increased positive attitudes toward recovery, suggesting shifts in recovery-oriented subjective norms (Lewis et al., Reference Lewis, Seko and Joshi2018). Interestingly, there were no attitudinal changes in those viewing hopeless messages.

Self-Knowledge and Expression

Beyond the use of social media as a source of social support is its role in facilitating self-expression and exploration. Being able to connect and provide mutual support, narrate experiences, and self-reflect, while also maintaining autonomy and anonymity, are all identified as clear benefits to social media use among individuals with SITB history (Coulson et al., Reference Coulson, Bullock and Rodham2017; Rodham et al., Reference Rodham, Gavin, Lewis, St. Denis and Bandalli2013). Indeed, self-oriented motivations such as understanding NSSI experience or expressing oneself through narrative description or other forms of creative expression are potent motives of online activity (Seko et al., Reference Seko, Kidd, Wiljer and McKenzie2015). Insight gleaned through sharing one’s story and encountering resonance in others’ stories is important in recovery and is associated with active information seeking, increased self-efficacy, and enhanced self-awareness (Kruzan & Whitlock, Reference Kruzan and Whitlock2019). Since young people frequently provide advice to others online (Seko et al., Reference Seko, Kidd, Wiljer and McKenzie2015; Whitlock et al., Reference Whitlock, Powers and Eckenrode2006), it is also possible that seeing oneself as a valued mentor to others with shared struggles may increase commitment to recovery processes. Online self-presentation and expression can assist in developing self-understanding, and be associated with beneficial shifts in self-perceptions (Kruzan & Won, Reference Kruzan and Won2019; Valkenburg, Reference Valkenburg2017).

Exchange of Resources and Information

Use of social media to both identify and exchange coping techniques is also common and potentially beneficial (Duggan et al., Reference Duggan, Heath, Lewis and Baxter2012) for individuals navigating self-injury or suicidal thoughts and urges (Lavis & Winter, Reference Lavis and Winter2020; Lewis & Michal, Reference Lewis and Michal2016). Tips on how to reduce the urge or replace self-injury behaviors are also highly salient. For example, in a study of three different social media sites (Reddit, Instagram, Twitter) researchers found a rich exchange of coping advice related to visual, distraction, and sensory techniques effective in reducing urges (Lavis & Winter, Reference Lavis and Winter2020). There is also evidence that topics related to professional help seeking for SITB are a feature of some online exchange (Lavis & Winter, Reference Lavis and Winter2020), but whether this is common remains unclear since there is work suggesting that online exchange does not lead to increased professional help seeking (R. C. Brown et al., Reference Brown, Fischer, Goldwich and Plener2020) and because this line of inquiry remains underexplored.

The power of social media exchange to alter offline behavior does open opportunity for development of more formal intervention. Online peers may be uniquely positioned to provide advice on treatment and coping strategies, and this advice may be easier to digest, and apply, when coming from someone who has “been there” (Naslund et al., Reference Naslund, Aschbrenner, Marsch and Bartels2016). Such exchange can be considered a unique and potent form of expertise (Marchant et al., Reference Marchant, Hawton and Stewart2017) that can be leveraged to deliver coping- and recovery-supportive messages and resources. Since not all resources exchanged through social media are evidence-based, and some can be harmful or depict self-injury as an effective coping strategy (Lewis & Baker, Reference Lewis and Baker2011; Seko & Lewis, Reference Seko and Lewis2018), it is crucial that the nature of naturally occurring exchange is understood and mitigated when potentially harmful.

Key Mechanisms: Moderators and Mediators of Effects on SITB

Individual, developmental, and social-contextual factors are all empirically and theoretically relevant when considering susceptibility to SITB and media effects, especially since young people with preexisting vulnerabilities, such as other mental health conditions, are more likely to be exposed to harmful content (Dyson et al., Reference Dyson, Hartling and Shulhan2016). SITB-specific individual-level factors such as prior SITB history may moderate social media effects (Dyson et al., Reference Dyson, Hartling and Shulhan2016). Cyberbullying may also moderate or mediate social media effects (John et al., Reference John, Glendenning and Marchant2018), and while underexplored, factors such as offline support and prior SITB help seeking are likely to moderate the effect of social media on SITB. For example, social media effects, particularly negative effects, might be less damaging to individuals who have rich social supports outside of social media. A review of the most acknowledged likely mediators follows.

Mental Health History

Just as prior mental health history has the potential to moderate the effects of social media use on SITB outcomes, it can also mediate this relationship. In some work, the relationship between heavy social media use and NSSI was mediated by factors such as suicidality, anxiety, and affective and psychotic disorders (Mészáros et al., Reference Mészáros, Győri, Horváth, Szentiványi and Balázs2020).

Affect and Intentions

Emotional affect and motives for use are also likely mediators of the relationship between social media and SITB. The connection between NSSI and affect is well established, and may be particularly important in understanding interactions that lead to risks or benefits of social media use, since both NSSI (Klonsky, Reference Klonsky2007) and social media use can be ways to modulate emotion (Rideout & Fox, Reference Rideout and Fox2018). Indeed, young people can deliberately seek out uplifting, distressing, or neutral messages that reflect, and may impact, their own affective state. While few studies have examined the role of mood in the relationship between SITB and social media use, young people with lived NSSI experience often discuss mood as part of their use of social media and related technologies (Seko et al., Reference Seko, Kidd, Wiljer and McKenzie2015).

Interactional Factors

In addition to the amount of use, the way someone uses social media is consistently connected to mental health outcomes (Verduyn et al., Reference Verduyn, Ybarra, Résibois, Jonides and Kross2017). This trend holds for SITB-related studies, as well, but the patterns of effects are not entirely intuitive. In a cross-sectional study of the association between SITB (both NSSI and suicidal thoughts and behavior) and social media use type among Norwegian university students, researchers found that active public social media use (e.g., posting, commenting) was associated with increased odds of NSSI ideation and behaviors and suicide attempts, whereas social private use (e.g., messaging friends) was associated with reduced odds of all NSSI and suicide outcomes (Kingsbury et al., Reference Kingsbury, Reme and Skogen2021). Passive nonsocial use (e.g., reading news) was associated with decreased odds of NSSI ideation, NSSI, and suicidal ideation, and active nonsocial use (e.g., for studies) was associated with decreased odds of suicide attempt. In parallel with the broader literature on social media effects on well-being, these findings suggest a nuanced relationship that differs by types of engagement.

Social Comparison Processes

Social comparison is a primary mechanism through which social media use impacts mental health and well-being (Appel et al., Reference Appel, Gerlach and Crusius2016; Kruzan & Won, Reference Kruzan and Won2019; Wang et al., Reference Wang, Wang, Gaskin and Hawk2017). Upward social comparison – wherein individuals compare themselves to those who are perceived as better off – has been associated with reductions in self-esteem, increased negative affect, and envy (Appel et al., Reference Appel, Gerlach and Crusius2016; Wang et al., Reference Wang, Wang, Gaskin and Hawk2017). Consonant with this general trend, Kingsbury et al., (Reference Kingsbury, Reme and Skogen2021) found that the presence of social comparison is associated with increased odds for all NSSI and suicidal outcomes. However, social comparison processes may look slightly different on social media sites or forums that are structured almost entirely around conversations about SITB (e.g., TalkLife) where the general positivity bias documented in mainstream social media does not exist. In light of its influence, the role of social comparison for SITB risk in social media should be explored further.

Opportunities and Challenges

Despite limitations, social media and related platforms, like mobile apps, offer excellent opportunities to leverage modern communication technologies in ways that provide timely and scalable intervention and, ideally, prevention. Such opportunities, however, present unique challenges related to methodological innovation and strategies for effectively addressing privacy and ethical considerations.

Opportunities: Amplifying the Beneficial Potential of Social Media

In addition to the opportunities inherent in the nature of the technology’s design, such as the possibility for enhanced social connection and belonging, there are unique opportunities for: (1) identification/detection, (2) intervention, (3) prevention, and (4) awareness/stigma reduction.

Identification/Detection

Automated methods for predicting SITB risk and social media effects are promising as they are capable of considering complex combinations not likely to arise from more traditional assessments (Walsh et al., Reference Walsh, Ribeiro and Franklin2017). Creative use of machine learning has been successful in early efforts to detect and address suicidal content, particularly when used to detect and intervene with novel online risks, such as pro-suicide games (Sumner et al., Reference Sumner, Galik and Mathieu2019). This same method can also be used to identify at-risk users. Natural language processing and topic modeling have been leveraged to understand changes in suicide-related content following national reports of celebrity suicides (Kumar et al., Reference Kumar, Dredze, Coppersmith and De Choudhury2015) and changes in emotional expression and self-attentional focus are consistently identified as indicators of higher suicide risk, for example (Coppersmith et al., Reference Coppersmith, Leary, Crutchley and Fine2018; De Choudhury et al., Reference De Choudhury, Kiciman, Dredze, Coppersmith and Kumar2016). However, most work has focused on high-level trends, rather than individual risk patterns, which would be useful for tailoring interventions. An exception to this is a study that was able to differentiate between users who are at risk of transitioning to suicidal ideation (De Choudhury et al., Reference De Choudhury, Kiciman, Dredze, Coppersmith and Kumar2016). While discerning posts related to self-injury with, and without, suicidal intent is more difficult, it is a promising area for further investigation.

Intervention

As the ability to detect at-risk users who could benefit from additional resources improves, scalable interventions delivered through social media will be possible. Preliminary evidence suggests that young people would be receptive to digital interventions, such as those through social media (Naslund et al., Reference Naslund, Aschbrenner, Marsch and Bartels2016) and that digital interventions focused on acquisition and implementation of evidence-based SITB coping skills are likely to be efficacious in reducing self-injury (Rizvi et al., Reference Rizvi, Hughes and Thomas2016; Schroeder et al., Reference Schroeder, Wilkes and Rowan2018). Such interventions could also serve as a decisional tool for future help-seeking behaviors, for both those at risk of SITB and concerned friends and family (Rowe et al., Reference Rowe, Patel and French2018).

Two frameworks particularly promising for early intervention in the social media environment are: (1) single session interventions (Schleider & Weisz, Reference Schleider and Weisz2017) and (2) digital micro interventions (Baumel et al., Reference Baumel, Fleming and Schueller2020). Single session interventions (SSIs) – brief, but potent, treatments designed to last one session – have shown promise in reducing many mental health outcomes in adolescent populations (Schleider & Weisz, Reference Schleider and Weisz2017). These interventions are scalable, potentially capable of reaching young people who are unlikely to come into contact with more formal/traditional services, and are flexible enough to be disseminated in multiple contexts, including social media. Additionally, the potential value of SSIs in reducing SITB has already been noted (Dobias et al., Reference Dobias, Chen, Fox and Schleider2020).

Digital micro interventions (DMIs) are small “bite-sized” interventions designed to fit seamlessly into an individual’s natural use of media (Baumel et al., Reference Baumel, Fleming and Schueller2020). In contrast to the linear and/or single-platform approach DMIs work across a number of platforms (e.g., social media apps, text messaging) and involve a series of smaller, dynamic touch points that are responsive to young people’s media habits. Since at least one suicide prevention study suggests that young users want preventive interventions embedded in the platforms they already frequent (Thorn et al., Reference Thorn, Hill and Lamblin2020), DMIs may be particularly well suited for delivering SITB early intervention and prevention.

Prevention

Social media can be leveraged to increase awareness, reduce stigma, and provide psychoeducation at scale (Robinson et al., Reference Robinson, Cox and Bailey2016). Simulation studies in this area demonstrate that suicide prevention efforts on social media have the potential to reach at-risk populations at a much larger scale than traditional methods (Silenzio et al., Reference Silenzio, Duberstein, Tang, Lu, Tu and Homan2009). Despite this potential, few prevention efforts for SITB to date have been disseminated on social media. Some of the more innovative work in this area engages young social media users in codesigning workshops aimed at developing a social media campaign (the #chatsafe project) focused on safe communication about suicide online (Thorn et al., Reference Thorn, Hill and Lamblin2020). The project demonstrated that it is feasible to safely engage young people in codesigning a suicide prevention intervention (Robinson et al., Reference Robinson, Hill and Thorn2018; Thorn et al., Reference Thorn, Hill and Lamblin2020). A number of auxiliary but useful key takeaways surfaced through this process, including finding that young people wanted to see guidelines through sharable content – including videos, animations, photographs – and that they want to feel visible in the media campaign (Thorn et al., Reference Thorn, Hill and Lamblin2020).

Awareness and Stigma Reduction

Destigmatizing mental health struggles and increasing positive discourse and disclosure is another opportunity for social media to address SITB. Social media can be used to gauge public perceptions of suicide, determine needs for literacy, and deliver psychoeducation when needed (Nathan & Nathan, Reference Nathan and Nathan2020). Social media mining can also be leveraged to improve the performance of stigma reduction programs (Li et al., Reference Li, Huang, Jiao, O’Dea, Zhu and Christensen2018). However, more research is needed to better understand how social media can be used to reduce stigma and promote open and nuanced discussions.

Challenges: Minimizing the Negative Potential of Social Media

Some of the challenges of studying and understanding the relationship between social media use and SITB outcomes are broadly related to (1) creating and maintaining a safe environment, (2) methodological innovation, and (3) privacy and ethical considerations.

Creating and Maintaining a Safe Environment

The need to attenuate negative effects of social media use and prevent further “digital harm” – or “online communication and activity that leads to, supports, or exacerbates, non-suicidal yet intentional harm or impairment of an individual’s physical well-being” (Pater & Mynatt, Reference Pater and Mynatt2017) (p. 1501) is critical to creating and maintaining safe online environments. While much of the work focused on social media and SITB risks focuses on moderation, it is also useful to think about how spaces can be designed to facilitate connection and supportive exchanges and to make negative interactions less likely. To accomplish this, however, understanding of how platforms can be designed to protect users against negative experiences (e.g., cyberbullying) without sacrificing opportunities for user agency (including peer-to-peer intervention) at interaction and platform level must be enhanced and leveraged. Researchers in fields like human–computer interaction are particularly well suited to address these concerns due to their person-centered approaches, especially when working in collaboration with experts in both SITB and adolescent development and well-being.

Methodological Innovation

The dynamic nature of social media environments coupled with the broad-reaching messaging power presents new and important methodological challenges for research – all of which merit careful attention from scholars in various technical and clinical disciplines. Social media data has improved our understanding of the needs and struggles of young people with SITB histories and has been linked to markers of SITB risk. However, both automation and platform use preferences evolve rapidly – necessitating a flexible approach. While use of automated methods has powerful potential, algorithms are “black boxes,” and utility is not likely to be of universal ease or impact across platforms. Therefore, understanding variations in speed, efficiency, and utility of methods across platforms will be a key component of augmenting utility. It will be similarly important for researchers to consider how to best translate findings from sophisticated detection algorithms into practice and to have a set of guidelines for developing, and validating, social media interventions.

Two of the greatest needs for future research are to examine the temporal relationship between online activities and behavior change, and to discern which mechanisms contribute to desirable outcomes. To do this, it will be important to triangulate different types of data and methods (Lavis & Winter, Reference Lavis and Winter2020) and to consider new methodological approaches capable of tracking what participants actually see and do online. Combining EMA with tracking (logging media use), for example, may assess states rather than traits, reduce recall bias, and link fluctuations to the manifold situational factors and circumstances outlined in this chapter (Whitlock & Masur, Reference Whitlock and Masur2019). Future research should also consider the bi-directional relationships between SITB and social media engagement (Lavis & Winter, Reference Lavis and Winter2020). To date, most work has focused on the impact of social media use on SITB risk; however, it is equally important to understand how individual histories of SITB and risk influence social media use.

Privacy and Ethics

Such methodological approaches pose significant ethical challenges and will require care in balancing potential ethical challenges inherent in such methods with the benefits they provide. One of the biggest challenges for platform designers, researchers, and policy-makers is navigating user privacy and ethics while also safeguarding against potential harms of free expression – both in terms of platform affordances and the research needed to better understand the complex interactions between social media use, SITB risk, and individual-level factors such as developmental stage and other risk and protective factors (Whitlock & Masur, Reference Whitlock and Masur2019). There is also a need to establish universal protocols for how risk detection and accuracy is measured and applied across platforms (Westers et al., Reference Westers, Lewis and Whitlock2020). This will likely require continuous monitoring and updating of algorithms as the data available expands and brings with it questions about privacy and opting-in to such monitoring.

Conclusion

Evidence that young people go online, exchange support, and share relatively openly about their experiences is promising in that it presents grounds to understand young people’s experiences, detect needs, and design and deliver scalable preventative interventions. However, there are also risks associated with the social media environment such as exposure to, and the quick spread of, potentially harmful content. To better understand how we can best amplify the beneficial potential of social media, while minimizing the negative consequences, further research focused on disentangling factors that contribute most to the SITB–social media relationship is needed.

References

Alavi, N., Reshetukha, T., Prost, E., et al. (2017). Relationship between bullying and suicidal behaviour in youth presenting to the emergency department. Journal of the Canadian Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 26(2), 7077.Google ScholarPubMed
Appel, H., Gerlach, A. L., & Crusius, J. (2016). The interplay between Facebook use, social comparison, envy, and depression. Current Opinion in Psychology, 9, 4449. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2015.10.006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arendt, F., Scherr, S., & Romer, D. (2019). Effects of exposure to self-harm on social media: Evidence from a two-wave panel study among young adults. New Media & Society, 21(11–12), 24222442. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444819850106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baker, T. G., & Lewis, S. P. (2013). Responses to online photographs of non-suicidal self-injury: A thematic analysis. Archives of Suicide Research, 17(3), 223235. https://doi.org/10.1080/13811118.2013.805642CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Baumel, A., Fleming, T., & Schueller, S. M. (2020). Digital micro interventions for behavioral and mental health gains: Core components and conceptualization of digital micro intervention care. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 22(10), e20631. https://doi.org/10.2196/20631CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Biernesser, C., Sewall, C. J. R., Brent, D., Bear, T., Mair, C., & Trauth, J. (2020). Social media use and deliberate self-harm among youth: A systematized narrative review. Children and Youth Services Review, 116, Article 105054. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2020.105054CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bonanno, R. A., & Hymel, S. (2013). Cyber bullying and internalizing difficulties: Above and beyond the impact of traditional forms of bullying. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 42(5), 685697. http://dx.doi.org.turing.library.northwestern.edu/10.1007/s10964–013-9937-1CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brown, J. D., L’Engle, K. L., Pardun, C. J., Guo, G., Kenneavy, K., & Jackson, C. (2006). Sexy media matter: Exposure to sexual content in music, movies, television, and magazines predicts black and white adolescents’ sexual behavior. Pediatrics, 117(4), 10181027. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2005-1406CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brown, R. C., Fischer, T., Goldwich, D. A., & Plener, P. L. (2020). “I just finally wanted to belong somewhere”: Qualitative analysis of experiences with posting pictures of self-injury on Instagram. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 11, Article 274. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2020.00274CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Carman, A. (2019, February). Instagram head admits platform has a problem policing self-harm posts: It’ll introduce sensitivity screens this week. The Verge. https://www.theverge.com/2019/2/4/18210473/instagram-self-harm-suicide-cutting-posts-molly-russellGoogle Scholar
Cavazos-Rehg, P. A., Krauss, M. J., Sowles, S. J., et al. (2017). An analysis of depression, self-harm, and suicidal ideation content on Tumblr. Crisis, 38(1), 4452. https://doi.org/10.1027/0227-5910/a000409CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cha, C. B., Franz, P. J., Guzmán, E. M., Glenn, C. R., Kleiman, E. M., & Nock, M. K. (2018). Annual Research Review: Suicide among youth – Epidemiology, (potential) etiology, and treatment. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, and Allied Disciplines, 59(4), 460482. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpp.12831CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Colombo, G. B., Burnap, P., Hodorog, A., & Scourfield, J. (2016). Analysing the connectivity and communication of suicidal users on Twitter. Computer Communications, 73, 291300. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.comcom.2015.07.018CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cooper, M. T., Bard, D., Wallace, R., Gillaspy, S., & Deleon, S. (2018). Suicide attempt admissions from a single children’s hospital before and after the introduction of Netflix series 13 Reasons Why. Journal of Adolescent Health, 63(6), 688693. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2018.08.028CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Coppersmith, G., Leary, R., Crutchley, P., & Fine, A. (2018). Natural language processing of social media as screening for suicide risk. Biomedical Informatics Insights, 10. https://doi.org/10.1177/1178222618792860CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Coulson, N. S., Bullock, E., & Rodham, K. (2017). Exploring the therapeutic affordances of self-harm online support communities: An online survey of members. JMIR Mental Health, 4(4), e44. https://doi.org/10.2196/mental.8084CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Curtin, S. C., Warner, M., & Hedegaard, H. (2016). Increase in suicide in the United States, 1999–2014. US Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Health Statistics.Google ScholarPubMed
Cutrona, C. E., & Suhr, J. A. (1992). Controllability of stressful life events and satisfaction with spouse support behaviors. Communication Research, 19(2), 154174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Daine, K., Hawton, K., Singaravelu, V., Stewart, A., Simkin, S., & Montgomery, P. (2013). The power of the web: A systematic review of studies of the influence of the internet on self-harm and suicide in young people. PLoS ONE, 8(10), e77555. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0077555CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Choudhury, M., Kiciman, E., Dredze, M., Coppersmith, G., & Kumar, M. (2016). Discovering shifts to suicidal ideation from mental health content in social media. Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 2098–2110. https://doi.org/10.1145/2858036.2858207CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Riggi, M., Lewis, S., & Heath, N. (2018). Brief report: Nonsuicidal self-injury in adolescence: Turning to the internet for support. Counselling Psychology Quarterly, 31(3), 397405. https://doi.org/10.1080/09515070.2018.1427556CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dobias, M., Chen, S., Fox, K., & Schleider, J. L. (2020). Brief interventions for self-injurious thoughts and behaviors in young people: A systematic review [Preprint]. PsyArXiv. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/z26chCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Du, J., Zhang, Y., Luo, J., et al. (2018). Extracting psychiatric stressors for suicide from social media using deep learning. BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, 18(2), Article 43. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12911–018-0632-8CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Duggan, J. M., Heath, N. L., Lewis, S. P., & Baxter, A. L. (2012). An examination of the scope and nature of non-suicidal self-injury online activities: Implications for school mental health professionals. School Mental Health, 4(1), 5667. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12310–011-9065-6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dunlop, S. M., More, E., & Romer, D. (2011). Where do youth learn about suicides on the internet, and what influence does this have on suicidal ideation? Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 52(10), 10731080. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7610.2011.02416.xCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dyson, M. P., Hartling, L., Shulhan, J., et al. (2016). A systematic review of social media use to discuss and view deliberate self-harm acts. PLoS ONE, 11(5), e0155813. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0155813CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fitzpatrick, S., Kranzler, A., Fehling, K., Lindqvist, J., & Selby, E. A. (2020). Investigating the role of the intensity and duration of self-injury thoughts in self-injury with ecological momentary assessment. Psychiatry Research, 284, Article 112761. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2020.112761CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fox, K. R., Franklin, J. C., Ribeiro, J. D., Kleiman, E. M., Bentley, K. H., & Nock, M. K. (2015). Meta-analysis of risk factors for nonsuicidal self-injury. Clinical Psychology Review, 42, 156167. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2015.09.002CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Franklin, J. C., Fox, K. R., Franklin, C. R., et al. (2016). A brief mobile app reduces nonsuicidal and suicidal self-injury: Evidence from three randomized controlled trials. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 84(6), 544557. https://doi.org/10.1037/ccp0000093CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Frost, M., & Casey, L. (2016). Who seeks help online for self-injury? Archives of Suicide Research: Official Journal of the International Academy for Suicide Research, 20(1), 6979. https://doi.org/10.1080/13811118.2015.1004470CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gainsburg, I., & Earl, A. (2018). Trigger warnings as an interpersonal emotion-regulation tool: Avoidance, attention, and affect depend on beliefs. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 79, 252263. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2018.08.006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gillies, D., Christou, M. A., Dixon, A. C., et al. (2018). Prevalence and characteristics of self-harm in adolescents: Meta-analyses of community-based studies 1990–2015. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 57(10), 733741. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaac.2018.06.018CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hirschtritt, M. E., Ordóñez, A. E., Rico, Y. C., & LeWinn, K. Z. (2015). Internal resilience, peer victimization, and suicidal ideation among adolescents. International Journal of Adolescent Medicine and Health, 27(4), 415423. https://doi.org/10.1515/ijamh-2014-0060CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
International Society for the Study of Self-Injury. (2018). What is self-injury. https://itriples.org/about-self-injury/what-is-self-injuryGoogle Scholar
Jacobson, C. M., & Gould, M. (2007). The epidemiology and phenomenology of non-suicidal self-injurious behavior among adolescents: A critical review of the literature. Archives of Suicide Research, 11(2), 129147. https://doi.org/10.1080/13811110701247602CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jarvi, S., Jackson, B., Swenson, L., & Crawford, H. (2013). The impact of social contagion on non-suicidal self-injury: A review of the literature. Archives of Suicide Research, 17(1), 119. https://doi.org/10.1080/13811118.2013.748404CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jasso-Medrano, J. L., & López-Rosales, F. (2018). Measuring the relationship between social media use and addictive behavior and depression and suicide ideation among university students. Computers in Human Behavior, 87, 183191. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2018.05.003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
John, A., Glendenning, A. C., Marchant, A., et al. (2018). Self-harm, suicidal behaviours, and cyberbullying in children and young people: Systematic review. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 20(4), e129. https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.9044CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Joiner, T. E., Ribeiro, J. D., & Silva, C. (2012). Nonsuicidal self-injury, suicidal behavior, and their co-occurrence as viewed through the lens of the interpersonal theory of suicide. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 21(5), 342347. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721412454873CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Khasawneh, A., Madathil, K. C., Dixon, E., Wiśniewski, P., Zinzow, H., & Roth, R. (2020). Examining the self-harm and suicide contagion effects of the Blue Whale Challenge on YouTube and Twitter: Qualitative study. JMIR Mental Health, 7(6), e15973. https://doi.org/10.2196/15973CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kiekens, G., Hasking, P., Boyes, M., et al. (2018). The associations between non-suicidal self-injury and first onset suicidal thoughts and behaviors. Journal of Affective Disorders, 239, 171179. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2018.06.033CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kim, J. Y. (2012). The nonlinear association between internet using time for non-educational purposes and adolescent health. Journal of Preventive Medicine and Public Health, 45(1), 3746. https://doi.org/10.3961/jpmph.2012.45.1.37CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kingsbury, M., Reme, B.-A., Skogen, J. C., et al. (2021). Differential associations between types of social media use and university students’ non-suicidal self-injury and suicidal behavior. Computers in Human Behavior, 115, Article 106614. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2020.106614CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klonsky, E. D. (2007). The functions of deliberate self-injury: A review of the evidence. Clinical Psychology Review, 27(2), 226239. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2006.08.002CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kruzan, K. P., & Whitlock, J. (2019). Processes of change and nonsuicidal self-injury: A qualitative interview study with individuals at various stages of change. Global Qualitative Nursing Research, 6. https://doi.org/10.1177/2333393619852935CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kruzan, K. P., Whitlock, J., & Bazarova, N. N. (2021). Examining the relationship between the use of a mobile peer-support app and self-injury outcomes: Longitudinal mixed methods study. JMIR Mental Health, 8(1), e21854. https://doi.org/10.2196/21854CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kruzan, K. P., & Won, A. S. (2019). Embodied well-being through two media technologies: Virtual reality and social media. New Media & Society, 21(8), 17341749. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444819829873CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kumar, M., Dredze, M., Coppersmith, G., & De Choudhury, M. (2015). Detecting changes in suicide content manifested in social media following celebrity suicides. Proceedings of the 26th ACM Conference on Hypertext & Social Media – HT’15, 85–94. https://doi.org/10.1145/2700171.2791026CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lavis, A., & Winter, R. (2020). #Online harms or benefits? An ethnographic analysis of the positives and negatives of peer-support around self-harm on social media. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 61(8), 842854. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpp.13245CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lee, S. Y., Park, E.-C., Han, K.-T., Kim, S. J., Chun, S.-Y., & Park, S. (2016). The association of level of internet use with suicidal ideation and suicide attempts in South Korean adolescents: A focus on family structure and household economic status. The Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 61(4), 243251. https://doi.org/10.1177/0706743716635550CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lewis, S. P., & Baker, T. G. (2011). The possible risks of self-injury web sites: A content analysis. Archives of Suicide Research, 15(4), 390396. https://doi.org/10.1080/13811118.2011.616154CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lewis, S. P., & Michal, N. J. (2016). Start, stop, and continue: Preliminary insight into the appeal of self-injury e-communities. Journal of Health Psychology, 21(2), 250260. https://doi.org/10.1177/1359105314527140CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lewis, S. P., & Seko, Y. (2016). A double-edged sword: A review of benefits and risks of online nonsuicidal self-injury activities. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 72(3), 249262. https://doi.org/10.1002/jclp.22242CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewis, S. P., Seko, Y., & Joshi, P. (2018). The impact of YouTube peer feedback on attitudes toward recovery from non-suicidal self-injury: An experimental pilot study. Digital Health, 4. https://doi.org/10.1177/2055207618780499CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Li, A., Huang, X., Jiao, D., O’Dea, B., Zhu, T., & Christensen, H. (2018). An analysis of stigma and suicide literacy in responses to suicides broadcast on social media. Asia-Pacific Psychiatry, 10(1), e12314. https://doi.org/10.1111/appy.12314CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Marchant, A., Hawton, K., Stewart, A., et al. (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), e0181722. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0181722CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Massing-Schaffer, M., & Nesi, J. (2020). Cybervictimization and suicide risk in adolescence: An integrative model of social media and suicide theories. Adolescent Research Review, 5(1), 4965. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40894–019-00116-yCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Massing-Schaffer, M., Nesi, J., Telzer, E. H., Lindquist, K. A., & Prinstein, M. J. (2020). Adolescent peer experiences and prospective suicidal ideation: The protective role of online-only friendships. Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1080/15374416.2020.1750019CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Memon, A. M., Sharma, S. G., Mohite, S. S., & Jain, S. (2018). The role of online social networking on deliberate self-harm and suicidality in adolescents: A systematized review of literature. Indian Journal of Psychiatry, 60(4), 384400.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mészáros, G., Győri, D., Horváth, L. O., Szentiványi, D., & Balázs, J. (2020). Nonsuicidal self-injury: Its associations with pathological internet use and psychopathology among adolescents. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 11, Article 814. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2020.00814CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Miller, A. B., & Prinstein, M. J. (2019). Adolescent suicide as a failure of acute stress-response systems. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 15, 425450. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-050718-095625CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Murray, C. D., & Fox, J. (2006). Do internet self-harm discussion groups alleviate or exacerbate self-harming behaviour? Australian E-Journal for the Advancement of Mental Health, 5(3), 225233. https://doi.org/10.5172/jamh.5.3.225CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Naslund, J. A., Aschbrenner, K. A., Marsch, L. A., & Bartels, S. J. (2016). The future of mental health care: Peer-to-peer support and social media. Epidemiology and Psychiatric Sciences; Verona, 25(2), 113122. http://dx.doi.org.proxy.library.cornell.edu/10.1017/S2045796015001067CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nathan, N. A., & Nathan, K. I. (2020). Suicide, stigma, and utilizing social media platforms to gauge public perceptions. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 10. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2019.00947CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Niederkrotenthaler, T., Fu, K., Yip, P. S. F., et al. (2012). Changes in suicide rates following media reports on celebrity suicide: A meta-analysis. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 66(11), 10371042. https://doi.org/10.1136/jech-2011-200707CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Niederkrotenthaler, T., Stack, S., Till, B., et al. (2019). Association of increased youth suicides in the United States with the release of 13 Reasons Why. JAMA Psychiatry, 76(9), 933940. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2019.0922CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nock, M. K., Borges, G., Bromet, E. J., et al. (2008). Cross-national prevalence and risk factors for suicidal ideation, plans and attempts. British Journal of Psychiatry, 192(2), 98105. https://doi.org/10.1192/bjp.bp.107.040113CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nock, M. K., Green, J. G., Hwang, I., et al. (2013). Prevalence, correlates, and treatment of lifetime suicidal behavior among adolescents: Results from the National Comorbidity Survey Replication Adolescent Supplement. JAMA Psychiatry, 70(3), Article 300. https://doi.org/10.1001/2013.jamapsychiatry.55CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pater, J., & Mynatt, E. (2017). Defining digital self-harm. Proceedings of the 2017 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing, 1501–1513. https://doi.org/10.1145/2998181.2998224CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Phillips, D. P. (1974). The influence of suggestion on suicide: Substantive and theoretical implications of the Werther effect. American Sociological Review, 39(3), 340354. https://doi.org/10.2307/2094294CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Porras-Segovia, A., Pérez-Rodríguez, M. M., López-Esteban, P., et al. (2019). Contribution of sleep deprivation to suicidal behaviour: A systematic review. Sleep Medicine Reviews, 44, 3747. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.smrv.2018.12.005CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Przybylski, A. K., & Weinstein, N. (2017). A large-scale test of the Goldilocks hypothesis: Quantifying the relations between digital-screen use and the mental well-being of adolescents. Psychological Science, 28(2), 204215. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797616678438CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rideout, V., & Fox, S. (2018). Digital health practices, social media use, and mental well-being among teens and young adults in the U.S. Providence St. Joseph Health. https://digitalcommons.psjhealth.org/publications/1093Google Scholar
Rizvi, S. L., Hughes, C. D., & Thomas, M. C. (2016). The DBT Coach mobile application as an adjunct to treatment for suicidal and self-injuring individuals with borderline personality disorder: A preliminary evaluation and challenges to client utilization. Psychological Services, 13(4), 380388. https://doi.org/10.1037/ser0000100CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Robinson, J., Cox, G., Bailey, E., et al. (2016). Social media and suicide prevention: A systematic review. Early Intervention in Psychiatry, 10(2), 103121. https://doi.org/10.1111/eip.12229CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Robinson, J., Hill, N. T. M., Thorn, P., et al. (2018). The #chatsafe project. Developing guidelines to help young people communicate safely about suicide on social media: A Delphi study. PLoS ONE, 13(11), e0206584. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0206584CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rodham, K., Gavin, J., Lewis, S. P., St. Denis, J. M., & Bandalli, P. (2013). An investigation of the motivations driving the online representation of self-injury: A thematic analysis. Archives of Suicide Research, 17(2), 173183. https://doi.org/10.1080/13811118.2013.776459CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rodham, K., Gavin, J., & Miles, M. (2007). I hear, I listen and I care: A qualitative investigation into the function of a self-harm message board. Suicide & Life-Threatening Behavior, 37(4), 422430.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rowe, S. L., Patel, K., French, R. S., et al. (2018). Web-based decision aid to assist help-seeking choices for young people who self-harm: Outcomes from a randomized controlled feasibility trial. JMIR Mental Health, 5(1), e10. https://doi.org/10.2196/mental.8098CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sampasa-Kanyinga, H., & Lewis, R. F. (2015). Frequent use of social networking sites is associated with poor psychological functioning among children and adolescents. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 18(7), 380385. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2015.0055CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sanson, M., Strange, D., & Garry, M. (2019). Trigger warnings are trivially helpful at reducing negative affect, intrusive thoughts, and avoidance. Clinical Psychological Science, 7(4), 778793. https://doi.org/10.1177/2167702619827018CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schemer, C., Masur, P. K., Geiß, S., Müller, P., & Schäfer, S. (2020). The impact of internet and social media use on well-being: A longitudinal analysis of adolescents across nine years. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 26(1), 121. https://doi.org/10.1093/jcmc/zmaa014CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schleider, J. L., & Weisz, J. R. (2017). Little treatments, promising effects? Meta-analysis of single-session interventions for youth psychiatric problems. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 56(2), 107115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaac.2016.11.007CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schroeder, J., Wilkes, C., Rowan, K., et al. (2018). Pocket skills: A conversational mobile web app to support dialectical behavioral therapy. Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems – CHI’18, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1145/3173574.3173972CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sedgwick, R., Epstein, S., Dutta, R., & Ougrin, D. (2019). Social media, internet use and suicide attempts in adolescents. Current Opinion in Psychiatry, 32(6), 534541. https://doi.org/10.1097/YCO.0000000000000547CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Seko, Y., Kidd, S. A., Wiljer, D., & McKenzie, K. J. (2015). On the creative edge: Exploring motivations for creating non-suicidal self-injury content online. Qualitative Health Research, 25(10), 13341346. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732315570134CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Seko, Y., & Lewis, S. P. (2018). The self – harmed, visualized, and reblogged: Remaking of self-injury narratives on Tumblr. New Media & Society, 20(1), 180198. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444816660783CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Silenzio, V. M. B., Duberstein, P. R., Tang, W., Lu, N., Tu, X., & Homan, C. M. (2009). Connecting the invisible dots: Reaching lesbian, gay, and bisexual adolescents and young adults at risk for suicide through online social networks. Social Science & Medicine, 69(3), 469474. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2009.05.029CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smithson, J., Sharkey, S., Hewis, E., et al. (2011). Problem presentation and responses on an online forum for young people who self-harm. Discourse Studies, 13(4), 487501. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445611403356CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steinberg, L. (2010). A dual systems model of adolescent risk-taking. Developmental Psychobiology, 52(3), 216224. https://doi.org/10.1002/dev.20445CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sumner, S. A., Galik, S., Mathieu, J., et al. (2019). Temporal and geographic patterns of social media posts about an emerging suicide game. Journal of Adolescent Health, 65(1), 94100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2018.12.025CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Swannell, S. V., Martin, G. E., Page, A., Hasking, P., & St John, N. J. (2014). Prevalence of nonsuicidal self-injury in nonclinical samples: Systematic review, meta-analysis and meta-regression. Suicide & Life-Threatening Behavior, 44(3), 273303. https://doi.org/10.1111/sltb.12070CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Swedo, E. A., Beauregard, J. L., de Fijter, S., et al. (2020). Associations between social media and suicidal behaviors during a youth suicide cluster in Ohio. Journal of Adolescent Health, 68(2), 308316. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2020.05.049CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Thoits, P. A. (2011). Mechanisms linking social ties and support to physical and mental health. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 52(2), 145161. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022146510395592CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Thorn, P., Hill, N. T., Lamblin, M., et al. (2020). Developing a suicide prevention social media campaign with young people (the #chatsafe project): Co-design approach. JMIR Mental Health, 7(5), e17520. https://doi.org/10.2196/17520CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Twenge, J. M., & Campbell, W. K. (2019). Media use is linked to lower psychological well-being: Evidence from three datasets. Psychiatric Quarterly, 90(2), 311331. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11126–019-09630-7CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
US Senate. (2000). Joint statement on the impact of entertainment violence on children. http://www.senate.gov/~brownback/violencel.pdfGoogle Scholar
Valkenburg, P. M. (2017). Understanding self-effects in social media. Human Communication Research, 43(4), 477490. https://doi.org/10.1111/hcre.12113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Verduyn, P., Ybarra, O., Résibois, M., Jonides, J., & Kross, E. (2017). A critical review: Do social network sites enhance or undermine subjective well-being? Social Issues and Policy Review, 11(1), 274302. https://doi.org/10.1111/sipr.12033CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Verkooijen, S., de Vos, N., Bakker-Camu, B. J. W., et al. (2018). Sleep disturbances, psychosocial difficulties, and health risk behavior in 16,781 Dutch adolescents. Academic Pediatrics, 18(6), 655661. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acap.2018.03.003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walsh, C. G., Ribeiro, J. D., & Franklin, J. C. (2017). Predicting risk of suicide attempts over time through machine learning. Clinical Psychological Science, 5(3), 457469. https://doi.org/10.1177/2167702617691560CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, J.-L., Wang, H.-Z., Gaskin, J., & Hawk, S. (2017). The mediating roles of upward social comparison and self-esteem and the moderating role of social comparison orientation in the association between social networking site usage and subjective well-being. Frontiers in Psychology, 8. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00771Google ScholarPubMed
Wartella, E., & Reeves, B. (1985). Historical trends in research on children and the media: 1900–1960. Journal of Communication, 35(2), 118133. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.1985.tb02238.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Westers, N. J., Lewis, S. P., Whitlock, J., et al. (2020). Media guidelines for the responsible reporting and depicting of non-suicidal self-injury. The British Journal of Psychiatry, 219(2), 14. https://doi.org/10.1192/bjp.2020.191Google Scholar
Whitlock, J., Lader, W., & Conterio, K. (2007). The internet and self-injury: What psychotherapists should know. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 63(11), 11351143. https://doi.org/10.1002/jclp.20420CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Whitlock, J., & Masur, P. (2019). Disentangling the association of screen time with developmental outcomes and well-being: Problems, challenges, and opportunities. JAMA Pediatrics, 173(11), 10211022. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamapediatrics.2019.3191CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Whitlock, J. L., Powers, J. L., & Eckenrode, J. (2006). The virtual cutting edge: The internet and adolescent self-injury. Developmental Psychology, 42(3), 407417. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.42.3.407CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×