Journal of Child and Adolescent Behavior
Open Access

Social media; Child behaviour

Introduction

In our global digital world, social connections are ingrained in both our actual physical environment and the virtual life we share on social media. The term “social media” refers to a group of Internetand mobile-based applications that enable users to receive information and create and share user-generated content. It is possible to interact with real-life friends, meet new people from all over the world, connect with one’s favourite celebrities, and maintain relationships both online and offline by creating a virtual profile. With the ability to connect to the Internet at any time and from any location, social media usage has skyrocketed since 2004. The user can select the platform that best serves the communication’s purpose from a wide range of applications based on the nature of the content. For instance, Facebook encourages interaction through services like sharing pictures, videos, status updates, and joining groups with particular interests and is more focused on real-life friends and family. Twitter and other social media platforms, which are also referred to as “micro blogs,” are characterized by short communication. In addition to the option to like, comment on, and re-post preferred content, photo- and video-sharing services are offered by other applications like Snap chat and Instagram. The most popular social networks are depicted in order of global active user count [1-5].

Although social media is used by people of all ages and cultures, online communication is especially important for children and teenagers because it provides them with “a window into the secret world of adolescent peer culture, even as it offers young people a new screen for the projection of adolescent developmental issues. While social media has a lot of potential for personality self-expression and keeping in touch with friends, some studies have also highlighted the risk of negative effects from using social media platforms too much. The concept of digital identity, the blurring of the lines between offline and virtual life, and online social interaction has emerged as topics of great interest in the fields of psychology and mental health [6].

Discussion

Because it is frequently confused with a description of addictive behavior related to general Internet services that has been included in the 5th edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, researchers in the field are looking for a consensus definition of the term “problematic social media use.” Problematic social media use, according to a biopsychosocial framework, involves a set of changes that affect biological functions (such as the regulation of neurotransmitters and the circadian rhythm); a decrease in perceived quality of life as a result of cognitive, psychological, and affective mechanisms (such as attention, salience, mood swings, and anxiety) and aspects of the social sphere (such as social desirability, popularity, and conflicts). The self-esteem and general well-being of an individual can be affected by feedback from members of the virtual social community. A problematic use can also have an impact on other aspects of a teenager’s day-to-day life, such as academic performance, difficulties with time management, procrastination, distraction, and insomnia. Negative outcomes may occur in severe cases and, if left unchecked, can have a significant impact, increasing the likelihood of psychiatric disorders. Because the Internet and social media are relatively new, it is more likely that people will experience negative or excessive effects during more sensitive time periods, like childhood and adolescence. According to a survey that was carried out in the United States in 2018 (for the full report, see Teens, Social Media & Technology 2018, for more information), 45 percent of the teenagers who were surveyed stated that they are almost always online. There were no differences found between the sexes, ethnicities, family incomes, or parental levels of education [7].

Understanding the effects of online social relationships on mental health and interpersonal functioning during developmental stages is essential due to constant exposure to the virtual environment. The point of our survey, contrasted with other late distributions, is to give a definite outline of not just the impact of web-based entertainment overall yet in addition of the relationship between unambiguous stages and psychopathology. We believe this is an important point because each social media platform has its own distinct features that influence the preferences of young users. As a result, it is critical to differentiate between them. In addition, despite the social connotation that primarily describes and defines these kinds of websites, social media usage is frequently included in the larger category of Internet usage. In addition, the included articles were categorized according to specific disorders that can emerge during childhood and adolescence. These included eating disorders (EDs) and addictive behaviors toward substances, both of which begin to manifest during adolescence. In point of fact, the greater plasticity of the central nervous system, the numerous biological changes, and the formation of psychological mechanisms that drive social behaviors make developmental stages more susceptible to environmental insults. Because of the distinctions that characterize every stage, one of the fundamental reasons for the current survey is to give proof connected with designated webbased entertainment administrations, rather than a more broad conversation via virtual entertainment. In point of fact, we maintain that the various communication mediums—text, video, and picture, for example—may have different ways of expressing the multifaceted manifestation of various psychological issues. We will also provide an overview of the neuroscientific and gene-by-environment contribution to the interaction between social media and the development of psychiatric disorders in adolescence because social behavior and the risk of psychiatric disorders are linked to the activity of specific brain regions and biological features. Furthermore, since we are addressing the outcomes of problematic social media usage (PSMU) from a bio psychosocial perspective, we will also provide an overview of the relationship between the two [8-10].

Conclusion

Depression is a common mood disorder characterized by persistent sadness, a loss of interest in activities that a person typically enjoys, and an inability to perform daily activities. Interpersonal models of depression in developmental ages emphasize the cyclical associations between social experiences and depressive symptoms in relation to childhood and adolescence. As the influence of peer relationships can affect a person’s identity and psychological well-being, new schemes in the interpersonal environment with more articulated, frequent, and unsupervised contacts may represent a further complication. As the prevalence of depression and internalizing symptoms among young people has increased over the past ten years, it is essential to investigate the relationship between social media use and depression and internalizing symptoms.

1. Jang KL, Livesley WJ, Angleitner A, Reimann R, Vernon PA (2002) Genetic and environmental influences on the covariance of facets defining the domains of the five-factor model of personality. Pers Individ Dif 33: 83-101.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref                         

2. DeYoung CG, Quilty LC, Peterson JB (2007) Between facets and domain: 10 aspects of the Big Five. J Pers Soc Psychol 93: 880-896.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

3. Gosling SD, Vazire S, Srivastava S, John OP (2004) Should we trust web-based studies? A comparative analysis of six preconceptions about internet questionnaires. Am Psychol 59: 93-104.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

4. Hazan C, Shaver P (1987) Romantic love conceptualized as an attachment process. J Pers Soc Psychol 52: 511-524.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

5. Jang KL, Livesley WJ, Angleitner A, Reimann R, Vernon PA (2002) Genetic and environmental influences on the covariance of facets defining the domains of the five-factor model of personality. Pers Individ Dif 33: 83-101.

Google Scholar, Crossref

6. Fleeson W, Gallagher P (2009) The implications of Big Five standing for the distribution of trait manifestation in behavior: fifteen experience-sampling studies and a meta-analysis. J Pers Soc Psychol 97: 1097-1114.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

7. Costa PTJr, Terracciano A, McCrae RR (2001) Gender differences in personality traits across cultures: robust and surprising findings. J Pers Soc Psychol 81: 322-331.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

8. Hyde JS (2005) The gender similarities hypothesis. Am Psychol 60: 581-592.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

9. John OP, Naumann LP, Soto CJ (2008) Paradigm shift to the integrative Big Five trait taxonomy: history, measurement, and conceptual issue. Handbook of Personality Psychology: Theory and Research 3: 114-158.

Indexed at, Google Scholar  

10. Soto CJ, John OP, Gosling SD, Potter J (2011) Age differences in personality traits from 10 to 65: Big Five domains and facets in a large cross-sectional sample. J Pers Soc Psychol 100: 330-348.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref