Type: Literature Review Chapter | Subject: Psychology | Level: Undergraduate | Word Count: ~2500 words
This model chapter was produced by an Essays UK specialist as reference material for learning purposes only. For support in this field, see our psychology dissertation specialists.
This is Chapter 2 of an undergraduate psychology dissertation. Produce a literature review chapter that critically reviews the research on adolescent social media use and self-esteem, organised thematically, and identify the gap your planned study will address.
Note: this is a single chapter presented as reference material; the full dissertation would include the remaining chapters.
Adolescent social media use has become one of the most extensively studied, and most publicly debated, topics in contemporary developmental psychology, with particular concern focused on its relationship to self-esteem during a developmental period already characterised by heightened sensitivity to peer evaluation. This chapter reviews the psychological literature on social media use and self-esteem in adolescence, in order to situate the empirical study reported later in this dissertation within the existing evidence base. Self-esteem is defined here, following the widely used Rosenberg (1965) conceptualisation, as an individual’s global evaluation of their own worth, distinct from more specific constructs such as body satisfaction or academic self-concept, although the review draws on research addressing these related constructs where they inform the broader picture. The importance of understanding this relationship extends beyond academic interest, since self-esteem during adolescence has been linked to a range of downstream outcomes, including academic engagement, the quality of peer relationships and vulnerability to depressive symptoms in early adulthood, which is part of why the topic has attracted such sustained empirical and public attention.
The chapter is organised thematically. It begins by outlining the two dominant theoretical perspectives used to explain a possible link between social media use and self-esteem: social comparison theory and the displacement hypothesis. It then reviews evidence distinguishing passive from active social media use, before considering individual differences in gender and age that appear to moderate the relationship. The chapter then critically examines methodological limitations that affect confidence in the existing evidence base, and concludes by identifying the specific gap this dissertation’s own study addresses.
The dominant theoretical explanation for a link between social media use and self-esteem draws on Festinger’s (1954) social comparison theory, which proposes that individuals evaluate their own abilities and opinions by comparing themselves with others, and that upward comparisons, comparing oneself to someone perceived as superior, tend to lower self-evaluation while downward comparisons tend to raise it. Social media platforms are theorised to create conditions that are unusually conducive to upward comparison: profiles and images are typically curated and idealised, comparison targets are numerous and constantly available, and the visible metrics of likes and followers provide a quantified, public measure of social approval that has no direct equivalent in offline social comparison (Vogel et al., 2014).
Vogel et al. (2014) tested this account directly across two studies, finding that greater Facebook use was associated with lower self-esteem, and that this relationship was mediated by increased social comparison; participants who reported making more frequent upward comparisons on the platform showed correspondingly lower self-esteem scores. Fardouly and Vartanian (2015, 2016) extended this comparison-based account specifically to appearance-related self-esteem and body image, finding that image-based platforms in particular prompt appearance comparisons that partially explain the association between social media use and body dissatisfaction, a finding with clear relevance to adolescent populations, who report heavier use of image-centric platforms than older adult samples.
A competing, though not necessarily incompatible, account is the displacement hypothesis, which proposes that time spent on social media displaces time that would otherwise be spent on activities more reliably associated with well-being, such as face-to-face social interaction, physical activity or sleep, with the resulting effects on self-esteem operating indirectly through these displaced activities rather than through social comparison as such. Twenge and Campbell (2019) draw on large cross-sectional datasets to argue for a displacement-consistent pattern, in which the heaviest users of digital media report both lower well-being and, separately, less time spent on activities such as in-person socialising and exercise, though as discussed in the methodological limitations section below, cross-sectional designs of this kind cannot establish the direction of this relationship with confidence.
The two accounts need not be treated as mutually exclusive, and indeed may operate in combination: time displaced from face-to-face interaction could itself increase adolescents’ reliance on social media as a primary source of social feedback, thereby intensifying comparison-driven processes rather than operating as a wholly independent pathway. Few studies to date have attempted to model displacement and comparison mechanisms simultaneously within a single design, and this dissertation’s own study, discussed in the following chapter, does not attempt to adjudicate between the two accounts directly, though the use-type-differentiated measure adopted is more closely aligned with the comparison-based tradition reviewed above.
A methodologically important refinement to the comparison-based account distinguishes between passive social media use, browsing and viewing content without direct interaction, and active use, posting, commenting and direct messaging. Verduyn et al. (2015), using experience-sampling and experimental methods, found that passive Facebook use reduced momentary affective well-being, an effect mediated by increased envy, whereas active use showed no comparable negative effect and in some analyses was weakly positively associated with well-being, plausibly because active use is more likely to generate genuine social connection and social support rather than purely comparative, one-directional consumption of others’ curated content.
Verduyn et al.’s (2017) subsequent critical review situates this passive/active distinction within a broader synthesis of the well-being literature, concluding that the association between social media use and well-being outcomes, including self-esteem, depends heavily on how use is operationalised, and that studies measuring only total time spent on a platform, without distinguishing use type, are likely to understate genuine effects by averaging together a harmful passive-use pathway and a neutral or mildly beneficial active-use pathway. This distinction has direct implications for the present study’s own methodological design, discussed in the following chapter, since a self-esteem measure correlated only against total screen time risks similarly obscuring the more specific comparison-driven mechanism the theoretical literature above identifies as the primary driver of any negative effect.
Appel, Gerlach and Crusius (2016) extend this account by proposing envy as a specific emotional mechanism linking passive, comparison-heavy use to lower well-being, arguing that envy generated by viewing others’ idealised self-presentations, sometimes termed the ‘comparison trap’, operates as a more proximal predictor of reduced self-esteem than social media use itself, a refinement consistent with, and building directly on, the social comparison account outlined in the previous section.
A further methodological complication is that the passive/active distinction, although conceptually clear, is not always straightforward to operationalise consistently across studies. Browsing a friend’s photo album while simultaneously typing a comment, for example, combines elements of both categories within a single episode of use, and self-report measures asking participants to estimate the proportion of time spent in each mode are subject to the same recall limitations discussed later in this chapter. Despite this measurement challenge, the weight of evidence reviewed above supports treating passive, comparison-heavy use as the more consistently harmful pattern, a conclusion that has informed the use-type-differentiated measure adopted in the present study.
The strength, and in some studies the direction, of the relationship between social media use and self-esteem is not uniform across adolescent sub-groups. A consistent pattern across several studies, including Fardouly and Vartanian (2016), is that appearance-related comparison effects are stronger among adolescent girls than boys, plausibly reflecting differential sociocultural pressure around physical appearance, although Twenge and Campbell (2019) note that associations between overall digital media use and lower well-being, while somewhat stronger for girls in several datasets, are present across genders and should not be treated as a girls-only concern.
Age and developmental stage represent a further moderating factor. Orben and Przybylski’s (2019) large-scale specification-curve analysis, applying thousands of alternative analytic specifications to several nationally representative datasets, found that the average association between digital technology use and adolescent well-being was small in absolute terms across the sample as a whole, comparable in magnitude to less-discussed factors such as regular breakfast consumption, but the authors explicitly caution that small average effects across a broad adolescent age range may mask larger effects concentrated within particular developmental windows, such as early-to-mid adolescence, when identity formation and sensitivity to peer evaluation are theorised to be heightened.
Pre-existing individual differences in trait self-esteem and social comparison orientation also appear to moderate outcomes: several studies suggest that adolescents who already report lower baseline self-esteem or a stronger dispositional tendency to compare themselves with others are more strongly affected by social-media-based comparison than peers with higher baseline self-esteem, consistent with a vulnerability, rather than a uniform-exposure, model of social media’s effects (Valkenburg, Meier and Beyens, 2022). This vulnerability-based framing has informed a shift in recent reviews away from asking whether social media affects self-esteem in general, towards asking for whom, under what conditions, and through which specific use patterns it does so.
Directionality within this vulnerability framework has begun to receive more direct empirical attention from longitudinal designs. Steinsbekk et al.’s (2021) three-wave prospective cohort study followed a community sample from childhood into early adolescence and found evidence of a modest reciprocal pattern, in which lower appearance-based self-esteem predicted subsequent increases in social media use, which in turn predicted further, smaller declines in self-esteem over time, consistent with a reinforcing spiral rather than a single, one-directional causal pathway. Findings of this kind lend some support to the vulnerability-based framing outlined above while also underlining that a fully unidirectional model, in either direction, is likely to oversimplify the relationship this dissertation’s own study seeks to investigate.
Socioeconomic and cultural background represent a further, comparatively under-researched, moderating factor. Most of the large-scale datasets underpinning the studies reviewed above, including Orben and Przybylski’s (2019) specification-curve analysis, draw predominantly on samples from the United States and other Western, English-speaking countries, and relatively few studies have examined whether the comparison mechanisms identified in this chapter operate similarly across different socioeconomic groups within a single national context such as the UK, where access to particular devices, platforms and levels of unsupervised device use may itself vary systematically by household income and parental digital literacy, a gap this dissertation’s own UK-based sample is partly positioned to speak to.
The comparison-based account outlined above assumes a broadly similar mechanism across social media platforms, yet several studies suggest that the strength of any association with self-esteem varies by platform and content type. Image-centric platforms, on which appearance-focused, heavily edited or filtered content predominates, are consistently associated with stronger appearance-comparison effects than predominantly text-based platforms, consistent with Fardouly and Vartanian’s (2016) argument that the visual, appearance-focused nature of image-sharing platforms makes appearance comparison a more salient and more frequent activity than on platforms built primarily around text-based status updates or news sharing.
Within image-centric platforms, several qualitative and mixed-methods studies distinguish further between ‘idealised’ content, professionally produced or heavily edited images typical of influencer and celebrity accounts, and more everyday, unfiltered content shared by peers, suggesting that comparison against idealised, difficult-to-attain content may carry a stronger negative association with self-esteem than comparison against realistic peer content, though this platform- and content-type-specific literature remains considerably smaller in volume than the broader social-comparison evidence reviewed in the preceding sections, and few studies have examined it specifically within a UK adolescent sample.
This platform- and content-specificity has a direct practical implication for the present study’s own instrument design, discussed in the following methodology chapter: a measure that treats ‘social media use’ as a single undifferentiated construct, without capturing which platforms and content types a given adolescent engages with most frequently, risks obscuring meaningful variation identified in this more fine-grained strand of the literature.
Three methodological limitations affect confidence in the existing evidence base and are directly relevant to the design of the present study. First, the great majority of studies reviewed above are cross-sectional, meaning that a correlation between social media use and self-esteem cannot establish causal direction; lower self-esteem may lead adolescents towards heavier or more comparison-focused social media use just as plausibly as heavy use may lower self-esteem, and the two directions are not mutually exclusive.
Second, self-report measures of both social media use and self-esteem, while practical for large-sample survey research, are subject to recall inaccuracy and social-desirability bias; Orben and Przybylski (2019) note that self-reported screen-time estimates correlate only moderately with objectively logged device data, raising the possibility that some of the small effects reported in self-report-based studies partly reflect measurement error rather than the absence of a genuine underlying relationship. Third, Meier and Reinecke’s (2021) meta-review highlights considerable inconsistency in how ‘social media use’ itself is operationalised across studies, ranging from total daily minutes to platform-specific frequency counts to single-item self-ratings, which limits the comparability of effect sizes reported across the literature reviewed in this chapter and complicates efforts to synthesise a single, precise estimate of the relationship’s magnitude.
A more recent methodological development offers a partial response to the cross-sectional limitation described above. Beyens et al.’s (2020) intensive longitudinal study used repeated within-person experience-sampling across six weeks to track fluctuations in individual adolescents’ social media use and well-being over short time intervals, rather than relying on a single between-person snapshot. Their findings indicated that effects varied considerably from one adolescent to the next, with the majority of participants showing no reliable within-person association between use and well-being and a smaller sub-group showing a more pronounced negative association, a pattern that reinforces the vulnerability-based framing discussed above but also demonstrates that idiographic, person-specific designs of this kind remain comparatively rare relative to the cross-sectional, group-level studies that dominate the evidence base reviewed in this chapter.
A fourth, more general limitation is publication and reporting bias: studies finding a statistically significant association between social media use and lower self-esteem may be more likely to be published, or more likely to attract media and policy attention once published, than studies finding no association, a pattern that several of the reviews cited above explicitly caution readers to bear in mind when weighing the overall balance of evidence summarised in this chapter.
This review has identified social comparison theory, refined by the passive/active use distinction, as the most consistently supported explanation for a negative association between social media use and adolescent self-esteem, with envy identified as a plausible proximal mechanism and gender, age and pre-existing trait self-esteem identified as significant moderators of effect size. The overall pattern across the literature is one of small average effects that are nonetheless clinically and developmentally meaningful for identifiable vulnerable sub-groups, rather than either a uniformly large effect across all adolescents or no effect at all. The reinforcing-spiral evidence discussed above further suggests that any future intervention targeting adolescent self-esteem via social media use is unlikely to succeed through a single-direction approach, such as simply reducing screen time, without also addressing the pre-existing vulnerability factors that appear to draw certain adolescents towards more comparison-heavy patterns of use in the first place.
Two specific gaps justify the empirical study that follows. First, as the methodological limitations discussed above indicate, the evidence base remains dominated by cross-sectional, self-report designs that cannot establish the direction of the comparison-self-esteem relationship with confidence, and comparatively few UK-based studies have combined validated self-esteem measures with platform-specific, passive-versus-active use measures in the same design. Second, despite the vulnerability-based framing that has emerged in recent reviews (Valkenburg, Meier and Beyens, 2022), relatively little research has examined whether pre-existing trait self-esteem itself predicts which adolescents gravitate towards more comparison-heavy patterns of use, an important reverse-causal possibility that correlational designs to date have been unable to rule out.
The present study addresses these gaps through a study combining a validated adolescent self-esteem measure with a use-type-differentiated social media questionnaire, administered to a sample of UK secondary-school pupils, described in full in the following methodology chapter.
Need a Model Dissertation Chapter Written to Your Exact Brief?
Our 350+ UK-qualified writers deliver referenced model documents from £15 per 250 words, with free plagiarism and AI-detection reports.
You May Also Like
All work is written by human writers. 100% AI free, guaranteed.
100% money back guarantee if you find plagiarism in our work.
COMPANY DETAILS
