Teens without social media are less stressed and better rested, according to study
The UK is to have a ban in place on certain social media for under-16s by the spring, after an announcement by Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer last month
Teens without social media are less stressed and sleep better, according to a new study.
Listen to this article
Research found that across 300 families across the UK, sleep, focus in school, and quality time spent with family and friends improved.
Three types of restrictions at home were implemented for a month as part of the study: a curfew on social media between 9pm and 7am; removing all social media apps; and a 15-minute limit per app per day.
Stronger social media restrictions improved in-person socialising and family time in the evenings, according to the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology, which commissioned the study by the market research group Savanta.
Participants aged between 13 and 17 had their screen time reduced the most, leading to improved concentration.
The 15-minute daily app limit had the weakest level of compliance and was reported by many to be difficult to sustain.
Young people said the cap made it hard to use the platform in any meaningful way, and some eventually switched to different devices or platforms instead of reducing their overall screen time.
The UK is to have a ban in place on certain social media for under-16s by the spring, after an announcement by Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer last month.
Researchers said in their report published on Tuesday: “Lasting impact appeared to be more likely where restrictions were supported by education and practical guidance and framed as a collective norm rather than an individual imposition.”
Many young people who took part reported feeling isolated and disconnected from friendships and plans.
Snapchat was given as an example of an app that is “central to peer communication, particularly through group chats”.
In the early stages of the intervention, participants experienced “irritability, mood fluctuations, and increased household tension, with some parents likening the initial adjustment period to withdrawal”, the report said.
“Some participants described the removal of social media as a source of relaxation or emotional regulation, while others said they responded by intensifying use before cut-off points or shifting their attention to other screens.”
However, friendships started to be maintained through adapting to texting, calling and meeting in person instead, it said.
The apps that were restricted were: Snapchat, TikTok, Instagram, Facebook, X and Reddit. Optional extras, if the parents wished, were Twitch, Kick and Discord. No interventions were used on WhatsApp, YouTube, iMessage, Google Classroom and Teams.
Researchers conducted 309 in-depth interviews with young people and their parents or carers before the restrictions were put in place from May 2 to 31 this year, through the half-term break. They were interviewed again in June.
Completing the first interview earned the young people £30, the second interview £50, and there was a £20 bonus for those who complied with the restrictions.
Technology Secretary Liz Kendall said in a statement: “These findings show what parents have been telling us all along: when children spend less time on social media, the benefits are real.
“They sleep better, focus more and spend more time with friends and family.
“It’s why we’re taking the strongest action in the world to support a generation that is healthier, happier and more connected to the people and experiences that matter most – not just to their screens.
“We said we would give children their childhood back, and we are delivering on that promise.”
Different research has found that eight in 10 Australian young people reported still accessing social media in the months after their world-first ban on under-16s using the sites took effect.
The findings from the small study suggested “insufficient evidence of any substantive early effects”, the University of Newcastle, Australia, researchers said.
The study, published by The BMJ at the end of June, acknowledged the ban is still relatively new and suggested it could be a decade before its full impact is known.
Ms Kendall previously acknowledged the UK ban would not be a “complete silver bullet”, saying it was about providing clarity for parents and children and resetting expectations and social norms when it comes to young people’s use of social media.
She has also said that the UK’s use of “highly effective age-verification measures” would make the ban stronger than the Australian system.
The young people in her department’s study were restricted from using the apps before the Prime Minister announced the ban.