Exploring how social networking sites impact youth with anxiety: A qualitative study of Facebook stressors among adolescents with an anxiety disorder diagnosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Adolescents with anxiety disorders often have low self-esteem, poor problem-solving, and a strong desire to be accepted. Combined, these qualities may predispose them to experience unique stressors when using social network sites (SNSs). Focus groups of adolescent Facebook users who have a primary anxiety diagnosis uncovered narratives describing individuals’ perspectives related to how Facebook can influence their anxiety. Qualitative analysis revealed six themes related to Facebook stressors: seeking approval, fearing judgment, escalating interpersonal issues, wanting privacy, negotiating self and social identity, and connecting & disconnecting. Many participants reported a fear of receiving negative comments online and discussed strategies to avoid them, such as posting less content (i.e., comments, photographs) than their peers. Some participants described feeling positive emotions when they received a “like” from a SNS user, however, they also tended to describe these positive emotions as “false”, “unreal” and “fleeting.” Notably, many participants reported comparing themselves to peers on Facebook, which increased feelings of anxiety, as well as compulsive checking behaviours, such as monitoring posted content and friend lists. These findings were coupled with discussions surrounding rumination, privacy, and elevated personal conflict due in part to the public nature of Facebook. The narratives from our exploratory study suggest there are various mechanisms through which Facebook may exacerbate anxiety in adolescents who have pre-existing anxiety disorders and thereby may make them vulnerable to negative online experiences. Understanding the underlying themes of this phenomenon can aid clinicians, school staff, and parents in identifying potential stressors for anxious adolescents who use SNSs, and provide strategies around social media use for this specific patient population. Future quantitative studies are recommended to further understand the relationships between Facebook stressors and expressed anxiety in clinical populations.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".