MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391528880 · doi:10.1089/cyber.2023.0451

Social Media and Self-Concept Among Postsecondary Students: A Scoping Review

2024· review· en· W4391528880 on OpenAlexaff
Amna Rafiq, Brooke Linden

Bibliographic record

VenueCyberpsychology Behavior and Social Networking · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicImpact of Technology on Adolescents
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSocial connectednessPsychologyTheme (computing)StressorMental healthSocial mediaPsychological interventionSocial psychologyPopulationPedagogySociologyClinical psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The vast majority of college-aged students use social networking sites (SNS) to foster connectedness and enable networking. In addition, SNS allow individuals to control their online self-presentation. This may lead to incongruence between students' actual selves and their curated online selves, thereby damaging one's self-perception by increasing social comparison orientation. The goal of this article was to investigate the relationship between SNS use and self-concept that has not yet been explored in depth among the postsecondary population. Utilizing Arksey and O'Malley's methodological framework, a scoping review of the published literature was conducted. A total of 41 articles were included in the review. Three overarching themes were extracted from the findings. The first theme found that consistent exposure to the thin ideal and fitspiration posts across various SNS were linked to increased body dissatisfaction. The second theme found that engaging in online academic or ability-based comparisons resulted in a worsened mental state among postsecondary students. The third theme found that one's SNS followers or the number of "likes" received have mixed effects on student self-concept. Through gaining an improved understanding of the SNS stressors that contribute to students' mental health from this review, postsecondary institutions can implement more targeted interventions to bolster student wellbeing.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.977
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.064
GPT teacher head0.450
Teacher spread0.386 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations8
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCyberpsychology Behavior and Social NetworkingSame topicImpact of Technology on AdolescentsFrench-language works237,207