Bergen social media engagement and experiences scale (Be-SMEE): A short questionnaire covering important aspects of social media use among adolescents. Development and association with symptoms of depression and anxiety.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<ns3:p>Background There is a need to go beyond mere measures of time used on social media. Existing tools inadequately capture the multidimensional nature of social media use, leaving a gap for concise yet comprehensive assessment tools. Aims This study aimed to develop a short questionnaire addressing three critical dimensions of social media use: self-presentation, negative experiences, and problematic use. The association between these dimensions and symptoms of anxiety and depression was also investigated. Methods This study uses two independent datasets of adolescents aged 16+ years in Norway. Using Ant Colony Optimization (ACO) analyses, a pool of 31 social media items was analyzed to investigate factor structure and associations with symptoms of anxiety and depression. For model development, the “LifeOnSoMe”-study was employed (>3,500 participants), and data from a pilot study (~500 participants) was used for external validation. Results Based on ACO-analyses, a 20-item six-factor model was identified, encompassing social comparison and self-presentation (five items), and three items for each of the following domains: negative experiences (Negative acts and Unwanted attention from others) and problematic use (Subjective overuse, Social obligations, and Source of concern). Confirmatory factor analyses demonstrated very good to excellent fit in both datasets, and consistent associations between the six different domains and symptoms of anxiety and depression. Discussion The suggested 20-item questionnaire provides a robust and succinct tool for evaluating social media’s impact on mental health, offering substantial explanatory power for variance in anxiety and depression symptoms. This can serve as meaningful tool for assessing the potential impact of social media use for mental health and related outcomes.</ns3:p>
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".