'Adolescence'
What's social media got to do with it?
The scapegoat is seemingly the digital world, and more specifically the continuous access to unregulated content that propagates misconstrued truths, unhealthy social comparisons, and unhealthy identity development at a time of peak susceptibility. For most Adolescence is a hard watch, and perhaps even more so for parents of teenagers. As a mother of a kindergarten boy, even my anxiety was ignited.
A core topic of conversation despite the explicit narrative in the show, is the insidious and vast dissemination of toxic communication. Tanner and colleagues (2025) describe toxic communication as“the deliberate framing and intensification of gender relations through the lens of male control and domination, alongside the denigration, devaluation, or defamation of feminine and non-binary identities associated with hegemonic masculinity”. That “manifests in a spectrum ranging from subtle humour to explicit violence. This diversity of content potentially appeals to a wide range of the population across varying tastes, ages, and attitudes toward gender while perpetuating narratives that reflect and reinforce entrenched patterns of male dominance” .An issue that continues to be debated within our parent and school communities.
Nevertheless, the fear of our teen’s susceptibility to external influences is not new, and certainly not specific to this generation. Caregivers will inherently see risk and danger in things that were not part of our own development, or that feel outside our control of influence. Nevertheless neurologically, we know the adolescent brain is underdeveloped and typically influenced by social status above most things. Perhaps then this fear is not wholly misplaced.
What does research tell us?
During the 21st century, violent video games were a perceived threat to the development of our teens. Early research of this era concluded a causal relationship between violent video games and aggressive behaviour (Anderson & Bushman, 2001; Sherry, 2001). More recently a Task Force on Violent Media established by the American Psychological Association (APA) in 2013, concluded watching aggressive video games was positively associated with desensitisation (reduced physiological response violence) and aggressive attitudes. Politicians, legislators, and parents understandably react to shield their children from this perceived threat. Yet, policies are poorly enacted upon, and many legislative attempts failed due to lacking evidence.
In fact, this same Task Force failed to find a relationship between aggressive media and violent crimes or aggressive behaviour. Moreover, the direct prediction of violent media on aggressive behaviours remains unsupported (Ferguson et al., 2020). Additionally, associations between violent game exposure and prosocial behaviour, academic performance, depressive symptoms, and attention deficit symptoms are deemed negligible (Ferguson, 2015; Nikkelen et al., 2014). Despite our intuition, most of the minuscule associations reported have since been debunked by updated and robust statistical analysis (Ferguson et al.,2015; Hilgard et al., 2019; Kühn et al., 2018).
An interesting observation is the relationship between violent exposure and violent behaviour is better supported amongst individuals in juvenile detention centres (DeLisi et al., 2013), yet when statistical analysis controls for gender, age, family environment, and mental health the relationship disappears (Gunter & Daly, 2012). This indicates that while there may be a small association between violent imagery and behaviour, other factors have significantly greater effect on behaviour.
Similarly, research on the relationship between time spent on the internet and depression, and time spent on the internet and toxic masculinity have been weak. Arguably, the online world is not an intrinsically bad place.
Elizabeth Morgan, assistant professor of Psychology at Springfield College said the “primary motivation [of teenagers] is to maintain connections, and establish new connections, with other people,", especially important for individuals with niche interests. In fact, studies have found that engagement with social media can boost happiness, and connection (Bednar, 2016).
However, the opposite occurs when used excessively and especially when social media is used to disproportionally inform their identity. That is, the valance of social media is a risk factor for negative outcomes. Supported by the relationship between negative social media interactions, toxic masculinity, and depression. Congruently, the coined term ‘Facebook intrusion’ operationalized as “problematic engagement in Facebook that disrupted daily activities and relationships” has been positively associated with depression. Interestingly, men were more likely than women to experience Facebook intrusion.
Furthermore, the irrevocability of what happens online means lapses in judgment can wreak havoc on young lives. Dr. Gwenn O'Keeffe, co-author of a clinical report issued by the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) adds that young people can harm their reputations and safety by posting personal and inappropriate information. Meanwhile, information about sites they visit may be captured and used to target them with advertising. Leading, Dr. Barry Sarvet, chair of Psychiatry at Baystate Medical Center to highlight the need for good judgement when engaging online. Emphasising, "the complexity of people's privacy and understanding the importance of privacy, is something that takes a lot of judgment, which kids don't always have" (Bednar, 2016).
Thus, contrary to earlier reports the time spent on social media is a lessor threat than how and why it is used. For more on this see article.
Courtesy of Parent, M. C., Gobble, T. D., & Rochlen, A. (2019).
It is less about the time spent on social media, and more about how and why it is used.
Identifying the threat.
Knowing this, it is normal for loving parents to experience fear and a need to protect or at least attenuate the risk. This may manifest in micromanaging homework and technology use, punitive punishments, lectures (even kind ones), nagging, and restrictions. None of which are pleasant for the parent, or the child. Yet, perhaps the real threat is not on the dark web.
My own experience working with children and adolescents’ mirrors that of Dr Cam Caswell who commented, teenagers do not experience a sudden change in mood or behaviour in response to social media or gaming content in isolation. Instead, Dr Cam Caswell noted, “the mental health of young people is not being shattered by what they see online – it is being crushed by the real-life pressures they’re carrying every single day.They feel invalidated, misunderstood, and unsupported.”
Big brother is real for our adolescents today, and it is a “brutal but necessary reminder that teens are walking tightropes every day, balancing hormones, peer dynamics, life online, and choices under constant watchful eyes and consequences that can change everything in a heartbeat”.
The adage, genes load the gun and the environment shoots it stands true. It is the unique accumulation of risk factors that increase adolescents’ susceptibility to societal messaging. Cautioning against the oversimplification of factors that contribute to the environment, and the unique interaction for every child. Children most vulnerable are those motivated by an intrinsic need to feel valued juxtaposed with a deep sense of inadequacy and/or lack of control.
Global self-esteem for example has been negatively correlated with cybervictimisation above that of traditional victimisation (Sticca et al., 2013), while others have confirmed a bidirectional relationship between cyber-ostracism and depression (Ding et al., 2025). Life stress is also found to be a predictor of cyber victimisation, mediated by online disinhibition (oversharing personal details about themselves and their emotions they would not do in real life) and maladaptive coping skills for example, avoidance or emotional suppression (Chu et al,. 2023).
Similarly, risk factors of perpetrating cyberbullying include emotion regulation difficulties, moral disengagement (a cognitive process by which a person justifies their own harmful or aggressive behaviour by loosening self-regulatory morals, Bandura, 1986) and online disinhibition (Syrjämäki et al., 2024; Wang et al., 2022). Additionally, personality factors such as lower honesty-humility, higher emotionality, and higher stimulating risk-taking are also predictive of online inhibition. Relatedly, some have postulated the frustration–aggression hypothesis to describe adolescents feeling frustrated at the perception of their personal goals being blocked where in the absence of healthy emotional regulation, this frustration is displaced manifesting into aggressive online behaviour.
Therefore, the most important part is how and what teensfeel andthink when they log on.
Most important is how teens feel when they log on.
Conclusion
The Netflix series Adolescence may be fiction, but its themes are starkly real, casting a glaring spotlight on the pressures, vulnerabilities, and moral complexities that shape the lives of today's youth. While it's tempting to pin blame on technology and social media, the evidence urges us to look deeper—to the emotional and psychological realities our teens are navigating offline as much as online. What they encounter on screens is not always the root of their struggles, but often a mirror reflecting the challenges they already face.
As caregivers, educators, and community members, we must move beyond fear-based responses and toward understanding. Our role is not to shut out the world, but to equip young people with the tools to face it with resilience, empathy, and self-awareness. Connection, not control, is the cornerstone of protection. That means open dialogue, guidance over judgment, and creating environments—both digital and real—that validate rather than diminish.
Ultimately, the question isn’t whether the world is dangerous—but whether our children feel safe, seen, and supported enough to navigate it. And that responsibility, complex as it is, lies with us.
Partnering with School
To come.
Try This!
- Battling the “all my friends are on it” comments. Consider how mature your child is, what their mood is, and what their intention is with their social media use. Discern as best you can how vulnerable they might be and their level of judgment.
- Openly talk to your children and adolescents about their online use and the specific issues that today's online kids face, such as cyberbullying, sexting, and difficulty managing their time;
- Address the 'participation gap' by becoming better-educated about the many technologies children and teens are using.
- Supervise online activities via active participation and communication, not just via monitoring software.
- Place emphasis on citizenship and healthy behaviour.
- Ease up on the pressure and persuade teens that that they don't have to market themselves constantly. Encourage the use of social media for fostering collaborative relationships, rather than competition, aggression, and irresponsible behavior that contributes to anxiety and depression.
- Help your child to be more intentional about their social media use. Create more structure to social media use (i.e. schedules) that prevent children from diving into, say, Snapchat as an emotional regulation strategy.
- Provide healthy emotional coping alternatives.
- Model, instruct, and support alternative emotion regulation strategies. See resources below.
An article on how to support your son develop a positive identity can also be found here.
References
A nightmare... every parent should see this. DRAMA THAT GRIPS TERRIFIES MUMS DADS Teen murder, social media pressure, toxic masculinity.. SARA WALLIS on the unmissable new Netflix show. (2025). Daily Record (Glasgow, Scotland), 20-.
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Bednar, J. (2016). Share Scare: Social Media Poses Both Opportunities and Dangers for Teens. BusinessWest, 32(20), 43-.
Chu, X., Li, Q., Fan, C., & Jia, Y. (2023). Life Stress and Cyberbullying: Examining the Mediating Roles of Expressive Suppression and Online Disinhibition. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 52(8), 1647–1661. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-023-01791-w
Ding, H., Zhao, C., Huang, F., Zhu, L., Wei, H., & Lei, L. (2025). Cyber-Ostracism, Depression, and Adolescents’ Cyberbullying Perpetration: A Cross-Lagged Panel Analysis. Youth & Society, 57(2), 351–373. https://doi.org/10.1177/0044118X241301062
Ferguson, C. J., Copenhaver, A., & Markey, P. (2020). Reexamining the Findings of the American Psychological Association’s 2015 Task Force on Violent Media: A Meta-Analysis. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 15(6), 1423–1443. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691620927666
Ferguson, C. J. (2015). Do Angry Birds Make for Angry Children? A Meta-Analysis of Video Game Influences on Children’s and Adolescents’ Aggression, Mental Health, Prosocial Behavior, and Academic Performance. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 10(5), 646–666. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691615592234
Hilgard J., Engelhardt C. R., Rouder J. N., Segert I. L., Bartholow B. D. (2019). Null effects of game violence, game difficulty, and 2D:4D digit ratio on aggressive behavior. Psychological Science, 30, 606–616. Crossref
Kühn S., Kugler D. T., Schmalen K., Weichenberger M., Witt C., Gallinat J. (2018b). Does playing violent video games cause aggression? A longitudinal intervention study. Molecular Psychiatry, 24, 1220–1234. Crossref
Nikkelen, S. W. C., Valkenburg, P. M., Huizinga, M., & Bushman, B. J. (2014). Media Use and ADHD-Related Behaviors in Children and Adolescents: A Meta-Analysis. Developmental Psychology, 50(9), 2228–2241. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0037318
Parent, M. C., Gobble, T. D., & Rochlen, A. (2019). Social Media Behavior, Toxic Masculinity, and Depression. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 20(3), 277–287. https://doi.org/10.1037/men0000156
Sherry, J. L. (2001). The Effects of Violent Video Games on Aggression: A Meta-Analysis. Human Communication Research, 27(3), 409–431. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.2001.tb00787.x
Sticca, F., Ruggieri, S., Alsaker, F., & Perren, S. (2013). Longitudinal Risk Factors for Cyberbullying in Adolescence. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology, 23(1), 52–67. https://doi.org/10.1002/casp.2136
Syrjämäki, A. H., Ilves, M., Olsson, T., Kiskola, J., Isokoski, P., Rantasila, A., Bente, G., & Surakka, V. (2024). Online disinhibition mediates the relationship between emotion regulation difficulties and uncivil communication. Scientific Reports, 14(1), 30019–11. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-81086-7
Tanner, S., & Gillardin, F. (2025). Toxic Communication on TikTok: Sigma Masculinities and Gendered Disinformation. Social Media + Society, 11(1). https://doi.org/10.1177/20563051251313844
Wang, X., Wang, W., Qiao, Y., Gao, L., Yang, J., & Wang, P. (2022). Parental Phubbing and Adolescents’ Cyberbullying Perpetration: A Moderated Mediation Model of Moral Disengagement and Online Disinhibition. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 37(7–8), NP5344–NP5366. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260520961877