Exploring public perceptions of social media
Creators: name: Shaw, Daniel
name: Murray, Evelyn
name: Pennington, Charlotte Rebecca
Publisher: name: OSF Registries
Year: 2024
Subjects: subject: Social and Behavioral Sciences
subject: Psychology
subject: FOS: Psychology
subject: Psychology
subject: Social media
subject: cyberpsychology
subject: public perceptions
subject: social media use

description: ‘Social media’ is broadly defined as an online platform to share digital media in a social capacity (Ellison &amp; Boyd, 2013; Kaplan &amp; Haenlein, 2010; Merriam-Webster, n.d.; Oxford English Dictionary, 2023) and is used to describe a variety of online platforms including, but not limited to, social networking sites, forums, blogs, social gaming, video sharing, and virtual worlds (Aichner et al., 2021). Over time, definitions of social media have changed and expanded reflecting technological advancements, such as extended functionality and content; in a recent review of social media definitions, Aichner et al. (2021) found that definitions developed prior to 2010 focused on people and how they interact through common interests, whereas post-2010 the focus changed to creating and sharing user-generated content. Researchers also appear to use two different approaches when defining social media – a characteristic or usage approach. The characteristic approach implies that social media only consists of platforms that have specific characteristics or functions, such as user-generated content, personal messages, and the ability to comment, like or share. For example, Ellison and Boyd’s (2013) definition of social media (see Table 1) refers to uniquely identifiable profiles that consist of user-supplied content, the ability to publicly articulate connections, and that users can consume, produce, and/or interact with streams of content. In contrast, the usage approach focuses on how individuals use a specific platform, such as categorising an online platform as ‘social media’ if it “allows for the potential for interaction” (Manning, 2014). In the research landscape, there appears to be no single or commonly accepted definition of social media and this has led to a ‘hodgepodge’ of operationalisations, theory, and research designs (Aichner et al., 2021; Carr &amp; Hayes, 2015; Valkenburg et al., 2022a). As we highlight in Table 1 below, different commonly used definitions are more or less inclusive of the multitude of social media platforms that currently exist, meaning that what is classed as ‘social media’ in one research study may not be classed as ‘social media’ in another. Furthermore, it is currently unknown whether such definitions are accessible and meaningful to those who use and engage with social media the most – the public.
Social media has become ubiquitous in people’s everyday lives, transforming the way in which we interact. In 2023, there were approximately 57 million unique social media user profiles in the United Kingdom alone, with the most used platforms being instant messengers (e.g., WhatsApp; 71%), social networking sites (e.g., Facebook; 65%), and media sharing (e.g., YouTube; 59%; Meltwater &amp; We Are Social, 2023). The exponential growth of social media has led researchers to investigate the potential risks and benefits of frequent usage. By providing channels that allow people to connect with each other digitally across time and space, many researchers consider the increased use of social media to serve important psychosocial benefits, such as enhancing social connectedness and social capital and decreasing loneliness (e.g., große Deters &amp; Mehl, 2013; Ellison et al., 2007; for a review see Ryan et al., 2017). However, concerns have also been raised regarding the potential negative effects that social media can exert on mental wellbeing, particularly for adolescents. Findings in this field are hugely inconsistent, however, with some studies indicating a seemingly robust relationship between (adolescent) social media use and indices of wellbeing (Allcott et al., 2020; Kross et al., 2013; Twenge et al., 2017), and others observing small or null relationships (Appel et al., 2019; Orben &amp; Przybyslki, 2019; Orben, 2020; Meier &amp; Reinecke, 2021). Such inconsistencies may be explained by moderators, such as age (Orben et al., 2022), different styles of social media usage (e.g., active versus passive use; Shaw et al., 2022; Valkenburg et al., 2022a; Verduyn et al., 2017), and other factors that influence individual vulnerabilities to the potential effects of social media (Valkenburg et al., 2021; 2022b). A recent U.K. government inquiry into the effects of social media on young people’s health concluded that the available evidence-base was limited in both quantity and quality (House of Commons, 2019). 
Several reports have also been published which explore the public’s perceptions of how social media impacts upon themselves and others. A recent Ofcom (2023a) report on adult’s digital literacy asked respondents about the impact of using ‘online communication platforms’ on their mental health. Opinion was divided, with 35% agreeing with the statement that “using these apps or sites is good for my mental health”, 24% disagreeing and 40% reporting that they neither agreed nor disagreed. A second report by Ofcom (2023b) focused specifically on children and young people and found that only 28% of parents of 3–17-year-olds agreed with the statement that “the benefits to my child using social media, messaging and video sharing platforms outweigh the risks”, with 42% disagreeing and 30% perceiving the impact to be neutral. However, the questions in these reports were very general, conflating ‘being online’ with ‘social media’, did not ask about specific benefits or risks, and did not distinguish between different styles of social media usage that may be perceived as more or less beneficial (e.g., active, passive, broadcasting; see Kaye et al., 2022; Valkenberg et al., 2022a). Another recent report by the Royal Society for Public Health (2017) explored young people’s perceptions of the positive and negative effects of social media on health and wellbeing, delineating between five commonly used social media platforms. However, they focused on only 14 related outcomes, such as anxiety, depression, loneliness, and body image, and it is unclear if and how these characteristics were informed by previous research.
Given the plethora of research into social media and its potential to significantly impact upon people’s lives, it is important to understand the public’s perceptions of what social media is and how they believe it affects them and those around them. In this mixed-methods study, we aim to achieve this by exploring which platforms U.K. respondents identify as being a ‘social media’, the extent to which they endorse numerous research-informed positive and negative characteristics associated with frequent social media usage, and their understanding and agreement with commonly used definitions of social media. This research will allow us to gauge public understanding of social media and its perceived impacts, which may inform educational training and digital literacy programmes.