ArticleJournal of behavioral addictions2022
Do evaluation and self-identification relate to self-reported and actual social media use?
Article in Journal of behavioral addictions, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- An examination of the impact of online feedback and social distance on the implicit self-identity of adolescents: behavioral and ERP evidence.Social cognitive and affective neuroscience · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and aims: Social media use can sometimes become excessive and damaging. To deal with this issue, scholars and practitioners have called for the development of measures that predict social media use. The current studies test the utility of evaluation and self-identification measures for predicting social media use. Method: Study 1 examined the relation between evaluation (n = 58) and self-identification (n = 56) measures on the one hand and several self-report measures of social media use on the other hand. Study 2 examined whether the main results of Study 1 could be replicated and whether evaluation (n = 68) and self-identification (n = 48) also relate to actual social media use. We probed evaluation and self-identification using implicit and explicit measures. Results: Explicit evaluation and self-identification measures significantly correlated with several of the self-report measures of social media. Explicit evaluation also significantly correlated with several indices of actual social media use. Implicit measures did not relate to social media use. Discussion and conclusions: The current results suggest that researchers and practitioners could benefit from using explicit evaluation and self-identification measures when predicting social media use, especially an evaluation measure since this measure also seems to relate to actual social media use. Study 2 was one of the first to test the ecological validity of social media use measures. Although implicit measures could provide benefits for predicting social media use, the current studies did not show evidence for their predictive utility.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.