A different question
Australia’s social media ban was introduced in response to growing concerns about rising rates of anxiety and depression among young people and the increasing use of social media. Lead author and UNSW PhD candidate Anna Bilston says governments may need to think beyond simply restricting access if they want to protect young people’s mental health.
“If we want to protect young people’s mental health, we need to think not only about whether they can access social media, but also about how young they are when they first start using it,” Ms Bilston says.
The findings are the first published results from a larger Australian study tracking the mood of young people before and after the social media ban.
Just try and stop us
Only a quarter of the 10-to-15-year-olds said they intended to stop using social media following the ban. Just over a third (34%) said they still intended to use it without an account, while a similar number (35%) said they intended to find a way around the restrictions to continue using their accounts.
“Most young people who intend to keep using social media expect to find ways around the restrictions, rather than simply waiting until they turn 16,” A/Prof. Schweizer says.
If not a ban, then what?
The researchers argue protecting young people’s mental health will require more than restricting access alone.
“As parents and educators we have an equally important role in helping young people develop healthy digital habits and delaying their first use of social media.”
Despite more than three quarters saying they planned to continue using social media anyway, the researchers aren’t suggesting the ban has failed.
“For some the ban likely helped start conversations about the mental health risks of social media between parents and children, teachers and students, and among young people themselves,” says A/Prof. Schweizer.
“In behavioural science we often see attitudes change before behaviour, so it’s still too early to judge whether the policy has been successful. We are excited to follow-up these young people and their parents across the next 12 months.”
Why IRL still matters
A companion study by the researchers followed older teenagers and young adults over time, asking them to record whether their social interactions took place online or in person, and how those interactions made them feel.
The researchers found face-to-face interactions generally left young people feeling more positive and more included than online interactions.
However, socially sensitive young people appeared to find online interactions easier.
“It’s possible these young people experience a short-term benefit from online interactions because they have more time to think about their responses,” A/Prof. Schweizer says.
“But over time, it’s face-to-face interactions that appear to sustain positive relationships. At this stage, though, that’s still speculative.
“What this tells us is that young people’s online activity is more complex than simply ‘helpful’ or ‘harmful’. Some online interactions may play an important role, particularly for socially sensitive young people, even though face-to-face interactions remain important overall.”
Further research needed
The results published today represent the first stage of a larger study that will follow young people before and after the social media ban. The researchers will continue tracking participants over the next year to see whether the policy changes behaviour, attitudes, mental health and exposure to online harms.
“This is one of the first opportunities anywhere in the world to understand what happens when a policy like this is introduced. We now need to follow these young people over time to see whether our teenagers benefit from the new restrictions, and what could be improved,” A/Prof. Schweizer says.
Read the research in full: https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2026.31107
