Negative social media content has a greater impact on people struggling with mental health

In recent years, numerous studies have focused on the impact of excessive screen time, particularly on social media, on mental health. The fact that the rise of smartphones and apps like Facebook, X, Instagram, and TikTok, has coincided with an exponential increase in mental health issues among young people and adults has intensified scrutiny of this relationship. However, recent research has called this link into question.

“Most studies have focused on the relationship between screen time and mental health, an area with mixed results,” says Christopher A. Kelly, a professor in the Department of Experimental Psychology at University College London.

Kelly co-authored a study recently published in Nature Human Behaviour, which suggests that the issue might not be the internet, screens, or social media per se, but rather the type of content consumed. According to the research, individuals with poorer mental health are more likely to engage with negative content online, which exacerbates their symptoms. To assess a website’s negativity, researchers analyzed the percentage of negative words it contained.

“Our study shows that people who feel worse before surfing the internet are more likely to search for negative content. This exposure to negative information worsens their bad mood, reinforcing a vicious circle in which emotional states and online behavior reinforce one other,” explains Kelly.

This pattern isn’t new. As experts point out, when someone is sad after a break-up, they tend to gravitate towards sad songs, movies, and books. “When we feel bad, we often seek short-term rewards, a concept known in psychology as negative reinforcement,” explains Conchita Sisí Martín, director of the Salud en Mente Clinic and a member of the Official College of Psychology of Madrid. “This has a simple explanation: since I want to avoid feeling my emotions because I feel bad, I turn to something that stimulates us in the short term — that makes me feel better (‘there are worse things in the world than what happened to me’). However, in the long term, this is much worse.”

The issue, according to Carlos Losada, a member of the Spanish Society of Clinical Psychology-ANPIR, is that smartphones’ constant connectivity allows this cycle to persist over time. Compounding the problem is users’ diminishing control over the content they consume in the digital space. “Before, you could choose to listen to sad songs or watch sad films,” he explains. “But what often happens now, is that we have no control over what we see. It is the algorithms that provide us with this content, so to a certain extent it is dangerous for a person who is unwell to unintentionally train the algorithm so that it offers them more negative content that causes them more discomfort.”

The spiral of negativity

Escaping the spiral of negativity can often feel challenging. Bad news tends to sell more than good, and people who create fake news exploit general malaise to make their falsehoods go viral. Certain dramatic events, such as the pandemic or the recent flooding in Spain’s Mediterranean coast, are nearly impossible to ignore.

“We are not suggesting that all negative information should be avoided,” says Kelly. “In fact, during events such as natural disasters or the emergence of Covid, the consumption of negative content was crucial to understanding how to adapt to new and stressful environments. Such information was often very useful and provided the necessary guidance to make informed decisions. However, just as excessive calorie intake can harm physical health, excessive consumption of negative content can affect mental health.”

This sentiment is echoed by Martín, who noted that during the week following the deadly floods in Spain, many of her patients reported feeling much worse because they were “hooked on consuming negative content,” often conspiracy theories laden with emotionally charged language. “People can’t consume 20 media outlets at once. You have to choose your sources — for example, one newspaper, one TV channel, and one radio station: three reliable sources at most — and avoid entering the endless loop of social media. Otherwise, by the end of the day, you’ll be saturated, and when there’s an excess of information, it becomes difficult to filter.”

Although a 2022 report by the Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism found that more than one in three respondents avoid reading negative news daily to protect their mental health, many who engage in cycles of negativity online are unaware of their behavior. “That’s the most dangerous part,” says Martín. “They often seek help for other reasons — anxiety, feeling overwhelmed, or that they are not getting anywhere. But when you dig deeper, you find they spend a lot of free time browsing in ways that trap them in these dynamics.”

Losada has observed a similar pattern. While disconnecting and engaging in in-person activities like meeting friends or playing sports may seem like a simple solution, the reality is often more complex. “In consultations, you meet people with grueling work schedules, family pressures, and life situations that you wouldn’t believe if they were in a series,” he says. “Social media offers a quick escape from discomfort. In the long term, however, it’s worse — social networks are designed to trap users. It’s not unlike what happens with substance abuse.”

Breaking the cycle

Researchers at University College London have developed a browser extension for Chrome, called Digital Diet, that aims to help users escape these negative spirals. Still in beta, the tool functions like a nutritional traffic light for online content. When performing a Google search, the extension labels search results in real time, rating websites based on their actionability (how useful the content is), knowledge (how well it helps users understand a topic), and emotional tone.

“We are used to seeing labels on the food we buy, offering nutritional information such as sugar, calories, protein and vitamins, to help us make informed choices about what we eat,” explains Kelly. “A similar approach could be applied to the content we consume online, to empower people to make healthier and more conscious choices online.”

Research supports this idea: participants who used the extension were more likely to visit positively rated websites. When later surveyed about their mood, those who browsed positive sites reported feeling better than those who did not.

“If you provide people with tools to protect themselves, they’ll use them. People aren’t stupid; they’re just living in circumstances that leave them with little room to think,” says Losada. While he believes tackling harmful or deceptive content directly might be a higher priority, he acknowledges that tools like Digital Diet are “a step in the right direction within a global problem.”

Martín agrees, pointing out that platforms like X (formerly Twitter) already allow users to mute specific words, helping them avoid loops of negativity. Additionally, apps like Forest and Quality Time encourage people to put their phones aside and break free from doomscrolling.

Sign up for our weekly newsletter to get more English-language news coverage from EL PAÍS USA Edition