The Psychology Driving Australia’s Social Media Ban

** I have a confession to make… I thought I’d happily hit publish on this post months ago but, as it turns out, I didn’t. I could blame my ADHD, there’s a fair chance I got distracted and never got back to it but the truth is I have no recollection of the moment at all. Who knows? But I've decided to post it anyway. Better late than never right? I hope you find it insightful anyway! **

In recent years, we have seen growing concern about the role of social media in young people’s lives. The minds of adolescents are remarkable: they are dynamic, developing rapidly, curious, socially oriented and at the same time vulnerable to certain pressures. When we consider how digital platforms engage them, what follows is a complex interplay of brain development, identity formation, peer dynamics, reward circuitry and emotional regulation. It is within this context that governments are stepping in.

Research into social media use and adolescent wellbeing has grown rapidly over the past decade. Meta-analyses and systematic reviews consistently find small but meaningful associations between higher social media use and poorer mental health outcomes. Correlations have been found between time spent on social media and depressive symptoms, anxiety, loneliness and lower self-esteem. The effect sizes are modest, but consistent enough across large samples to suggest that the relationship is not trivial. In particular, problematic or compulsive social media use tends to show stronger associations with psychological distress, indicating that it is not time alone that matters but the quality and purpose of engagement.

Several mechanisms are thought to underpin these findings. Adolescence is a developmental stage marked by heightened social sensitivity. The brain’s reward and social-cognitive systems are especially tuned to peer feedback, social comparison and belonging. Social media platforms amplify these drives through features that reward attention and visibility. Likes, shares and follower counts provide constant social metrics that shape self-perception and reinforce the importance of external validation.

Social comparison is another significant factor. Adolescents often compare their own lives to idealised portrayals online, which can distort body image and undermine self-esteem. Passive use of social media (browsing without interaction) has been more strongly linked with poor mood than active engagement, possibly because it increases comparison while reducing genuine connection.

Sleep disturbance has also been identified as an important pathway. Frequent social media use late at night, or exposure to emotionally arousing or addictive content, disrupts sleep quality and duration. Poor sleep in turn increases vulnerability to anxiety, irritability and low mood. Exposure to cyberbullying, harassment or harmful content adds another layer of psychological risk. Research indicates that young people who experience online victimisation are significantly more likely to experience symptoms of depression and anxiety.

Given this evidence, the Australian government’s decision to introduce a minimum age for social media use appears grounded in a developmental and public health rationale. Although the research does not prove that social media causes mental illness, the convergence of evidence is enough to justify precautionary measures. Adolescence is a sensitive window for emotional and cognitive development, and early exposure to highly stimulating, socially evaluative environments can have long-term effects on self-concept and emotion regulation.

There are several likely reasons why the government has decided to regulate at this point in time. First, it reflects an attempt to reduce risk during a period of rapid brain development. The prefrontal cortex, responsible for impulse control and decision making, continues maturing well into the early twenties. By setting an age threshold, policymakers are effectively delaying exposure until young people have stronger internal resources for self-regulation.

Second, the policy acknowledges that the risks are structural, not just individual. The persuasive design of social media, with its infinite scroll, algorithmic reward loops and personalised feeds, makes it extremely difficult for young users to moderate their behaviour. Governments increasingly recognise that these systems shape human behaviour at scale, and that parents alone cannot counteract their influence.

Third, the decision reflects a child protection framework similar to other age-based restrictions, such as those around alcohol, gambling or explicit media. It is less about moral judgment and more about acknowledging that certain environments require a level of cognitive and emotional maturity.

Fourth, the policy has a symbolic function. It communicates societal concern about the psychological wellbeing of young people and reasserts that time spent offline, in embodied relationships and real-world exploration, is valuable. Regulation can help reset expectations, giving parents and caregivers language and legitimacy to establish digital boundaries.

From a psychological point of view, the ban can be understood as an effort to re-balance developmental priorities. Childhood and early adolescence are times for experimentation, learning through play and the development of identity through physical and social worlds. Social media compresses this timeline by exposing children to adult-like arenas of performance, competition and comparison. The government’s move effectively aims to preserve space for slower, more grounded forms of growth.

For parents, caregivers and clinicians, the question remains: how do we talk with young people about this change in a way that builds trust and understanding rather than conflict?

1. Begin with curiosity. Ask what your child enjoys about being online, who they connect with and what feels meaningful. This shows respect for their world.

2. Talk about what the research suggests, but without fearmongering. You might say, “The government has seen research showing that heavy social media use can sometimes make people feel anxious or down, especially when they are still learning who they are.”

3. Explore the positives of online connection as well as the downsides. Ask them what they think would change if they had less access, and what they might miss.

4. Co-create new ways to connect with peers. Encourage activities that replicate some of the social benefits of online spaces such as shared creativity, play, collaboration but in person.

5. Keep the conversation open and ongoing. Adolescents value being heard and involved in decision-making. Acknowledge their perspective and work together on practical alternatives.

Therapy can help young people and families make sense of these changes. It offers a reflective space to explore what digital connection means to them, how it impacts mood and identity, and how to build values-based habits. For adolescents who feel anxious about being disconnected from peers or who rely heavily on digital affirmation, therapy can help them develop resilience, emotional literacy and real-world sources of belonging.

For parents who are unsure how to approach the issue, therapy can support boundary-setting that is firm but empathic, focusing on the relational aspects of parenting rather than control. Psychologists can also help families navigate differences of opinion and develop language that bridges generational perspectives on technology.

Ultimately, the social media ban is not about fear or censorship. It is a public expression of caution, grounded in what we know about how young minds grow. Whether we agree with the policy or not, it opens a valuable national conversation about how we protect, nurture and connect with our children in an age of digital abundance.

References

Best, P., Manktelow, R., & Taylor, B. (2014). Online communication, social media, and adolescent wellbeing: A systematic narrative review. Children and Youth Services Review, 41, 27–36.

Coyne, S. M., Rogers, A. A., Zurcher, J. D., Stockdale, L., & Booth, M. (2020). Does time spent using social media impact mental health? Computers in Human Behavior, 104, 106160.

Kelly, Y., Zilanawala, A., Booker, C., & Sacker, A. (2018). Social media use and adolescent mental health: Findings from the UK Millennium Cohort Study. EClinicalMedicine, 6–7, 59–68.

Keles, B., McCrae, N., & Grealish, A. (2020). A systematic review: The influence of social media on depression, anxiety and psychological distress in adolescents. International Journal of Adolescence and Youth, 25(1), 79–93.

Marengo, D., Longobardi, C., Fabris, M. A., & Settanni, M. (2021). Highly visual social media and internalizing symptoms in adolescence: The mediating role of body image concerns. Computers in Human Behavior, 114, 106580.

Twenge, J. M., Haidt, J., Lozano, J., & Cummins, K. M. (2025). Social media and mental health: A review of the evidence. Journal of Adolescent Research, 40(2), 145–168.

Woods, H. C., & Scott, H. (2016). Sleepy teenagers: Social media use and sleep quality in late adolescence. Journal of Adolescence, 51, 36–41.

Yoon, S., Kleinman, M., Mertz, J., & Brannick, M. (2019). Is social network site usage related to depression? A meta-analysis of Facebook–depression relations. Journal of Affective Disorders, 248, 65–72.

UNICEF Australia. (2024). Explainer: What you need to know about the proposed social media age ban in Australia. Retrieved from https://www.unicef.org.au/unicef-youth/staying-safe-online/social-media-ban-explainer.

Human Rights Commission. (2024). Proposed social media ban for under 16s in Australia.Retrieved from https://humanrights.gov.au/about/news/proposed-social-media-ban-under-16s-australia.