Thursday, July 16, 2026

College students who spend more time online are more likely to report suicidal thoughts

 In the digital age, adolescents and young adults increasingly form social connections through online spaces, including social media, gaming and messaging platforms, which serve as venues for identity exploration, peer connection and emotional validation. However, these spaces also create new vulnerabilities, including upward social comparison, exclusion and online harassment that can undermine mental health, including depression and suicidality.

 

While most research has been focused on adolescents, a new study has found that college students who spend more time online (including social media use, gaming, etc.) and those who experience online harassment, are more likely to report suicidal thoughts. It also showed that these patterns were not the same across gender groups. In particular, cisgender men showed the strongest link between time spent online and suicidal thoughts, while online harassment was linked to higher risk across all gender groups. This is one of the few studies to look at both time online and harmful online experiences together, while paying close attention to gender differences.

 

“As with much of the literature on digital use and mental health, most research has focused on adolescents, leaving college-aged young adults underrepresented. In addition, few large-scale studies have examined how time online and experiences relate to mental health across gender identities, underscoring the need for gender-stratified research in diverse, multisite college samples—our study addresses these gaps,” explains corresponding author Seungbin Oh, PhD, LPC, NCC, assistant professor of psychiatry at Boston University Chobanian & Avedisian School of Medicine.

 

The researchers analyzed data from a large national survey called the Healthy Minds Study, which asks college students about their mental health and daily experiences. They looked at answers from more than 46,000 students who were asked how much time they spent in online spaces outside of school or work. They then examined whether students who spent more time online, or who reported being harassed online, were more likely to say they had seriously thought about suicide in the past year. The researchers also looked at whether these patterns differed for cisgender men, cisgender women, and transgender and gender nonconforming students, while taking into account other important factors such as depression, sleep and financial stress.

 

“One especially important finding was that the link between time spent online and suicidal thoughts was strongest among cisgender men, which differs from much of the earlier research that has focused more heavily on girls and young women as being especially vulnerable to digital harms. We may be overlooking an important mental health risk pattern among young men and that their digital experiences deserve much more public and clinical attention,” adds Oh.

 

According to the researchers, providers who work with college students and young adults should ask not only about depression and anxiety, but also about online life, including social media use, gaming habits, online harassment and digital stress. “These questions may help identify students who are struggling but who may not bring up these experiences on their own. The findings also highlight the need to pay greater attention to young men’s mental health, especially because they are often less likely to seek help and may show distress in ways that are easier to miss,” says Oh.

 

These findings appear online in the American Journal of Public Health.


Adolescent social media restrictions may reduce some harms while shifting others

Amrit Kaur Purba and colleagues argue that social media restrictions operate within a wider system of adolescents, families, schools, governments, and commercial actors - and therefore should be treated as complex systems interventions rather than isolated behavioural policies.

Without this broader approach, they warn that “governments risk introducing highly visible policies that are poorly understood and may cause unintended harm while leaving root causes unchanged.”

They outline how lessons from other commercial determinants of health such as the tobacco and alcohol industries can help predict how social media companies may adapt politically, scientifically, technologically, and economically after regulation.

For example, companies may try to redefine what counts as “social media” so that it falls outside new regulations, invest more in related or less regulated spaces, and shape policy through lobbying, public messaging, research funding, and marketing.

Adolescents themselves may also adapt by moving to more private or harder to monitor spaces, such as encrypted messaging apps or AI based chat systems.

The authors also note that restrictions may not affect all young people in the same way, suggesting that those with supportive families, strong digital skills, access to high quality educational resources, and opportunities for safe offline activities may benefit more than those facing isolation, unsafe environments, or limited support.

One young person’s perspective, who is also an author on the paper, seems to support this view. While acknowledging that social media can be both helpful and harmful, they describe it as “a place where friendships are made, where people can find communities, express themselves, learn new things, and sometimes a place to escape difficult situations.”

They add: “I have had friends reach out to me on social media about things they aren’t comfortable talking to family members about, and I have done the same. Without social media, what could we have done?”

The authors suggest using systems mapping to anticipate these effects and design more balanced, evidence informed approaches.

While this approach cannot predict exactly what will happen, it helps show how different parts of a system connect, how these parts may respond to change, and where effects may feedback on one another, they write.

As such, they recommend that evaluations move beyond standalone measures like screen time or short term changes in mental health to capture wider factors such as school engagement, social connections, industry and platform responses, and longer term effects.

And they conclude that taking this broader view need not delay action. Instead, “it will help ensure policies are balanced, flexible, evidence informed, and improve over time.”

How academic freedom is threatened – and how resilience of research can be strengthened

 

In Germany, too, academic freedom and the autonomy of research must be defended against increasing hostility and attacks. Meeting this challenge is first and foremost the responsibility of the research ecosystem itself and of everyone working within it. Researchers and research organisations in particular can and should actively strengthen the resilience of research by identifying their own vulnerabilities, making determined use of the possibilities available to them and working together with other stakeholders in the areas of politics, business and society at large.

 

These are the central arguments of a position paper recently published by a DFG Senate working group. Against the backdrop of current developments and incidents in Germany and numerous other countries, the paper describes threats to academic freedom and outlines options for protecting and strengthening it.

 

The paper is the second publication issued by the working group, which comprises members of the DFG Senate and Executive Committee and is chaired by Vice Presidents Professor Dr. Britta Siegmund and Professor Dr. Johannes Grave. The group was established last year to develop proposals aimed at enhancing the resilience of academia and the research ecosystem across multiple domains. In its first statement, published in March 2026, it presented “Recommendations on the Resilience of Research Data Infrastructures”.

 

The new “Position Paper on Strengthening the Academic Freedom and Resilience of Research” was prepared over recent months by the working group in consultation with both German and international experts from academia, business and society. The paper was most recently presented to and discussed by the DFG’s statutory bodies in the course of the annual meeting of Germany's largest research funding organisation and central self-governing organisation for science and the humanities at the end of June.

 

A wide range of threats

 

The paper begins by outlining in concise form the ways in which academic freedom  is coming under increasing pressure, in particular by identifying the actors involved and their motives. Attacks may target individual researchers and their views, as has already frequently been the case, as well as specific fields of research and research institutions. There are also attempts to discredit academic research or attribute malicious intentions to it.

More far-reaching are attacks that seek to weaken public funding for research, gain control over a research ecosystem or, in the context of geopolitical crises and wars, threaten a national research system as a whole.

 

In each case, the paper offers examples, including developments in the United States and Hungary and the war in Ukraine, while also citing instances of occurrences in Germany, such as the hostility directed at virologists during the COVID-19 pandemic and the AfD’s “government programme” for the forthcoming state election in Saxony-Anhalt.

 

Vulnerabilities and protection

 

In the second part of the paper, the authors argue that such attacks are sometimes facilitated by potential or existing vulnerabilities inherent in the conduct of research and within the research ecosystem itself. For example, the paper notes that opponents are afforded additional opportunities for attack when the impression is created that the research community itself is restricting academic freedom through self-censorship or ”cancel culture”. The paper further contends that research is particularly vulnerable to attack when it is perceived as lacking effective quality assurance and self-regulation, or when the research community is viewed as an insular elite retreating into a fortress mentality. The paper also argues that the research ecosystem is potentially weakened as a result of overly optimistic assumptions and unrealistic expectations about the rationality of its opponents, a lack of solidarity within the research community, and the misleading notion that the research ecosystem is apolitical and therefore need not defend itself.

 

In addition, the paper identifies specific vulnerabilities within the German research ecosystem, including individual risks arising from dependency relationships and inappropriately short-term employment contracts.

 

The third section explores the institutional and legal safeguards that protect academic freedom despite the wide range of challenges it faces. Chief among these is the constitutional guarantee of the freedom of research and teaching, enshrined as a fundamental right in Germany's Basic Law.

 

The paper also emphasises that research in Germany is firmly embedded in both the economy and society. Its contribution to economic and social development, together with the high level of public trust it enjoys, means that attacks on academic freedom are likely to meet resistance far beyond academia.

 

Where action is possible – and needed

 

Building on this analysis, the paper outlines a range of options for strengthening resilience through preventive action. These include fostering close and trusting cooperation among researchers and research organisations, as well as building alliances with business and civil society. In order to improve preparedness, the authors also call for expanded research into the programmes and strategies of those who oppose academic freedom and, more broadly, into the relationship between academia, politics and society.

 

In addition, high standards of academic self-governance and self-regulation must be continuously reinforced and safeguarded.

The paper further argues that the research community must engage in more critical self-reflection, not least to develop a clearer understanding of the distinctions between research-based knowledge and other forms of knowledge, as well as between scientific findings and opinion. It likewise calls for authentic science communication that conveys not only scientific achievements but also the provisional nature of knowledge, the limits of current understanding, and the uncertainties, setbacks and iterative character of the research process. At the institutional level, the authors advocate strengthening procedures, statutes and decision-making processes to make them more resilient to misuse, identifying unanimity requirements as one example of institutional vulnerability. Finally, the paper argues that preventive action is also required to enhance research security and safeguard research infrastructures.

 

Like the paper itself, these recommendations are addressed primarily to the research ecosystem and those working within it. At the same time, however, the authors identify a wider circle of actors with whom collaborative action is required to safeguard academic freedom and strengthen the resilience of the research ecosystem. These include policymakers, the federal and state ministries responsible for research, and the federal–state bodies responsible for coordinating research policy. Their involvement is considered particularly important in reducing the individual uncertainties and risks faced by researchers, as well as in shielding research from political interference exercised through financial pressure.

 

In the event of specific attacks on academic freedom, the working group further recommends that the research community and its institutions consider public forms of protest where appropriate. It also emphasises the importance of practical solidarity and mutual support at both the individual and institutional levels, for example through a ”collective duty of mutual assistance”. Finally, it notes that the constitutional protection of academic freedom provides a basis for legal action where judicial remedies offer an effective response.

 

 

Further Information

 

The full text of the Position Paper on Strengthening the Academic Freedom and Resilience of Research: https://zenodo.org/records/21353471

 

Further information and material on the topic of the resilience of research: https://zenodo.org/records/21353471


Wednesday, July 15, 2026

Scrolling for Study Helps, Scrolling for Fun Hurts: Students’ Social Media Use and Wellbeing


A recent study on nursing students’ social media usage suggests that social media use can affect wellbeing, depending on the purpose.

The study was led by Dr. Mohamed Goda Elbqry, with co-authors Dr. Fatma Mohamed Elmansy, Dr. Noha Mohammed Ibrahim, Dr. Saddam Ahmed Al‑Ahdal, and Dr. Fatima S. O. Ashmieg, from Qassim University (Saudi Arabia) and Suez Canal University (Egypt). The team published their findings in The Open Nursing Journal (Bentham Open).


Purpose of using Social Media

Social media is woven into the daily lives of university students, but its impact depends on how it is used. A nursing student who turns to platforms for lecture notes, assignment collaboration, or clinical case discussions engages in a fundamentally different practice than one who spends hours on entertainment feeds or constant social messaging. A new study published in The Open Nursing Journal asked a critical question: Does the purpose behind social media use determine whether it supports or undermines students’ life satisfaction?


The Study
 
Researchers surveyed 298 undergraduate nursing internship students (128 males, 170 females; average age just over 21) at Al‑Razi University, Sanaa, Yemen, between April and August 2025. Using four validated questionnaires, the team measured academic, social, and entertainment use of social media, levels of addiction, and overall life satisfaction. The study followed STROBE guidelines for observational research, with structural equation modelling applied to map relationships among variables.


Key Findings

The results revealed that academic use of social media, such as for coursework, exam preparation, or peer learning, was associated with higher life satisfaction and lower risk of addiction. In contrast, entertainment-driven use emerged as the strongest predictor of addictive behaviour, with a path coefficient more than three times larger than social use. Social media addiction itself was independently linked to lower life satisfaction and partially mediated the effects of all three types of use. The indirect negative effect of entertainment use on life satisfaction (β = -0.235) was considerably stronger than that of social use (β = -0.078), while academic use showed a modest positive indirect effect (β = 0.069).


Implications for Universities and Students

The findings highlight that not all social media time is equal. Purposeful academic engagement enhances wellbeing, while compulsive recreational use erodes it. Universities should consider implementing digital wellness programmes that help students distinguish between academic and recreational use, alongside policies that restrict non-academic platform access during study hours and counselling or peer support for students showing signs of addiction. Given nursing students’ high academic and clinical stress, such measures could meaningfully improve wellbeing. The authors note limitations, including the single-institution sample, reliance on self-reports, and cross-sectional design. Future longitudinal and multi-site studies are needed.


Read the published article here: https://bit.ly/4gYfD9i

Television and movie content linked to racial bias in children

 It has been well-established that the developmental roots of racial prejudices emerge in early childhood, but scientists have a less clear understanding of how various influences affect these attitudes.

A new study in the journal American Psychologist offers some insight into these questions.

It found that White children whose favorite movie or television show portrayed fewer Black characters—relative to other movies or shows—were less likely to choose to play with a Black child, held less positive attitudes towards Black children, and were more likely to attribute Black-White inequalities to racial differences.

These findings were particularly strong in shows and films that showed few Black characters in high-status contexts or roles, such as authority figures or wealthy princesses. These results indicated that the dearth of Black characters in respected or sought-after positions contributed to views of racial bias among the study’s participants.

“Our findings highlight the role media play in the development of racial biases during childhood and underscore the importance of monitoring the messages young children receive when consuming media,” says Michael Rizzo, a postdoctoral researcher at New York University at the time of the study and now an assistant professor of psychology at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign.

“The good news is these findings offer pathways for addressing racial biases before they become deeply entrenched,” adds Marjorie Rhodes, a professor in NYU’s Department of Psychology and the paper’s senior author, who previously uncovered ways to reduce bias in children. “Compared with other environmental contributors to children’s biases, addressing the contents of media children consume is more straightforward. For instance, portraying more characters of color in high-status roles could be beneficial in shaping children’s attitudes about those of other races.”

Researchers have analyzed the impact of entertainment content on children’s beliefs and attitudes for decades. However, less studied is how this content is influential over time. 

To better understand this phenomenon, Rizzo and Rhodes, along with researchers from the University of Connecticut and the University of California, Santa Cruz, conducted a study of nearly 600 White children in the United States for a year. This longitudinal study of children—four to eight years old—allowed the authors to see the impact of content on racial attitudes as it was consumed in children’s natural environments and over a 12-month period.

How the study was done

The American Psychologist research was part of a larger, online longitudinal study examining the psychological processes and developmental mechanisms underlying the emergence of racial biases in US children. Overall, the researchers asked the participants about their playmate preferences and their beliefs about racial inequalities while taking into account the types of programs they were watching—as reported by the children’s parents—and how these programs depicted characters of different races. This approach allowed the study’s authors to see if program content had any influence on the children’s attitudes and beliefs over time.

Attitudes and Beliefs

Children were shown faces of children on a computer screen (Asian, Black, Latine, and White) and asked who they would like to play with most. They were also shown faces of Black and White children and asked, “How nice do you think this child is?” and “How much do you like this child?”

They were also told about an example of a racial inequality and were asked to think about why that inequality exists. In this commonly used method, participants were shown images of a Black child who lived in a low-wealth house and a White child who lived in a high-wealth house and then asked to think about why each child lived in their respective house: “Because of things that happen in the world” (extrinsic reasons) or “Because of who they are inside” (intrinsic reason).

Parents and Content

In a survey, the children’s parents listed their child’s top three favorite shows or programs, how much they (the parents) valued racial diversity in their child’s friend group, their political affiliation, and their residential zip code. Parents’ values, politics, and the racial demographics of children’s zip codes (i.e., the proportion of White people in their residential zip code drawn from US Census data) served as control variables in the analyses in order to isolate the effects of children’s media consumption.

A total of 29 television shows and movies depicting primarily human characters were selected based on their popularity—as reported by their parents—amongst the participants. The content included nearly 11,000 characters across more than 2,000 scenes.

The researchers coded three three aspects of racial representation within these programs: overall racial representation; low-, middle-, and high-status context representation; and high-status role representation. For instance, scenes were coded as high-status if they contained clear cues to wealth or power, including castles or mansions, luxury vehicles, and depictions of wealthy people.

White characters were overrepresented in high-status contexts and roles compared to their overall representation in these programs. In addition, the participants were more likely to watch media with White characters than they were those with Asian, Black, and Latine characters.

What the researchers found

Overall, the results showed a connection between the children’s favorite television shows and movies and racial attitudes—depending on how Black and White characters were depicted:

  • Children whose favorite media depicted a higher proportion of White relative to Black characters said they were less likely to choose to play with a Black child and were less likely to have positive attitudes towards Black children, even after taking into account their parents’ values and politics as well as neighborhood demographics.
  • Children were more likely to choose a playmate—regardless of race—when the playmate’s racial group was more frequently represented in high-status contexts in children’s favorite media—regardless of their parents’ values, politics, and neighborhood demographics.
  • Children whose favorite media depicted a higher proportion of White relative to Black characters in high-status contexts were less likely to choose to play with a Black child and more likely to endorse an intrinsic over extrinsic explanation for racial inequalities.
  • Older children whose favorite media depicted a higher proportion of White relative to Black characters when they started the study became less likely to choose to play with the Black child over a one-year period. However, significant effects were not found for children’s explanations for racial inequalities.
  • Notably, there were no effects or White children’s attitudes toward other White children, suggesting that consuming media with more Black characters does not reduce children’s positive feelings towards others of their own race.

“The relationship between media consumption and racial biases is likely dynamic and self-perpetuating: Children who watch biased media develop more racial biases, which leads them to favor media that reflect and reinforce those biases,” the authors write. “Our findings speak to the importance of breaking this cycle as early as possible.”

State anti-DEI laws alter the graduate student experience

 A new study by University of Delaware professor Jarett Haley and others explored how racially minoritized graduate students understood the impacts of proposed or enacted state anti–diversity, equity and inclusion (anti-DEI) laws on their experiences in racial/ethnic graduate student organizations at public historically and predominately white institutions. 

The study, published in American Educational Research Association, found that ultimately participants believed that their state’s anti-DEI law impacted their experiences and ultimately their agency within their organizations.

While some students did not think their organizations were impacted by the laws, many experienced direct impacts to their organizations’ funding and event planning while also identifying a lack of support from their institutions for navigating these impacts. 

These findings can help institutions develop better resources and guidance for these organizations to address the impacts of anti-DEI laws.

Haley is an assistant professor in the School of Education at the University of Delaware. His research centers on understanding undergraduate and graduate students’ experiences in student affairs and other co-curricular higher education contexts, with an emphasis on the experiences of Black men in these spaces.


Tuesday, July 14, 2026

How an adolescent’s brain reacts to faces may predict their social future

 

Study finds that social future is different for boys and girls


It’s been said that eyes are a window to the soul, but new research has found that an adolescent’s brain response to a face might open a window to their social future.

A new study at the University of California, Davis Center for Mind and Brain found that high activity in the amygdala when an adolescent looks at a face showing emotions predicts their social health two years later. The increased amygdala activity for girls predicted more involvement with their peers, but predicted less involvement for boys.

The amygdala is best known for the fight-or-flight response and controls strong emotional reactions, especially fear. It is also one of the core brain regions that process information from faces.

“Faces contain a lot of social information, and perceptually or cognitively humans process that information really, really quickly,” said Myles N. Arrington, lead author and postdoctoral fellow working with Professor Amanda E. Guyer, a co-author who directs the Teen Experiences, Emotions & Neurodevelopment (TEEN) Lab. “That makes it great for neuroscience, because as soon as you show a face to a person it doesn't take long for their brain to respond.”

The paper was recently published in the journal Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience with UC Davis co-authors Johnna R. Swartz and Jeffrey R. Fine.

The social brain and future social health

The “social brain” is an idea from neuroscience that specific key brain regions are behind nearly every aspect of our social behavior. These brain regions help us recognize people we know, and they guide us in understanding the thoughts of others as well as our own. These regions’ development during adolescence plays an important role in peer relationships later on, but it’s been unclear exactly how.

This study tested the social brain’s impact on future social health with data from 5,832 participants in the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development, or ABCD, Study. Participants were between 8 and 11 years old between 2017 and 2018 when shown images of either faces or places while their brain activity was observed with fMRI imaging showing blood flow in the brain. Data on their social health was collected two years later.

The team compared brain activity when participants viewed faces, which contain a high amount of social information, versus places, which have none. They also compared brain activity when participants viewed faces showing positive or negative emotions and faces showing no emotion. 

In addition to finding that high amygdala activation predicted boys and girls moving in opposite directions socially two years later, the analysis showed that the amygdala was the only brain region that predicted a participant’s future social health. 

Building on teen social health research

In a prior study, the team identified social health profiles that grouped teens by a mix of factors that included their number of friends, who was in their friend group and how much conflict they had with peers. Activation in the amygdala when seeing faces showing emotion predicted which of those profiles the participants would fall into two years later.

Arrington said that this study provides a valuable insight into how the brain develops during adolescence, a period when different parts of the brain develop at different rates. The results suggest that these differences in development between boys and girls may play a role in social health later on.

“For adolescents in particular, there’s a lot of development happening in this age range in the amygdala specifically, but it doesn't look the same for everyone,” said Arrington.

The work was supported by the National Institutes of Health.