The popularity of social media use among adolescents has raised concerns about the potentially harmful effects of social media use on adolescents’ sleep. Since longitudinal research considering this relationship is scarce, the present two-wave longitudinal study of 2021 secondary school students (M_age = 13.86, SD = 1.25) examined whether frequency of social media use and problematic social media use predicted adolescents’ bedtime and quality of sleep. Moreover, the protective role of parental rules regarding Internet and smartphone use one hour before sleep was examined. The findings indicated that strict parental rules about Internet and smartphone use before sleep might prevent negative consequences of social media use on bedtime and sleep quality, but only among less engaged social media users. Once adolescents are highly engaged social media users, strict parental rules do not seem to prevent negative media influences on sleep. This implies that limiting Internet accessibility before bedtime can help prevent adolescents’ sleep problems, but that regulation is less effective for adolescents who are already highly involved in social media use.

This study aimed to enhance knowledge on which aspects of the family context are most relevant in identifying at-risk/problematic social media users among adolescents. Therefore, we examined the relative contribution to adolescents' at-risk/problematic social media use (SMU) of general and Internet-specific family factors related to three different family (sub)systems: parent-child (Internet-specific rule-setting, reactive restrictions towards Internet use, co-use, adolescents' involvement in rule-setting and positive parenting), parent (parental screen time, phubbing, stress, anxiety and depression) and family (family functioning, family intactness and SES) (sub)system. Questionnaire data came from 403 adolescents (M = 13.51, SD = 2.15) and 396 parents (M = 46.59, SD = 5.29) who participated in wave 1 of the Dutch 'Digital Family project'. Logistic regression analyses showed that only factors related to the parent-child subsystem remained significant in predicting being an at-risk/problematic social media user when examining predictors related to the parent-child, parent and family (sub)system simultaneously. Specifically, general and Internet-specific parenting practices contributed to the prediction above and beyond each other. Positive parenting and Internet-specific rule-setting seem protective, while parental reactive restrictions towards Internet use could be a risk factor. Positive parenting showed the largest effect size. The results suggest that parental behaviors directed towards the child should be a focus of attention in prevention of adolescents' problematic SMU. In addition, our findings highlight the importance of untangling restrictive mediation (impulsive, in the moment, attempts to limit SMU versus communicating clear rules in advance) when examining its effects.

Although both Internet-specific and general parenting have been linked to adolescents’ problematic social media use, until now they have been investigated as separate predictors of this behavior. As specific parenting practices occur in the broader general parenting context, this study examined how different Internet-specific parenting practices (Internet-specific rule setting, reactive restrictions towards Internet use, and co-use) and general parenting dimensions (responsiveness and autonomy-granting) co-occur, and act together in predicting adolescents’ problematic social media use. Four-wave data of 400 adolescents (T1: M age = 13.51 years, SD = 2.15, 54% girls) were used. Latent profile analysis identified three parenting profiles: Limiting and less supportive (13.5%), Tolerant and supportive (25.5%), and Limiting and supportive (60.8%). Membership to Tolerant and supportive predicted lower scores on prospective problematic social media use than membership to the other profiles. Besides, membership to Limiting and supportive predicted lower scores on problematic social media use than membership to Limiting and less supportive. No robust moderation effects of adolescents’ age and gender were found. These findings suggest that a supportive general parenting context rather than Internet use restrictions should be the focus when considering the prevention of adolescents’ problematic social media use.

Much remains unknown about whether restrictive mediation is an effective parenting strategy to prevent or reduce problematic social media use among adolescents. Therefore, this study examined bidirectional within-family effects between two restrictive mediation practices (rule-setting and reactive restrictions) and problematic social media use using random-intercept cross-lagged panel modeling. Three-wave survey data collected among Dutch adolescents (T1: N = 1928, M_age = 13.31 years, SD = 0.91, 43.3% girl) with a 1 year-interval were used. Results showed that within-family changes in problematic social media use symptoms predicted subsequent within-family changes in perceived parental restrictive mediation. More specifically, an increase in symptoms predicted a decrease in rule-setting and an increase in reactive restrictions 1 year later. Within-family changes in perceived parental restrictive mediation practices did not predict within-family changes in problematic social media use symptoms, suggesting that the relation is unidirectional. However, concluding that limiting adolescents’ Internet use is ineffective to prevent problematic social media use would be premature. Future research should investigate whether it may be an effective parenting strategy for a certain subgroup of adolescents or under certain circumstances.

Background: Many parents are concerned about their adolescents’ (problematic) social media use. Therefore, parents may apply restrictive mediation practices to prevent problematic social media use. However, their effectiveness remains unclear. Objective: This study aimed to provide insights into the specific groups and conditions under which restrictive mediation may effectively prevent adolescents’ problematic social media use. Specifically, we investigated the prospective relationship between rules about the amount, location, and timing of internet use and the onset of adolescents’ at-risk or problematic social media use. In addition, we examined the moderating role of demographic and parenting factors, including adolescents’ age, adolescents’ gender, adolescent involvement in rule-setting, positive parenting, parental phubbing, and quality of coparenting (2-way interactions). Furthermore, we explored whether the moderation effects of the parenting factors varied by adolescents’ age and gender (3-way interactions). Methods: Four-wave survey data of 315 adolescents (T1: mean age 13.44, SD 2.26 years; n=146, 46.3% girls, n=169, 53.7% boys) and their parents (T1: mean age 46.4, SD 5.05 years; n=292, 55.4% mothers) were used. Data were collected between April 2020 and January 2022, with a 6-month interval between each wave. Results: No significant main effect was found of internet-specific rule-setting at T1 on the onset of adolescents’ at-risk or problematic social media use throughout the study period (odds ratio [OR] 0.959, 95% CI 0.60-1.54, d=0.02). Yet, 2-way interaction analyses revealed that the effect of internet-specific rule-setting varied by adolescents’ age (OR 2.171, 95% CI [1.35-3.49], d=0.43). Specifically, for adolescents aged 15.70 years (+1 SD), stricter rules were associated with a higher likelihood of developing at-risk or problematic social media use (B=0.594, SE=0.294, 95% CI 0.02-1.17, P=.043). Two-way interaction effects of rule-setting with adolescents’ gender (OR 0.945, 95% CI 0.54-1.64, d=0.03), adolescent involvement in rule-setting (OR 1.02, 95% CI 0.77-1.36, d=0.01), positive parenting (OR 1.044, 95% CI 0.69-1.59, d=0.02), parental phubbing (OR 0.977, 95% CI [0.72-1.33], d=0.01), and quality of coparenting (OR 0.877, 95% CI 0.64-1.21, d=0.07) were not significant, nor were any of the 3-way interaction effects. Conclusions: Setting internet-specific rules seems to have a preventive effect on the development of problematic social media use symptoms in pre- and early adolescence, but may be counterproductive from the age of 15.7 years onward. These findings highlight the importance of age-appropriate parental mediation strategies to prevent problematic social media use.

Almost all research on adolescents’ problematic social media use (PSMU) utilizes self-reports of symptoms. Recently, parent-report scales have been validated. Yet, in order to use parent-reports, it is imperative to understand the level of agreement between self- and parent-reported adolescents’ PSMU. This study examined agreement and discrepancies between adolescent-, mother-, and father-reported adolescents’ PSMU (assessed with the Social Media Disorder scale) on classification, the overall number of symptoms, and individual symptom level. Data from 234 Dutch adolescents aged 10–19 years and their parents (160 mothers and 91 fathers) from the Digital Family project were used. Configural invariance was established across all dyads and scalar invariance across mothers and fathers. Across adolescents and mothers/fathers, partial scalar invariance was found (one of the nine-item thresholds appeared noninvariant). Overall, we found poor agreement, but the level of agreement seems biased by the low prevalence of PSMU. Positive agreement was lower for symptoms that are harder to observe. Parental over- and underreporting compared to adolescent self-reports on the number of PSMU symptoms occurred to the same extent. Moreover, parental over- and/or underreporting were related to the number of adolescent- and parent-reported adolescents’ PSMU symptoms, adolescents’ gender, and maternal worrying about children’s social media/gaming addiction. Researchers should be aware that self- and parent-reports are not (always) interchangeable.