Why Ferguson's Meta-Analysis Should Not Be Used to Inform Debates on Social Media's Impact on Adolescent Depression and Anxiety: A Commentary

Abstract

This commentary is a response to "Do social media experiments prove a link with mental health: A methodological and meta-analytic review," by Christopher J. Ferguson. Ferguson concludes that his analysis "undermines causal claims … that reductions in social media time would improve adolescent mental health" (p. 205). We argue that Ferguson's conclusion (and subsequent correction) is invalid due to six critical concerns: (1) erroneous data extraction from several studies, (2) two inclusion errors, (3) inappropriate blending of methods and of outcomes, (4) invalid statistical reasoning, (5) lack of transparency, and (6) inadequate corrections. Taken together, these concerns show that this paper is not a valid meta-analysis and should not be cited in the ongoing public debate-and litigation-about whether social media platforms are harming the mental health of adolescents.

Keywords: social media, mental health, anxiety, depression, experiment