In a landmark legal verdict issued on March 25 in California, a jury awarded $6 million to a plaintiff who argued her psychological harm was caused by the addictive properties of social media platforms. Tech giants Google and Meta were found liable in this case, although both companies have expressed their intention to appeal the decision. This court ruling reignites debates across scientific, clinical, and regulatory domains regarding the classification and reality of social media addiction.
Dar Meshi, an associate professor specializing in advertising and public relations at Michigan State University’s College of Communication Arts and Sciences, has thoroughly researched the psychology underlying technology usage, including social media. In a recent commentary published in the esteemed journal Nature, Meshi explores the nuanced relationship between social media behavior and addiction, advocating for a science-based approach to defining and addressing problematic use. Meshi’s insights shed light on the complexity of social media’s impact on mental health and the intricacies of potential addictive mechanisms involved.
Excessive social media use has been epidemiologically associated with a spectrum of psychological distress and functional impairments. Clinical reports and case studies detail consequences that range from occupational setbacks and deteriorated interpersonal relationships to academic underperformance. Neuroimaging studies reveal alterations in brain regions integral to reward processing, resembling neurological patterns observed in substance use disorders. Crucially, impaired decision-making processes have been linked to these neurobiological changes, echoing phenomena documented in recognized addictions.
However, the relationship between social media engagement and psychological outcomes is anything but uniform. Differential effects emerge depending on the nature of use: active engagement, through content creation, commenting, or direct messaging, correlates with enhanced well-being, whereas passive consumption typically aligns with negative psychosocial outcomes. Furthermore, social media platforms serve as critical support networks for marginalized populations, including sexual and gender minorities, offering a potentially protective effect by fostering community and inclusion.
One fundamental challenge in advancing this field is the predominance of correlational research designs, which limit causal inference. Even well-intentioned longitudinal studies often cannot definitively determine whether social media use causes distress or is a consequence of pre-existing vulnerabilities. Additionally, the scientific community has yet to reach consensus on the operationalization and measurement of “social media addiction,” including critical thresholds that delineate normal usage from pathological behavior.
The question of whether social media use should be classified as an addiction remains contentious among clinicians and researchers alike. Despite over twenty years of empirical investigation, many experts remain reticent to apply the addiction label. This hesitation stems from the absence of a unified diagnostic framework that recognizes social media addiction according to established clinical criteria. The American Psychiatric Association (APA), as the leading authority on psychiatric diagnoses, has not formally endorsed social media addiction as a distinct disorder, underscoring the necessity for rigorous empirical evidence and professional consensus.
In the clinical context, addiction is characterized by multifaceted benchmarks articulated in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), published by the APA. These include demonstrable clinical impairment, evidence of underlying neurobiological processes, and a favorable risk-benefit balance regarding the clinical utility versus potential stigmatization. The most recent DSM edition, released in 2013, predates much of the contemporary data on problematic social media use and currently subsumes this behavior under the broader conceptualization of general internet addiction, a designation that itself lacks formal diagnostic recognition.
The possibility of social media addiction gaining formal status in future DSM revisions is uncertain. The 2022 DSM update did not introduce new criteria related to social media behaviors, nor do published strategic plans for forthcoming editions highlight this issue prominently. Interestingly, the APA’s public educational resources address “social media addiction,” signaling a discrepancy between formal diagnostic criteria and educational outreach that could sow confusion both among the public and clinicians.
Misapplication of the term “addiction” risks broadening the diagnostic scope to encompass normal variations in behavior, a phenomenon known as pathologizing everyday life. Such overdiagnosis could strain healthcare systems by diverting resources toward individuals who may not manifest clinically significant impairment. Furthermore, stigma attached to an addiction label could lead to psychosocial harm, including misdirected treatment interventions and unwarranted pharmacotherapy.
Conversely, formally recognizing social media addiction would provide a structured diagnostic framework that enhances clinical screening, facilitates intervention development, and standardizes research methodologies. Clear diagnostic criteria would enable clinicians to identify individuals at genuine risk and tailor treatment strategies effectively. This systemization would also strengthen research validity by providing uniform participant classification criteria, thereby advancing the evidence base for understanding this phenomenon.
Meshi emphasizes the critical need for the APA to engage actively with existing research on social media use. Future efforts to refine psychiatric classifications should incorporate expertise on behavioral addictions, alongside consideration of biomarkers, socioeconomic factors, and functional impairments associated with mental health disorders. Such interdisciplinary collaboration is vital to discerning whether problematic social media behaviors fulfill the criteria of addiction and delineating precise diagnostic thresholds, with periodic re-evaluation as new evidence emerges.
A significant bottleneck in this research domain is limited access to granular social media usage data. Detailed information about user interactions and exposure on platforms is essential to parse individual differences and unravel the neurobehavioral mechanisms underpinning addiction-like symptoms. Policymakers might consider mandates that enable secure, anonymized data sharing between social media companies and researchers under rigorous privacy protections, fostering transparency and facilitating high-quality research.
Ultimately, clarifying the nature and parameters of social media addiction is an urgent scientific priority. Courts and juries are ill-equipped to adjudicate this complex issue, which demands nuanced, data-driven analysis by trained clinicians and researchers. Establishing clear, evidence-based diagnostic guidelines will lay the foundation for effective policy, clinical care, and public understanding in the digital era.
Subject of Research: Psychology of technology use, social media addiction, clinical diagnosis criteria
Article Title: Is social media addictive? Why a formal diagnosis is still out of reach
News Publication Date: 1-Apr-2026
Web References: https://comartsci.msu.edu/our-people/dar-meshi, https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-026-01023-8
Keywords: Social media, Addiction, Mental health, Psychological science, Clinical psychology, Mass media, Cognitive psychology
