This report summarizes a large-scale experimental study that examines how deactivating Facebook and Instagram for a period before the 2020 U.S. presidential election affects users’ emotional state. The study was designed to better understand ongoing debates about whether social media platforms improve or harm mental well-being. As reported in the study, the primary objective was to assess the impact of a controlled deactivation period on self-reported happiness, depression, and anxiety levels. The authors set out to address concerns that exposure to political and social content on these platforms might worsen emotional state outcomes during high-stakes periods like an election.

The study was conducted using two parallel randomized experiments, one focusing on Facebook and the other on Instagram. Researchers selected U.S. users who were at least 18 years old and had logged in within the past month. Invitations were placed prominently at the top of the users’ news feeds, and participants were incentivized to deactivate their accounts for either one week (control group) or six weeks (deactivation group) by receiving payments ($25 for a one-week deactivation and $150 for six weeks). The careful design ensured that both groups were made to feel part of a study involving temporary deactivation, thereby reducing potential demand effects. In the experiments, baseline and endline surveys measured the emotional state using three specific questions asking how frequently users felt happy, depressed, or anxious over the past four weeks. The responses were converted into standardized scores for analysis.

The experiment yielded important quantitative insights on the effect of social media deactivation. Among participants, those in the Facebook deactivation group experienced a statistically significant improvement of 0.060 standard deviations in an emotional state index, which combined measures of happiness, depression (reversed), and anxiety (reversed). For Instagram, the improvement was 0.041 standard deviations relative to the control. These changes suggest that a temporary deactivation can positively influence emotional well-being. The authors explicitly note that these improvements are driven by shifting levels in happiness scores, with additional, although smaller, positive changes in depression and anxiety reported in the original response units (e.g., improving happiness by approximately 0.053 units and reducing depression by 0.045 units).

The study also conducted extensive subgroup analyses to explore moderators that might influence the effect of deactivation. For Facebook, the beneficial impact was more pronounced among individuals aged 35 and over. In contrast, the Instagram results indicated that the most significant improvement in emotional state occurred among young women aged 18-24, who reported an improvement of 0.111 standard deviations. Additional exploratory analyses examined baseline use intensity, initial emotional state, political participation, and the number of civic pages followed. Although some heterogeneity was observed—with larger effects among more politically engaged users and among non-college graduates in certain comparisons—the results for baseline use and baseline emotional state showed that the effects were generally consistent across these categories. These findings support the idea that the context (such as political stress during an election) and user demographics play key roles in how social media use influences mental well-being.

In order to contextualize the magnitude of the findings, the study offers several benchmarks. The experiment compared the improvement in emotional state due to deactivation with differences observed in baseline demographic characteristics. For instance, the study noted that the emotional state index was 0.48 standard deviations higher among Republicans compared to Democrats, and other typical demographic shifts ranged from 0.09 to 0.23 standard deviations. Additionally, the deactivation effects were contrasted with the average improvement of psychological interventions (roughly 0.27 standard deviations) and with nationwide declines in mental well-being reported over recent years. Specifically, approximately 3.8 percent of participants changed their responses from 'sometimes' to 'often' feeling happy in the original survey scale. Such benchmarks highlight that while the improvements from deactivation are modest, they are meaningful when compared to other interventions and societal trends.

Another important insight drawn from the study relates to how participants reallocated their time during deactivation. When Facebook was deactivated, participants substituted a significant portion of their usual time on the platform to other apps; however, a small reduction (around 9 minutes per day) in overall app usage was noted, suggesting some increase in offline time. In the case of Instagram, almost all time that would have been spent on the platform was redirected to other applications, resulting in no significant overall change in total mobile app usage. These substitution patterns imply that the improvements in emotional state might be influenced not only by reduced exposure to potentially negative content on the focal platforms but also by a change in the overall nature of digital engagement and the quality of user experiences across different apps.

The report highlights that this study substantially expands on previous research by offering a larger sample size and longer abstention period than earlier experiments, some of which involved far fewer participants and shorter deactivation periods. Prior studies reported mixed results, with some experiments finding significant improvements in well-being and others showing very modest changes. The present study also contrasts randomized findings with results obtained from cross-sectional and time-series methods, noting that non-experimental approaches often yield biased estimates with unpredictable signs. The comprehensive design and robustness checks, including adjustments for multiple hypothesis testing, contribute to a more reliable estimate of the impact of social media on emotional state.

The study concludes that temporary deactivation of Facebook and Instagram before a high-stakes election can lead to statistically significant improvements in users’ emotional states. Despite the improvements being modest in absolute terms, they are notable given the broader context of rising concerns about social media's role in degrading mental well-being. The results underscore the importance of considering user demographics and contextual factors such as political engagement, which might amplify or diminish the observed effects. The experimental evidence provided adds to the ongoing discourse on the mental health impacts of social media, suggesting that even short-term breaks from these platforms could offer emotional benefits. However, the authors also acknowledge limitations regarding sample generalizability and the specific conditions (election period, individual-level deactivation) under which the study was conducted. Overall, the findings contribute critical insights to both academic research and policy debates about managing digital engagement to promote mental health.

Test your knowledge of sleep science

Related Content You May Like