For years, the conversation around young people and screens has been dominated by one word: risk. But new research suggests that framing might be missing half the story.
Drawing on 90 studies across 26 countries, the review by the Australian Catholic University's Institute of Positive Psychology and Education found social media and online gaming can genuinely benefit young people, building skills, supporting identity and helping them feel like they belong.
Perhaps more surprising is the finding that teenagers aren't the passive scrollers they're often made out to be. Many are actively curating their feeds, and shaping their own online experience.
The positive outcomes found were divided into three themes: autonomy, which includes self-expression and identity exploration; competence, which includes learning and skill development; and relatedness, which includes friendships and belonging.
The research also found that adolescents understand how platform algorithms work and use this knowledge to influence what appears in their feeds. This involved unfollowing accounts, deleting apps, and prioritising content that felt positive or affirming.
A ban only delays the real challenge
With Australia's new social media ban for under-16s built partly on evidence linking heavy use to anxiety, depression and sleep problems, lead author Dr Chloe Gordon says Principals shouldn't take that as the full picture.
“Our review doesn’t suggest that online risks are unimportant. Adolescents can experience challenges online,” Dr Gordon told The Educator. “Our review suggests this is only part of the story.”
Dr Gordon said while restrictions might have a place where there are clear risks or concerns, restriction alone is unlikely to prepare young people for life in a digitally connected world.
“A ban may delay access, but it doesn’t remove the need to learn how to navigate digital environments safely,” she said.
“The question for schools isn’t simply how to protect young people from online spaces, but how to protect them within them. That means helping students develop digital judgement, media literacy, help-seeking and confidence to engage online in ways that support their wellbeing and learning.”
The agency schools aren't accounting for
Asked whether teenagers are more capable of self-regulating online than the ban's design-addiction rationale assumes, Dr Gordon said what schools are seeing is more nuanced than either side of that debate suggests.
“We’re seeing both. Platforms are often designed to capture attention and keep users engaged, and that presents challenges for adults and young people,” she said.
“At the same time, our review found many adolescents are not passive consumers of digital media. They described shaping their online environments by unfollowing accounts, deleting apps, seeking positive content and making deliberate decisions about what they engage with online.”
Dr Gordon said a key finding was that many young people were exercising agency in their digital lives.
“They understood that online experiences could affect how they felt and took steps to manage them,” she said. “That doesn’t mean every adolescent self-regulates effectively, nor that platform design should escape scrutiny.”
However, Dr Gordon said it challenges the idea that young people are simply passive recipients of whatever appears in their feeds.
“Many are developing skills to navigate digital environments. The challenge for schools and policy makers is how to strengthen capabilities rather than assume they don’t exist.”
Beyond risk education, into practice
On how Principals can translate the review into wellbeing and digital citizenship policy without undermining the safety rationale behind the bans, Dr Gordon said the starting point is treating students as knowledgeable participants in their own digital lives, not blank slates needing protection.
“Risk education is important, but our findings suggest schools can also help students develop the skills, judgement and confidence to use digital technologies in ways that support wellbeing and learning,” she said.
“A useful starting point is to approach young people as knowledgeable about their own digital lives. Teachers can ask students about how they curate their feeds, what content make them feel informed or supported, and how they decide when to step back from a platform.”
Additionally, Dr Gordon said wellbeing and digital citizenship programs can be designed to support adolescents’ needs for autonomy, competence and relatedness.
“This means helping students make value-aligned choices, use digital tools in a self-regulated way, and foster online belonging,” she said.
“In practice, this might mean teaching students about algorithms, digital habits, online peer cultures and the difference between content that is engaging and content that is genuinely helpful or affirming. It is also about empowering young people to make digital choices that reflect their values.”