Peer Connectedness and Social Technology Use During COVID-19 Lockdown

Abstract

During the COVID-19 pandemic lockdown, adolescents relied on social technology for social connection. Although some research suggests small, negative effects for quantity of social technology use on adolescent mental health, the quality of the interaction may be more important. We conducted a daily diary study in a risk-enriched sample of girls under COVID-19 lockdown to investigate associations between daily social technology use, peer closeness, and emotional health. For 10 days, 93 girls (ages 12-17) completed an online daily diary (88% compliance) assessing positive affect, symptoms of anxiety and depression, peer closeness, and daily time texting, video-chatting and using social media. Multilevel fixed effects models with Bayesian estimation were conducted. At the within-person level, more daily time texting or video-chatting with peers was associated with feeling closer to peers that day, which was associated with more positive affect and fewer depressive and anxiety symptoms that day. At the between-person level, more time video-chatting with peers across the 10 days was indirectly associated with higher average positive affect during lockdown and less depression seven-months later, via higher mean closeness with peers. Social media use was not associated with emotional health at the within- or between-person levels. Messaging and video-chatting technologies are important tools for maintaining peer connectedness during social isolation, with beneficial effects on emotional health.

Keywords: Adolescents; Anxiety; COVID-19; Daily diary; Depression; Emotion.

Fig. 1

Significant within-person pathways a = direct within-person effect of day number on feeling close/connected (Est.=0.09, SD = 0.03, 95% CI: 0.04, 0.14); b = direct within-person effect of video-chatting on feeling close/connected (Est. = 0.53, SD = 0.09, 95% CI: 0.36, 0.70); c = direct within-person effect of texting on feeling close/connected (Est. =0.49, SD = 0.09, 95% CI: 0.31, 0.67); d = direct within-person effect of day number on positive affect (Est. = − 0.08, SD = 0.02, 95% CI: − 0.11, − 0.04); e = direct within-person effect of assessment timing (weekend) on positive affect (Est.= 0.23, SD = 0.11, 95% CI: 0.03, 0.44); f = direct within-person effect of day number on depressive symptoms (Est. = − 0.03, SD = 0.01, 95% CI: − 0.05, − 0.00); g = direct within-person effect of assessment timing (weekend) on depressive symptoms (Est. =-0.14, SD = 0.07, 95% CI: − 0.28, − 0.01); h_i = direct within-person effect of feeling close/connected on positive affect (Est. =0.17, SD = 0.03, 95% CI: 0.13, 0.23); h_ii = indirect within-person effect of video-chatting on positive affect via closeness/connectedness (Est. =0.09, SD = 0.02, 95% CI: 0.06, 0.14); h_iii = indirect within-person effect of texting on positive affect via closeness/connectedness (Est. =0.09, SD = 0.02, 95% CI: 0.05, 0.13); i_i = direct within-person effect of feeling close/connected on anxiety symptoms (Est. = − 0.05, SD = 0.02, 95% CI: − 0.08, − 0.02); i_ii = indirect within-person effect of video-chatting on anxiety symptoms via closeness/connectedness (Est. = − 0.03, SD = 0.01, 95% CI: − 0.05, − 0.01); i_iii = indirect within-person effect of texting on anxiety symptoms via closeness/connectedness (Est. = − 0.02, SD = 0.01, 95% CI: − 0.05, − 0.01); j_i = direct within-person effect of feeling close/connected on depressive symptoms (Est. = − 0.06, SD = 0.02, 95% CI: − 0.09, − 0.02); j_ii = indirect within-person effect of video-chatting on depressive symptoms via closeness/connectedness (Est. =0.03, SD = 0.01, 95% CI: − 0.05, − 0.01); j_iii = indirect within-person effect of texting on depressive symptoms via closeness/connectedness (Est. = − 0.03, SD = 0.01, 95% CI: − 0.05, − 0.01).

Fig. 2

Significant between-person pathways a = direct between-person effect of baseline depressive symptoms on feeling close/connected (Est. = − 0.94, SD = 0.29, 95% CI: -1.51, − 0.37); b = direct between-person effect of video-chatting on feeling close/connected (Est. =0.76, SD = 0.34, 95% CI: 0.09, 1.43); c = direct between-person effect of average level of video-chatting on average level of positive affect (Est. = − 0.77, SD = 0.35, 95% CI: -1.48, − 0.10); d = direct between-person effect of average baseline depressive symptoms on daily diary anxiety symptoms (Est. = 0.39, SD = 0.20, 95% CI: 0.01, 0.78); e = direct between-person effect of average baseline depressive symptoms on daily diary depressive symptoms (Est. = 0.48, SD = 0.15, 95% CI: 0.18, 0.79); f = direct between-person effect of average baseline anxiety symptoms on follow-up anxiety symptoms (Est. = 0.81, SD = 0.10, 95% CI: 0.62, 0.99); g = direct between-person effect of baseline depressive symptoms on follow-up depressive symptoms (Est. = 0.68, SD = 0.16, 95% CI: 0.36, 1.00); h_i = direct between-person effect of average level of feeling close/connected on average level of positive affect (Est. = 0.67, SD = 0.13, 95% CI: 0.41, 0.93); h_ii = indirect between-person effect of baseline depression on positive affect via closeness/connectedness (Est. = − 0.61, SD = 0.24, 95% CI: -1.13, − 0.21); h_iii = indirect between-person effect of video-chatting on positive affect via closeness/connectedness (Est. =0.49, SD = 0.26, 95% CI = 0.06, 1.06); i_i = direct between-person effect of feeling close/connected on follow-up depressive symptoms (Est. = − 0.16, SD = 0.07, 95% CI: − 0.29, − 0.03); i_ii = indirect between-person effect of baseline depressive symptoms on follow-up depressive symptoms via closeness/connectedness (Est. =0.14, SD = 0.08, 95% CI: 0.02, 0.33); i_iii = indirect between-person effect of video-chatting on follow-up depressive symptoms via closeness/connectedness (Est. = − 0.11, SD = 0.08, 95% CI: − 0.30, − 0.003).