Remember: Population statistics tell us what happens on average, but your experience might differ substantially. Trust your own wellbeing signals while remaining open to evidence-based insights.
I. Introduction
In a world where opinions on social media swing wildly between "digital poison" and "harmless pastime," finding solid ground can feel impossible. Last week, my neighbor Clara announced she was quitting Instagram "for her mental health," while my colleague Thomas insisted his Facebook usage had "absolutely no effect" on his well-being. Both spoke with equal conviction, yet neither had much beyond personal anecdote to support their position.
Fortunately, science has finally caught up with our collective curiosity. A groundbreaking study led by researchers Hunt Allcott and Matthew Gentzkow has provided the most comprehensive look yet at what happens when people quit major social platforms. With nearly 35,000 participants who deactivated either Facebook or Instagram for 5-6 weeks, this research offers insights that go far beyond the typical "I quit social media for a week and you won't believe what happened" articles that pollute our feeds.
Today, we examine what happens when people quit Facebook or Instagram for over a month, what it means for wellbeing, and—most importantly—how to apply these findings to your own digital life without unnecessary drama or oversimplification.
II. The Study: What Actually Happened
The experiment's design was refreshingly straightforward: researchers recruited tens of thousands of participants. They randomly assigned participants to either deactivate their Facebook or Instagram accounts for 5-6 weeks or continue using them as usual. The timing—during the 2020 U.S. election—was deliberately chosen as a period when social media's effects might be particularly pronounced. Participants were compensated for their participation, which helped ensure they adhered to the protocol rather than sneaking back onto platforms.
What makes this study particularly robust is its scale—with approximately 35,000 participants, it's about 20 times larger than previous similar studies. The researchers also verified compliance through direct platform data, rather than relying solely on self-reports, thereby eliminating the "I only checked it once or twice" phenomenon that often plagues self-reported digital detoxes.
So what happened? From my understanding, people who quit Facebook experienced a modest improvement in emotional well-being, about 0.060 standard deviations on their well-being index. Instagram quitters saw a slightly smaller benefit of 0.041 standard deviations.
If those numbers sound small and somewhat abstract, that's because they are. To put it in more practical terms, the improvement is roughly equivalent to about 3.8% of people feeling happy "often" instead of "sometimes." It's approximately 15-22% as large as the typical benefit people receive from psychological interventions, such as therapy.
The demographic patterns were particularly interesting. Facebook's effects were more substantial for people over 35, while Instagram's negative impact was most pronounced among women aged 18-24. For young women specifically, quitting Instagram had an effect approximately 17% as large as the overall decline in young people's wellbeing observed between 2008 and 2022.
Perhaps most surprising was what happened to people's time. Rather than rediscovering offline hobbies or deep human connections, most participants switched to other apps. The great digital detox dream of suddenly picking up watercolor painting or reading Proust largely failed to materialize.
III. Interpreting Small Effects Honestly
Let's be frank: the measured effects were minor. In social science research, effects of 0.2, 0.5, and 0.8 standard deviations are typically considered small, medium, and large, respectively. At 0.060 and 0.041, the Facebook and Instagram effects fall well below even the conventional threshold for "small" effects.
I was reminded of this when my friend Elena triumphantly declared that quitting Instagram had "completely transformed" her life. The evidence suggests such dramatic changes are unlikely for most people. However, Elena may well be in a demographic subgroup with more potent effects, or perhaps the psychological relief of making any positive change created a beneficial placebo effect.
Still, minor effects matter for several reasons. First, they're cumulative. A series of small, positive changes to your digital habits can collectively produce meaningful improvements in your well-being. Second, at the population scale, small individual effects translate to significant overall impact when millions or billions of users are considered. Third, the intervention is essentially free and requires minimal effort, unlike many wellbeing practices that demand time, money, or substantial lifestyle changes.
The subgroup analysis is particularly important. The finding that Instagram has more substantial negative effects on young women isn't surprising to anyone who has watched a teenage girl anxiously checking likes on her latest post, but having empirical confirmation helps us move beyond intuition to evidence-based approaches.
What's perhaps most refreshing about these findings is their moderation. They support neither the tech evangelists who insist social media is entirely benign nor the doomsayers who blame it for society's collapse. The truth, as is often the case, sits somewhere in the awkward, nuanced middle. Of course, the answer to this article should have started with "it depends".
IV. Beyond Quitting: A More Nuanced Approach
If there's one thing humans love, it's a binary choice. On or off. Good or bad. Delete your accounts or scroll freely. But the reality of social media's impact demands more nuance.
Consider Maria, a graphic designer in Barcelona who struggled with Instagram's impact on her creativity. Rather than quitting entirely, she implemented a carefully curated approach: following only accounts that genuinely inspired her work, limiting usage to 20 minutes each morning, and taking complete breaks during project deadlines. "It's not about being on Instagram or off Instagram," she told me. "It's about making it work for my actual goals instead of working for it."
The study results support Maria's intuition. While complete deactivation yielded modest benefits, there is reason to believe that modifying our use of these platforms might be equally effective. After all, social media encompasses a vast range of experiences—from passive scrolling through influencer content to active communication with close friends to professional networking.
The quality of our social media experience likely matters as much as the quantity. A platform filled with close connections, shared interests, and meaningful exchanges probably affects us differently than one dominated by political arguments, celebrity culture, or carefully curated lifestyle content designed to provoke envy.
This quality dimension helps explain why effects vary so dramatically between individuals. My colleague Xavier insists that Facebook is essential to his well-being because it connects him to his extended family across three continents. Meanwhile, his wife, Sophia, finds the same platform anxiety-inducing because former classmates' seemingly perfect lives dominate her feed. Both are correct about their own experiences, even as they draw opposite conclusions about the platform. Again, the pros and cons of any platform are faces of the same coin, not different ones.
V. Practical Applications for Eudaimonia
So what does all this mean for those of us seeking eudaimonic wellbeing in a digital age? How do we translate modest statistical effects into practical wisdom?
First, consider strategic platform breaks. The study demonstrated that 5-6 week deactivations produced measurable benefits. You might experiment with periodic social media holidays—perhaps one week per quarter, or a month during particularly busy or stressful periods in your professional life. The key is approaching these breaks not as permanent lifestyle changes but as regular reset opportunities.
Thomas, a management consultant in Frankfurt, implemented what he calls "social media seasons"—actively using platforms for three months, then taking a three-month break completely off. "The breaks help me notice which parts I actually miss and which parts were just habit," he explained. "After each break, I come back with clearer intentions."
Second, practice mindful content curation. If Instagram shows more substantial negative effects among young women, and this is likely connected to appearance-focused content, consider ruthlessly eliminating accounts that provoke appearance comparison or consistent negative emotions. This isn't about avoiding all challenging content—political news and global awareness remain important (or not, you know better yourself) —but about intentionally shaping your feed to support rather than undermine your well-being.
Third, consider demographic vulnerability patterns. The study demonstrated that different platforms have varying effects on various groups. If you're over 35, being mindful of Facebook usage might be particularly important. If you're a young woman, Instagram deserves special attention. These aren't absolute rules, but they provide a starting point for self-reflection.
Fourth, monitor your own emotional responses. The average effects in the study were modest, but individual variation was substantial. Pay attention to how you feel during and after using the platform. Some people find that a simple mood rating (1-10) before and after social media sessions helps identify patterns that might otherwise go unnoticed.
Fifth, when reducing social media time, plan your substitutions intentionally. The study found that people automatically filled their time with other apps. Instead, consider pre-planning both digital and non-digital alternatives. Perhaps some of your Facebook time could be redirected to messaging apps that maintain social connections without the news feed. At the same time, another portion might be devoted to a non-screen activity.
Finally, be especially mindful during periods of high stress. The study was conducted during an election when political content was particularly prevalent. Consider taking planned breaks during similar periods—whether political events, global crises, or personal stress points when your emotional resilience might already be taxed.
VI. Conclusion: A Balanced Perspective
What emerges from this research is neither a call to digital abandonment nor permission for unlimited scrolling. Instead, we find evidence supporting a thoughtful, individualized approach to platform usage—one that acknowledges both the real but modest costs to wellbeing and the genuine benefits that keep billions of us coming back daily.
Social media management represents just one element in the broader pursuit of eudaimonic wellbeing. It exists alongside sleep quality, physical movement, meaningful work, and human connection as factors within our partial control that influence how we experience our lives.
In future issues, we'll explore how digital wellbeing intersects with workplace satisfaction, family dynamics, and creative pursuits. We'll continue examining evidence rather than anecdote, nuance rather than extremes, and practical wisdom rather than viral oversimplification.
The platforms that connect us are neither villain nor hero in our quest for wellbeing—merely tools whose effects depend largely on how skillfully we wield them.
VII. Further Reading
For those interested in exploring this topic further:
- The original study by Allcott, Gentzkow, et al. is available through the National Bureau of Economic Research
- "Digital Minimalism" by Cal Newport offers a philosophical framework for technology use
- "How to Break Up With Your Phone" by Catherine Price provides practical strategies for changing digital habits
As always, I welcome your questions and experiences for future issues. How has social media affected your well-being? Have you experimented with breaks or usage changes? Your insights might help fellow readers navigate their own digital lives.
Key Takeaways
- Quitting social media produces modest but real wellbeing benefits (15-22%, as large as the benefits of therapy)
- Different platforms affect different demographics differently—Instagram shows more potent effects on young women, Facebook on older adults.
- Periodic breaks (5-6 weeks) can serve as effective resets without requiring permanent platform abandonment.
- Quality of usage matters as much as quantity—who you follow, how you engage, and why you use platforms.
- Self-monitoring is essential—the average effect is small, but individual responses vary significantly.
Ask yourself: After using social media, do I feel better, worse, or about the same? Your answer matters more than any study.
