Journal Pre-proof

Social comparison on social networking sites

Philippe Verduyn, Nino Gugushvili, Karlijn Massar, Karin Täht,

Ethan Kross

PII: S2352-250X(20)30046-4
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2020.04.002
Reference: COPSYC 998

To appear in: Current Opinion in Psychology

Please cite this article as: Verduyn P, Gugushvili N, Massar K, Täht K, Kross E, Social
comparison on social networking sites, Current Opinion in Psychology (2020),
doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2020.04.002

This is a PDF file of an article that has undergone enhancements after acceptance, such as
the addition of a cover page and metadata, and formatting for readability, but it is not yet the
definitive version of record. This version will undergo additional copyediting, typesetting and
review before it is published in its final form, but we are providing this version to give early
visibility of the article. Please note that, during the production process, errors may be
discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal
pertain.

© 2019 Published by Elsevier.

Submitted to Current Opinion in Psychology

Invited contribution to the special issue on cyberpsychology

Social comparison on social networking sites

Philippe Verduyn*1, Nino Gugushvili1,2, Karlijn Massar1, Karin Täht2, & Ethan Kross3

of
1
Maastricht University, Faculty of Psychology and Neuroscience, Maastricht, Netherlands

ro
2
University of Tartu, Department of Individual and Social Psychology, Tartu, Estonia

3
University of Michigan, Department of Psychology, Ann Arbor, USA

-p
re
*Correspondence to:

Email: philippe.verduyn@maastrichtuniversity.nl
lP

Phone: 0031-433884347

Address: Universiteitssingel 40, 6229 Maastricht, Netherlands

na

Word count: 2158

ur

References: 65
Jo

*Declaration of interest: none

Abstract

Due to the rise of social networking sites (SNSs), social comparisons take place at an unprecedented rate

and scale. There is a growing concern that these online social comparisons negatively impact people’s

1
subjective well-being (SWB). In this paper, we review research on (a) the antecedents of social

comparisons on SNSs, (b) the consequences of social comparisons on SNSs for SWB and, (c) social

comparison as a mechanism explaining (mediator) or affecting (moderator) the relationship between

SNSs and SWB. The occurrence of social comparisons on SNSs depends on who uses the SNS and on how

the SNS is being used with passive use in particular resulting in increased levels of social comparison.

Moreover, social comparison on SNSs may occasionally result in an increase in SWB but typically

negative effects are found as people tend to engage in contrasting upward social comparisons. Finally,

of
several studies show that social comparison is a key mechanism explaining the relationship between use

ro
of SNSs and SWB and that users with a tendency to engage in social comparison are especially likely to

be negatively impacted by SNSs. The dynamic, cyclical processes that result from this pattern of findings

are discussed.

-p
re
Keywords: Social networking sites (SNSs), social media, online social comparison, subjective well-being

(SWB)
lP

Social networking sites (SNSs) have fundamentally changed the way people interact. Facebook is the
na

largest SNS having no less than 2.5 billion monthly active users [1] but other SNSs such as Instagram

(one billion, [2]) and Twitter (330 million, [3]) have vast user bases as well. These users spend a lot of
ur

time on SNSs with recent statistics revealing that worldwide people spend on average more than 2

hours on SNSs each day [4]. The list of SNSs is long but each of these platforms have three common
Jo

defining features [5]; they allow users to (a) create a personal profile, (b) generate a list of online

connections, and (c) view and interact with a stream of frequently updated information which includes

posts of one’s online connections (e.g., Facebook’s News Feed).

People have a fundamental need for social connection [6] and SNSs provide a wide range of

tools which may fulfill this need. One might therefore expect that use of SNSs positively impacts

2
subjective well-being (SWB). However, longitudinal [7,8], experimental [9–11], and meta-analytic studies

[12,13] converge on the conclusion that SNSs have a small negative rather than positive effect overall on

indicators of SWB. This implies that usage of SNSs not only instigates psychological processes which

stimulate SWB but also processes that have a negative impact. Many scholars have pointed to online

social comparison as a key mechanism underlying the detrimental impact of SNSs [14–17].

In this paper we review research examining the role of online social comparison in the context

of the relationship between SNSs and SWB. We begin by first providing a brief explanation of the

of
function and mechanisms underlying social comparison. We then review studies examining (a) the

ro
antecedents of social comparisons on SNSs, (b) the consequences of social comparisons on SNSs for

SWB and, (c) social comparison as a mechanism explaining (mediator) or affecting (moderator) the

relationship between SNSs and SWB.

-p
re
1. Social comparison: from an offline to an online context

Social comparison refers to the tendency of using other people as sources of information to
lP

determine how we are doing relative to others (ability comparison), or how we should behave, think,

and feel (opinion comparison) [18]. These comparisons provide us with information about our own as
na

well as other people’s abilities, social standing, and performance, allowing us to navigate the social

world smoothly. Furthermore, knowledge about other individuals and groups has the potential to satisfy
ur

basic human needs, such as the need for affiliation and esteem [18]. Social comparison is ubiquitous

across cultures [19], is evident in young children [20], and has been put forward as a core feature of
Jo

human social evolution [21].

Central to the social comparison process are the selection of the comparison target (upward:

superior other vs. downward: inferior other) and the consequence of the comparison (assimilation vs.

contrast). Specifically, assimilation refers to the comparer’s self-evaluation changing towards the

comparison target, becoming more positive after upward comparison and more negative after

3
downward comparison. Conversely, contrast refers to the comparer’s self-evaluation changing away

from the comparison target, becoming more negative after upward comparison and more positive after

downward comparison. Although people also make non-diagnostic comparisons with irrelevant

comparison targets [22], social comparisons are more likely when the comparison dimension is relevant

to the self, and when the comparison target is similar to the self. Recent meta-analytic research shows

that in offline contexts, individuals predominantly tend to compare to someone who outperforms them

in a contrasting manner, resulting in lowered self-evaluations, envy and overall worsened mood [23].

of
SNSs provide a fertile ground for social comparisons to take place [15] as information about

ro
similar comparison targets is available at an unprecedented scale. Moreover, especially upward social

comparisons are likely to occur as users of SNSs are more often confronted with the successes than the

-p
failures of their online connections [7]. This is partially due to SNSs making it easy to portray a rosy

image of one’s life. For example, many SNSs allow for asynchronous communication providing ample
re
time to write a clever comment or for photo filtering allowing to further enhance the visual appeal of
lP

already carefully selected pictures. Obviously, before the rise of SNSs people also tried to impress others

but SNSs have made this considerably simpler due to which people are now more often exposed to

idealized images of others and share more often self-enhancing information themselves.
na

2. Antecedents of social comparison on SNS

ur

Two classes of predictors of social comparison on SNSs can be distinguished. First, the

occurrence of social comparison depends on who uses SNSs. One research stream shows that the
Jo

personality of users plays a key role with several studies revealing that neuroticism is positively related

to upward social comparison and feelings of envy [24,25]. Moreover, users’ motivations to engage with

SNSs are relevant, with envy being related to using Facebook to gather information, seeking attention or

passing time [25]. Finally, an increasing number of studies reveal that indicators of SWB may also be

predictive of social comparison on SNSs [26]. Especially people suffering from depressive symptoms and

4
related perceptions of low self-esteem are vulnerable to engaging in damaging social comparisons on

SNSs [27,28] which may further aggravate their mental health.

Second, the occurrence of social comparison depends on how SNSs are used. Ways of using

SNSs can be divided in two categories: active and passive use [15,29]. Active usage pertains to activities

that facilitate direct exchanges with others. This includes targeted one-on-one exchanges (e.g., sending

a private message on Facebook) or broadcasting (e.g., posting a status update on Facebook). Passive

usage refers to monitoring the online life of other users without engaging in direct exchanges with them

of
(e.g., scrolling through news feeds or looking at other users’ profiles). As such, while during active usage

ro
information is mainly produced, during passive usage information is mainly consumed. A wide range of

studies indicate that passive consumption of information on SNSs results in upward comparisons and

-p
associated feelings of envy [14,30–34]. Consistently, meta-analytic evidence reveals a negative

relationship between passive use of SNSs and indicators of SWB while active usage of SNSs may
re
stimulate SWB [35].
lP

It should be noted that a number of studies have questioned that passive consumption of

positive information on SNSs predominantly results in damaging social comparisons [36,37]. The most

well-known study in this regard was conducted by Kramer and colleagues [38] who showed that
na

participants who were exposed to less positive (negative) words posted by their Facebook connections,

subsequently posted less positive (negative) words themselves. They interpreted this result in terms of
ur

emotional contagion whereby positive (negative) emotions experienced by one person transfer to the
Jo

interaction partner. Follow-up studies challenged this interpretation on methodological grounds

demonstrating that the number of positive (negative) words posted or expressed is unrelated to

people’s experience of positive (negative) emotions [39,40]. Moreover, it has been argued that positive

communication following exposure to positive news of others may reflect a self-enhancement strategy

to deal with feelings of inferiority or envy [15,31,41]. For example, when being exposed to a beautiful

5
holiday picture, one may post a similar picture oneself to deal with one’s feelings of interiority and envy.

Such emotion regulatory attempts may then, in turn, initiate feelings of envy in others resulting in a self-

enhancement envy spiral [41,42].

3. Consequences of social comparison on SNS

Cross-sectional [43,44], longitudinal [30,45] and experimental [46] studies on social comparison

on SNSs demonstrate that these comparisons typically result in decreases in SWB. Consistently, two

of
recent meta-analyses [13,47] revealed that social comparison on SNSs in general (i.e., non-directional:

collapsing across social comparison types) predicts a decrease in SWB with a small- to medium-sized

ro
effect, while upward social comparisons predicted decreased SWB with a medium-sized effect.

However, a number of studies revealed that social comparisons on SNSs do not always result in

-p
declines in SWB. First of all, the comparison dimension matters as research showed that social
re
comparison on SNSs is not associated with negative emotional consequences when the comparison is

focused on opinions rather than ability [45]. Second, the position of the comparison target has
lP

consequences with research showing that downward (rather than upward) social comparison does not

result in a decrease of SWB [48]. Third, the response to the comparison target matters with research
na

showing that assimilation (rather than contrast) to an upward comparison target results in feelings of

inspiration which has positive downstream consequences for SWB [49]. Similarly, research on subtypes
ur

of envy [50–52] has shown that so-called benign-envy (related to feelings of inspiration and a tendency

to self-improve) positively impacts SWB while the opposite holds for malicious envy (related to feelings
Jo

of inferiority and a tendency to harm the comparison target) but some authors challenge the

functionality of this distinction between envy types [41,53].

These positive consequences may well be the exception rather than the rule, in the sense that

exposure to the so-called success theatre on SNSs is more likely to elicit negative than positive

emotional responses. This is consistent with the meta-analysis on online social comparison showing that

6
these comparisons have in general a negative impact on SWB [13] and the meta-analysis on offline

social comparison showing that people tend to engage in contrasting upward social comparisons [23].

Nevertheless, future research on the key components underlying the social comparison process on SNSs

may further refine our understanding of the impact of social comparison on SWB. When conducting

such studies, it is important to take into account that people may not readily admit feeling envy as

reflected by divergent conclusions when relying on direct [36] and indirect [14,31] methods to assess

the relative frequency of positive and negative emotions following exposure to positive content on SNSs.

of
4. Social comparison as an explanatory mechanism (mediator) or vulnerability factor (moderator)

ro
Several studies have directly examined whether social comparisons explain (mediate) the

relationship between (subtypes of) SNS use and SWB. This should come as no surprise as the research

-p
described above clearly indicates that passive use of SNSs is predictive of online social comparison and
re
that online social comparison most often negatively impacts indicators of SWB. A wide range of cross-

sectional [33,34,54] and longitudinal studies across short [30] and long [8,55] timescales revealed that
lP

upward social comparisons indeed explain the negative impact of passive use of SNSs on SWB. However,

it should be noted that social comparison is not the only mechanism connecting SNSs to SWB. For
na

example, several studies have shown that active use of SNSs increases social capital and associated

feelings of social connectedness which, in turn, predict increases in SWB [56–58]. Moreover, information
ur

overload [59], procrastination [60], and displacement of face-to-face interactions [61] have all been

proposed as additional explanatory mechanisms underlying the relation between SNSs and SWB. Future
Jo

research is needed to examine how these other explanatory mechanisms relate to subtypes of SNS use

and interact with online social comparison in creating an overall effect of SNSs on SWB.

Finally, a number of studies examined whether social comparison moderates the relation

between SNSs and SWB. These studies suggest that social comparison acts as a vulnerability factor. For

example, people who tend to compare themselves to others (vs. people who do not tend to do so)

7
experience stronger drops in self-esteem and increased levels of depression when viewing other users’

profiles or browsing newsfeed on Facebook [62,63], as well as higher feelings of loneliness [64], and

stronger drops in positive emotions after using Instagram [65]. This evidence further suggests that when

exposure to content on SNSs results in social comparisons (as one would expect from people who have a

tendency to compare themselves to others), SNS use typically results in declines in SWB. However, if

people do not engage in social comparison processes, exposure to positive posts on SNS may not

negatively impact their SWB and may occasionally even foster it.

of
5. Conclusion

ro
In this short review article we demonstrated that social comparison should be taken into account when

explaining the relationship between SNSs and SWB. Social comparisons on SNSs may occasionally result

-p
in an increase of SWB by stimulating feelings of inspiration or motivation to self-improve. However, they
re
typically negatively impact SWB due to the overly positive (rather than negative) content on SNSs,

people’s tendency to select upward (rather than downward) comparison targets and to react to these
lP

targets in a contrasting (rather than assimilating) manner. Research connecting low SWB to subsequent

engagement in online social comparison suggests that the negative feelings that follow social
na

comparison on SNSs may ironically cause people to engage in further damaging social comparisons,

creating a vicious downward cycle. Moreover, as self-enhancement is an often adopted approach to

ur

deal with feelings of inferiority or envy, envious people may also post self-enhancing information on

SNSs themselves. This content is then picked up by other users such that envy cycles may also spread
Jo

across the SNS. A key challenge for future research is to develop interventions to break these cycles and

protect people from the damaging consequences of social comparisons on SNSs.

CRediT_author_statement

8
Due to the nature of this contribution, this document is not applicable I think. I add it because it is
required in the submission system.

Declaration of interests

☒ The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships
that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

of
ro
-p
re
lP
na
ur
Jo

9
 References

[1] Clement J. Number of monthly active Facebook users worldwide as of 4th quarter 2019. Statista,

January 30, 2020. https://www.statista.com/statistics/264810/number-of-monthly-active-

facebook-users-worldwide/.

[2] Clement J. Number of monthly active Instagram users from January 2013 to June 2018. Statista,

December 3, 2019. https://www.statista.com/statistics/253577/number-of-monthly-active-

instagram-users/.

of
[3] Clement J. Number of monthly active Twitter users worldwide from 1st quarter 2010 to 1st

ro
quarter 2019. Statista, August 14, 2019. https://www.statista.com/statistics/282087/number-of-

monthly-active-twitter-users/.

[4]

-p
Clement J. Daily time spent on social networking by internet users worldwide from 2012 to 2018.

Statista, February 26, 2020. https://www.statista.com/statistics/433871/daily-social-media-

re
usage-worldwide/.
lP

[5] Ellison NB, Boyd D. Sociality through social network sites. In: Dutton WH, editor. Oxford Handb.

Internet Stud., Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2013, p. 151–172.

[6] Baumeister RF, Leary MR. Need to belong: Desire for interpersonal attachments as a
na

fundamental human motivation. Psychol Bull 1995;117:497–529.

[7] Kross E, Verduyn P, Demiralp E, Park J, Lee DS, Lin N, et al. Facebook use predicts declines in
ur

subjective well-being in young adults. PLoS One 2013;8:e69841.

Jo

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0069841.

[8] Schmuck D, Karsay K, Matthes J, Stevic A. “Looking Up and Feeling Down”. The influence of

mobile social networking site use on upward social comparison, self-esteem, and well-being of

adult smartphone users. Telemat Informatics 2019;42.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2019.101240.

10
[9] Tromholt M. The Facebook experiment: Quitting Facebook leads to higher levels of well-Being.

Cyberpsychology, Behav Soc Netw 2016;19:661–6. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2016.0259.

[10] Mosquera R, Odunowo M, McNamara T, Guo X, Petrie R. The economic effects of Facebook. Exp

Econ 2020. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10683-019-09625-y.

[11] Brailovskaia J, Ströse F, Schillack H, Margraf J. Less Facebook use – More well-being and a

healthier lifestyle? An experimental intervention study. Comput Human Behav 2020.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2020.106332.

of
[12] Appel M, Marker C, Gnambs T. Are social media ruining our lives? A review of meta-analytic

ro
evidence. Rev Gen Psychol 2019:1–15. https://doi.org/10.1177/1089268019880891.

[13] Yoon S, Kleinman M, Mertz J, Brannick M. Is social network site usage related to depression? A

-p
meta-analysis of Facebook–depression relations. J Affect Disord 2019;248:65–72.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2019.01.026.
re
**The authors conducted a meta-analysis on the relationship between social comparison on SNSs
and depression. The meta-analysis revealed that general social comparisons on SNSs (not taking
lP

subtypes of social comparisons into account) are positively related to depression with small- to
medium-sized effects while upward social comparisons on SNSs are positively related to
depression with medium-sized effects

[14] Krasnova H, Wenninger H, Widjaja T, Buxmann P. Envy on Facebook: A hidden threat to users’ life
na

satisfaction? In: Eymann T, Schwabe G, editors. 11th Int. Conf. Wirtschaftsinformatik, Leipzig:

2013, p. 1–16.
ur

[15] Verduyn P, Ybarra O, Résibois M, Jonides J, Kross E. Do social network sites enhance or
Jo

undermine subjective well-being? A critical review. Soc Issues Policy Rev 2017;11:274–302.

https://doi.org/10.1111/sipr.12033.

[16] Verduyn P, Gugushvili N, Kross E. The impact of social network sites on mental health:

distinguishing active from passive use. World Psychiatry in press.

*The authors provide a short review of research on the relationship between use of SNSs and
SWB. They argue that the consequences of SNS use for SWB criticially depend on how SNSs are

11
 being used. Passive use of SNSs is negatively associated with SWB while active use of SNSs may
increase SWB.

[17] Krause HV, Baum K, Baumann A, Krasnova H. Unifying the detrimental and beneficial effects of

social network site use on self-esteem: A systematic literature review. Media Psychol 2019:1–38.

https://doi.org/10.1080/15213269.2019.1656646.

[18] Festinger L. A Theory of Social Comparison Processes. Hum Relations 1954;7:117–40.

https://doi.org/10.1177/001872675400700202.

of
[19] Baldwin M, Mussweiler T. The culture of social comparison. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A

2018;115:E9067–74. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1721555115.

ro
[20] Steinbeis N, Singer T. The effects of social comparison on social emotions and behavior during

childhood: The ontogeny of envy and Schadenfreude predicts developmental changes in equity-

-p
related decisions. J Exp Child Psychol 2013;115:198–209.
re
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2012.11.009.

[21] Gilbert P, Price J, Allan S. Social comparison, social attractiveness and evolution: How might they
lP

be related? New Ideas Psychol 1995;13:149–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/0732-118X(95)00002-X.

[22] Gilbert, D. T., Giesler, R. B., Morris KA. When comparisons arise. J Pers Soc Psychol 1995;69:227–
na

36.

[23] Gerber JP, Wheeler L, Suls J. A social comparison theory meta-analysis 60+ years on. Psychol Bull
ur

2018;144:177–97. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000127.

**The authors conducted a meta-analysis covering more than sixty years of research on who
Jo

people compare themselves with and on the consequences of these social comparisons. It was
found that people predominantly tend to compare themselves with superior others in a
contrasting manner.

[24] Rozgonjuk D, Ryan T, Kuljus J-K, Täht K, Scott GG. Social comparison orientation mediates the

relationship between neuroticism and passive Facebook use. Cyberpsychology J Psychosoc Res

Cybersp 2019;13. https://doi.org/dx.doi.org/10.5817/CP2019-1-2.

12
[25] Wallace L, James TL, Warkentin M. How do you feel about your friends? Understanding

situational envy in online social networks. Inf Manag 2017;54:669–82.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2016.12.010.

[26] Frison E, Eggermont S. “Harder, Better, Faster, Stronger”: Negative comparison on Facebook and

adolescents’ life satisfaction are reciprocally related. Cyberpsychol Behav Soc Netw 2016;19:158–

64. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2015.0296.

[27] Appel H, Crusius J, Gerlach AL. Social comparison, envy, and depression on Facebook: A study

of
looking at the effects of high comparison standards on depressed individuals. J Soc Clin Psychol

ro
2015;34:277–89. https://doi.org/10.1521/jscp.2015.34.4.277.

[28] Jang K, Park N, Song H. Social comparison on Facebook: Its antecedents and psychological

[29] -p
outcomes. Comput Human Behav 2016;62:147–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.03.082.

Burke M, Marlow C, Lento T. Social network activity and social well-being. Proc. SIGCHI Conf.
re
Hum. Factors Comput. Syst., 2010, p. 1909–12. https://doi.org/10.1145/1753326.1753613.
lP

[30] Verduyn P, Lee DS, Park J, Shablack H, Orvell A, Bayer J, et al. Passive Facebook usage undermines

affective well-being: Experimental and longitudinal evidence. J Exp Psychol Gen 2015;144:480–8.

https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000057.
na

[31] Krasnova H, Widjaja T, Buxmann P, Wenninger H, Benbasat I. Research Note - Why following

friends can hurt you: An exploratory investigation of the effects of envy on social networking
ur

sites among college-age users. Inf Syst Res 2015;26:585–605.

Jo

https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.2015.0588.

[32] Hu Y-T, Liu Q-Q. Passive social network site use and adolescent materialism: Upward social

comparison as a mediator. Soc Behav Personal an Int J 2020;48:1–8.

https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.8833.

[33] Burnell K, George MJ, Vollet JW, Ehrenreich SE, Underwood MK. Passive social networking site

13
 use and well-being: The mediating roles of social comparison and the fear of missing out.

Cyberpsychology J Psychosoc Res Cybersp 2019;13. https://doi.org/10.5817/cp2019-3-5.

[34] Ozimek P, Bierhoff HW. All my online-friends are better than me–three studies about ability-

based comparative social media use, self-esteem, and depressive tendencies. Behav Inf Technol

2019;0:1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929X.2019.1642385.

[35] Liu D, Baumeister RF, Yang CC, Hu B. Digital communication media use and psychological well-

being: A meta-analysis. J Comput Commun 2019;24:259–74.

of
https://doi.org/10.1093/ccc/zmz013.

ro
*The authors conduct a meta-analysis on the relationship between subtypes of SNS use and SWB.
They found that passive usage of SNSs is negatively related to SWB while active usage of SNSs
positively impacts SWB.

[36]

-p
Lin R, Utz S. The emotional responses of browsing Facebook: Happiness, envy, and the role of tie

strength. Comput Human Behav 2015;52:29–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.04.064.

re
[37] Ferrara E, Yang Z. Measuring emotional contagion in social media. PLoS One 2015;10:1–14.
lP

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0142390.

[38] Kramer ADI, Guillory JE, Hancock JT. Experimental evidence of massive-scale emotional contagion

through social networks. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2014;111:8788–90.

na

https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1320040111.

[39] Kross E, Verduyn P, Boyer M, Drake B, Gainsburg I, Vickers B, et al. Does counting emotion words
ur

on online social networks provide a window into people’s subjective experience of emotion? A
Jo

case study on facebook. Emotion 2019;19:97–107. https://doi.org/10.1037/emo0000416.

*The authors show that the number of positive (negative) words people post on social networking
sites is unrelated to people’s experience of positive (negative) emotions. As such, research
showing that exposure to positive posts results in increased posting of positive words does not
provide evidence for emotional contagion.

[40] Sun J, Schwartz HA, Son Y, Kern ML, Vazire S. The language of well-being: Tracking fluctuations in

emotion experience through everyday speech. J Pers Soc Psychol 2020;118:364–87.

14
 https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000244.

[41] Wenninger H, Cheung CM, Krasnova H. College-aged users behavioral strategies to reduce envy

on social networking sites: A cross-cultural investigation. Comput Human Behav 2019;97:10–23.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.02.025.

*The authors examine how SNS users respond to feelings of envy. They show that feelings of envy
result in self-enhancement, gossiping, and discontinuous intention. Self-enhancement may elicit
envy in other users, creating a self-enhancement envy spiral.

[42] Krasnova H, Widjaja T, Buxmann P, Wenninger H, Benbasat I. Research Note - Why following

of
friends can hurt you : An exploratory investigation of the effects of envy on social networking

ro
sites among college-age users. Inf Syst Res 2015;26:585–605.

https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.2015.0588.

[43]

-p
Niu G feng, Luo Y jun, Sun X jun, Zhou Z kui, Yu F, Yang SL, et al. Qzone use and depression among

Chinese adolescents: A moderated mediation model. J Affect Disord 2018;231:58–62.

re
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2018.01.013.
lP

[44] Sherlock M, Wagstaff DL. Exploring the relationship between frequency of Instagram use,

exposure to idealized images, and psychological well-being in women. Psychol Pop Media Cult

2018;8:482–90. https://doi.org/10.1037/ppm0000182.
na

[45] Yang C, Holden SM, Carter MDK. Social media social comparison of ability (but not opinion)

predicts lower identity clarity: Identity processing style as a mediator. J Youth Adolesc
ur

2018;47:2114–28.
Jo

[46] Tiggemann M, Hayden S, Brown Z, Veldhuis J. The effect of Instagram “likes” on women’s social

comparison and body dissatisfaction. Body Image 2018;26:90–7.

[47] Yang FR, Wei CF, Tang JH. Effect of Facebook social comparison on well-being: A meta-analysis. J

Internet Technol 2019;20:1829–36. https://doi.org/10.3966/160792642019102006013.

[48] Feltman CE, Szymanski DM. Instagram use and self-objectification: The roles of internalization,

15
 comparison, appearance commentary, and feminism. Sex Roles 2018;78:311–24.

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-017-0796-1.

[49] Park SY, Baek YM. Two faces of social comparison on Facebook: The interplay between social

comparison orientation, emotions, and psychological well-being. Comput Human Behav

2018;79:83–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.10.028.

*The authors studied how social comparison orientations on SNSs impact SWB by social
comparison based emotions. They showed that social comparisons on SNSs do not always result
in declines in SWB.

of
[50] Meier A, Schaefer S. Positive side of social comparison on social network sites: How envy can

ro
drive inspiration on Instagram. Cyberpsychol Behav Soc Netw 2018;21:411–7.

https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2017.0708.

[51]

-p
Lim M, Yang Y. Upward social comparison and Facebook users’ grandiosity: Examining the effect

of envy on loneliness and subjective well-being. Online Inf Rev 2019;43:635–52.

re
https://doi.org/10.1108/OIR-04-2017-0137.
lP

[52] Noon EJ, Meier A. Inspired by friends: Adolescents’ network homophily moderates the

relationship between social comparison, envy, and inspiration on instagram. Cyberpsychology,

Behav Soc Netw 2019. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2019.0412.

na

[53] Cohen-Charash Y, Larson EC. An emotion divided: Studying envy is better than studying “benign”

and “malicious” envy. Curr Dir Psychol Sci 2017;26:174–83.

ur

https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721416683667.
Jo

[54] Wang JL, Wang HZ, Gaskin J, Hawk S. The mediating roles of upward social comparison and self-

esteem and the moderating role of social comparison orientation in the association between

social networking site usage and subjective well-being. Front Psychol 2017;8:1–9.

https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00771.

[55] Rousseau A, Eggermont S, Frison E. The reciprocal and indirect relationships between passive

16
 Facebook use, comparison on Facebook, and adolescents’ body dissatisfaction. Comput Human

Behav 2017;73:336–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.03.056.

[56] Kim J, Lee J-ER. The Facebook paths to happiness: Effects of the number of Facebook friends and

self-presentation on subjective well-being. Cyberpsychology, Behav Soc Netw 2010;14:359–64.

https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2010.0374.

[57] Frison E, Eggermont S. Exploring the relationships between different types of Facebook use,

perceived online social support, and adolescents’ depressed mood. Soc Sci Comput Rev

of
2016;34:153–71. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894439314567449.

ro
[58] Frison E, Eggermont S. Toward an integrated and differential approach to the relationships

between loneliness, different types of Facebook use, and adolescents’ depressed mood.

[59] -p
Communic Res 2015:009365021561750. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650215617506.

Koroleva K, Krasnova H, Günther O. “STOP SPAMMING ME !” - Exploring information overload on

re
Facebook. Proc 16th Am Conf Inf Syst 2010:1–8.
lP

[60] Hinsch C, Sheldon K. The impact of frequent social internet consumption: Increased

procrastination and lower life satisfaction. J Consum Behav 2013;12:496–505.

https://doi.org/10.1002/cb.
na

[61] Twenge JM, Spitzberg BH, Campbell WK. Less in-person social interaction with peers among U.S.

adolescents in the 21st century and links to loneliness. J Soc Pers Relat 2019;36:1892–913.
ur

https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407519836170.
Jo

[62] Vogel EA, Rose JP, Okdie BM, Eckles K, Franz B. Who compares and despairs? The effect of social

comparison orientation on social media use and its outcomes. Pers Individ Dif 2015;86:249–56.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2015.06.026.

[63] Alfasi Y. The grass is always greener on my Friends’ profiles: The effect of Facebook social

comparison on state self-esteem and depression. Pers Individ Dif 2019;147:111–7.

17
 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2019.04.032.

[64] Yang C. Instagram use, loneliness, and social Comparison orientation: Interact and browse on

social media, but don’t compare. Cyberpsychology, Behav Soc Netw 2016;19:703–8.

https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2016.0201.

[65] de Vries DA, Möller AM, Wieringa MS, Eigenraam AW, Hamelink K. Social comparison as the thief

of joy: Emotional consequences of viewing strangers’ Instagram posts. Media Psychol

2018;21:222–45.

of
ro
-p
re
lP
na
ur
Jo

18