Meta’s Internal Study Reveals Parental Controls Ineffective in Reducing Teens’ Social Media Overuse
In a revealing internal study titled Project MYST, conducted by Meta in collaboration with the University of Chicago, findings indicate that parental supervision and control mechanisms—such as setting time limits and restricting access—have minimal impact on curbing teenagers’ compulsive use of social media platforms. The research further highlights that adolescents who have encountered stressful life events are more prone to excessive social media engagement, lacking the ability to self-regulate their usage effectively.
These insights emerged prominently during a recent social media addiction trial in the Los Angeles County Superior Court. The plaintiff, identified as KGM or by her first name, Kaley, along with her mother and other participants, is suing major social media companies, alleging that their platforms are addictive and dangerous. The lawsuit claims that these platforms have contributed to a range of mental health issues among young users, including anxiety, depression, body dysmorphia, eating disorders, self-harm, and suicidal thoughts.
This case is among several landmark trials scheduled for this year, all accusing social media companies of causing harm to children. The outcomes of these lawsuits are expected to significantly influence how these companies approach their younger user base and may prompt regulatory bodies to implement stricter measures.
In this particular trial, the defendants include Meta, YouTube, ByteDance (the parent company of TikTok), and Snap. Notably, ByteDance and Snap have already settled their claims prior to the commencement of the trial.
During the proceedings, Kaley’s attorney, Mark Lanier, referenced Meta’s internal study, suggesting that the company was aware of the specific harms associated with its platforms but chose not to disclose them publicly.
Project MYST, an acronym for the Meta and Youth Social Emotional Trends survey, concluded that parental and household factors have little association with teens’ reported levels of attentiveness to their social media use. In essence, the study suggests that parental efforts to control or supervise their children’s social media activities—whether through direct supervision, household rules, or built-in parental controls—do not significantly influence the likelihood of teens overusing or compulsively engaging with social media. The study’s conclusions are based on a survey involving 1,000 teenagers and their parents, focusing on their social media usage patterns.
Both parents and teens concurred with these findings, indicating there is no association between either parental reports or teen reports of parental supervision, and teens’ survey measures of attentiveness or capability.
If these findings hold true, it implies that tools like Instagram’s built-in parental controls or smartphone time limits may not effectively deter teens from excessive social media use. The plaintiff’s legal team argues that social media platforms exploit teenagers through features designed to maximize engagement, such as algorithmic feeds that encourage continuous scrolling, variable rewards that manipulate dopamine responses, persistent notifications, and inadequate parental control tools.
During his testimony, Instagram’s head, Adam Mosseri, claimed unfamiliarity with Project MYST, despite documents suggesting he had approved the study’s initiation. Mosseri stated, We do a lot of research projects, and could not recall specific details about MYST beyond its name.
The plaintiff’s attorney emphasized that this study exemplifies why social media companies should be held accountable for the alleged harms caused by their platforms, rather than placing the onus solely on parents. He highlighted that Kaley’s mother had actively attempted to mitigate her daughter’s social media addiction, including confiscating her phone on multiple occasions.
Furthermore, the study found that teens who had experienced a higher number of adverse life events—such as dealing with alcoholic parents, facing harassment at school, or other significant challenges—reported lower levels of attentiveness to their social media use. This suggests that adolescents undergoing real-life trauma are at a heightened risk of developing addictive behaviors towards social media.
On the stand, Mosseri acknowledged this finding to some extent, stating, There’s a variety of reasons this can be the case. One I’ve heard often is that people use Instagram as a way to escape from a more difficult reality. Meta avoids labeling any form of overuse as addiction; instead, Mosseri mentioned that the company uses the term problematic use to describe situations where individuals spend more time on Instagram than they feel good about.
Meta’s legal representatives argued that the study was primarily focused on understanding whether teens felt they were using social media excessively, rather than determining actual addiction. They also aimed to shift responsibility towards parents and the realities of life circumstances as catalysts for negative emotional states in teens, rather than attributing these issues to the design of social media products.
For instance, Meta’s lawyers pointed out that Kaley was a child of divorced parents, had an abusive father, and faced bullying at school.
The jury’s interpretation of studies like Project MYST, along with testimonies from both sides, remains to be seen. Mosseri noted that MYST’s findings had not been publicly released, and no warnings were issued to teens or parents as a result of the research.
Meta has been approached for comment on these developments.
