Does Social Media Make Us Sad, Stupid, and Narcissistic?

The rise of smartphones and social media—such as Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram—is arguably one of the most challenging developments that individuals, families, and societies are faced with today. Many recent books and news articles highlight the negative psychological implications of social media use. It seems that the grimmer the picture drawn, the better the sales of these books and the higher the number of clicks generated. But is this pessimistic assessment backed by research evidence?

Over the last ten years, thousands of scholarly articles were published on the correlates and consequences of social media use. For example, studies show that the more that teenagers use social media, the sadder and lonelier they feel. Other studies, however, reported a reverse pattern: The more the merrier! And other studies find no relationship at all. Given the large number of diverging findings on the effects of social media, commentators sometimes cherry-pick whatever study result fits their scientific, journalistic, or personal goals. This is a conundrum that is common to many research fields in the social and behavioral sciences.

One way to make sense of many of these contradictory results is to conduct a meta-analysis—a statistical procedure that boils down existing evidence by combining data across many studies that have been conducted on the same topic. In an article to be published in Review of General Psychology, my colleagues Caroline Marker, Timo Gnambs, and I reviewed what recent meta-analyses have to say about the relationship between social media use on the one hand and well-being, school achievement, and narcissism on the other. We chose these three topics because they have attracted a vast amount of research, and several meta-analyses have been conducted on research findings on these topics.

Here is what you need to know about each of these topics:

Social media use and well-being. Four meta-analyses have addressed the relationship between social media use and indicators of psychological well-being. These analyses aggregated data from up to 30 studies that included over 22,000 participants. The studies provide only weak support for the idea that social media use (measured by the frequency of log-ins or the time spent with social media) is associated with greater loneliness, lower self-esteem, lower life satisfaction, or self-reported depression. Thus, there is no support for the claim that social media has potentially devastating effects on people's well-being.

Social media use and school achievement. The relationship between social media use and school achievement was examined by three meta-analyses, summarizing up to 50 studies and 100,000 participants. All three meta-analyses identified only small associations between the frequency of log-ins or the time spent with social media and students' school grades. For adolescents, there is no association at all. Moreover, studies indicate that using social media for academic purposes is associated with getting higher grades in school.

Social media use and narcissism. Some researchers have argued that people's narcissistic tendencies can be expressed and nourished by engaging with social media. Three meta-analyses that were based on up to 57 studies and 25,000 participants found some support for a link between social media and narcissism. Narcissists tend to have more social media friends, and the frequency of posting and sharing pictures is particularly strongly associated with narcissism.

Interestingly, these relationships between social media use and narcissism appear to be larger in non-Western than in Western countries. The cultures in many non-Western countries may provide fewer opportunities for narcissists to show off and assert their superiority in the off-line world. So, narcissists in those countries may find social media more useful for getting attention from other people.  

After reviewing these meta-analyses, my colleagues and I conclude that available evidence does not support the assumption that social media use has—on average—severe detrimental consequences. Our conclusion is, of course, not a final verdict. But at present, evidence does not support the idea that social media has highly negative consequences in these three areas.


For Further Reading:

Appel, M., Gnambs, T., & Marker, C. (2019). Are social media ruining our lives? A review of meta-analytic evidence. Review of General Psychology. Ahead-of-Print

URL to open access preprint: https://tinyurl.com/y3d3xmvh

See also: www.meta-internet.com for more information

 

Markus Appel is a Professor and head of the Psychology of Communication and New Media lab at the University of Würzburg, Germany.

Health Influenced by Social Relationships at Work

Recent research shows higher social identification with one’s team or organization is associated with better health and lower stress. The meta-analysis covers 58 studies and more than 19,000 people across the globe.

Whether you’re an engineer, a nurse, or a call center worker, you are likely to spend an average of one-third of your day on the job. In a new meta-analysis covering 58 studies and more than 19,000 people across the globe, psychologists have shown that how strongly we identify with the people or organization where we work is associated with better health and lower burnout.

The work appears in the journal Personality and Social Psychology Review, published by the Society for Personality and Social Psychology.

While many people assume that finding the right job that fits your personality and skills is the key to a healthy work life, this meta-analysis shows that health at work is determined to a large extent by our social relationships in the workplace — and, more particularly, the social groups we form there.

Previous studies on the relationships between people and their workplaces focus on issues of satisfaction, motivation, and performance in organizations, but much less on health and well-being.

“This study is the first large-scale analysis showing that organizational identification is related to better health,” says lead researcher Dr. Niklas Steffens (University of Queensland, Australia). “These results show that both performance and health are enhanced to the extent that workplaces provide people with a sense of ‘we’ and ‘us.’”

Prof. Alex Haslam and Prof. Jolanda Jetten (both University of Queensland), Dr. Sebastian Schuh (China Europe International Business School, China), and Prof. Rolf van Dick (Goethe University Frankfurt, Germany) also collaborated on the study. The team reviewed 58 studies covering people in a variety of occupations, from service and health to sales and military work, in 15 countries.

While the type of job was not a significant factor in the link between social identification and health benefits, several factors influenced the relationship.

“Social identification contributes to both psychological and physiological health, but the health benefits are stronger for psychological health,” says Steffens.

The positive psychological benefit may stem from the support provided by the work group but also the meaning and purpose that people derive from membership in social groups.

“We are less burnt out and have greater well-being when our team and our organization provide us with a sense of belonging and community — when it gives us a sense of ‘we-ness,’” summarizes Steffens.

The authors also found that the health benefits of identifying with the workplace are strongest when there are similar levels of identification within a group — that is, when identification is shared. So if you identify strongly with your organization, then you get more health benefits if everyone else identifies strongly with the organization too.

The team was surprised to find that the more women there were in a sample, the weaker the identification–health relationship.

“This was a finding that we had not predicted and, in the absence of any prior theorizing, we can only guess what gives rise to this effect,” says Steffens. “However, one of the reasons may relate to the fact that we know from other research that there are still many workplaces that have somewhat ‘masculine’ cultures. This could mean that even when female employees identify with their team or organization, they still feel somewhat more marginal within their team or organization.”

As part of their work, the researchers have several recommendations for future research.

“One important area where we need to do much more work is making use of this research in applied settings.” says Steffens. “In particular, it is important to examine whether health may actually precede changes in performance and what role identification plays in this.”

The team also recommends exploring the role of leadership. This is because other findings that emerge from the same program of research indicate that how leaders manage teams and groups has a strong influence on the social identification-health connection. "Leaders play a key role in shaping a sense of group identity in the workplace", Steffens said, "and this is important not only for team performance but also for the mental and physical health of employees.”


Funding The work was supported by two grants from the Australian Research Council awarded to S.A.H. (FL110100199) and J.J. (FT110100238).

Niklas K. Steffens, S. Alexander Haslam, Sebastian C. Schuh, Jolanda Jetten, and Rolf van Dick A Meta-Analytic Review of Social Identification and Health in Organizational Contexts Personality and Social Psychology Review 1088868316656701, first published on July 7, 2016 as doi: 10.1177/1088868316656701.

Personality and Social Psychology Review (PSPR), published monthly, is an official journal of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology (SPSP). SPSP promotes scientific research that explores how people think, behave, feel, and interact. The Society is the largest organization of social and personality psychologists in the world. Follow us on Twitter, @SPSPnews and find us on Facebook.

Can Mindfulness Help Reduce Bias and Division?

One day, a man encounters a disheveled woman on the street, asking for spare change. Immediately, negative stereotypes spring to mind about the poor and unhoused, intertwined with other stereotypes about race or mental illness. The man feels disgust and contempt, and before he realizes it, he is rushing past her without a glance. As he walks away, he experiences a twinge of guilt and shame, as he ordinarily sees himself as a generous and compassionate person.

Most of us have experienced a similar scenario—automatic associations hijack our behavior and leave us feeling uncomfortable and ashamed. People sort others into categories, based on status and roles, race or ethnicity, age, religion, or social class. People then distance themselves from dissimilar others (outgroup) and hold more positive views of similar others (ingroup).  Unchecked, these cultural biases lead to harmful intergroup processes such as marginalization, dehumanization, discrimination, hate crimes, and genocide. In addition, bias targets may internalize negative stereotypes about their group, increasing their risk for negative health, academic, and other important life outcomes.

Strategies to Reduce Intergroup Bias

Research shows that contact with outgroup members is one of the best ways to reduce intergroup bias when the groups have equal status and a shared goal, and the contact involves cooperation and has institutional support. However, most people circulate in homogenous social networks, resulting in fewer opportunities for intergroup interactions. For example, a July 2023 Pew Research poll involving more than 5,000 Americans found that 70% of White people report that all or most of their close friends are also White.

Mindfulness As a Strategy to Mitigate Bias

How can people mitigate bias in a spatially and digitally segregated world?  Recent research suggests that mindfulness disrupts intergroup bias, including bias against others and internalized stigma. Adapted from Buddhist meditation practices, mindfulness involves moment-by-moment awareness of bodily sensations, thoughts, feelings, and surrounding environment, coupled with an attitude of openness, curiosity, and nonjudgment.

We conducted a meta-analysis, examining the previous evidence that mindfulness, as a meditative practice or as a personal trait, predicts decreased bias directed towards others or internalized toward oneself. We also examined whether mindfulness relates to anti-racist or other anti-bias outcomes, such as donating money to the homeless, cultivating relationships with oppressed group members (for example, racial or religious minorities), or acknowledging that racism is a root cause of social inequality.

A total of 70 studies from 62 articles involving 9,231 participants mostly from the U.S., but also across Europe, Asia, and Australia, as well as the Middle East (specifically Israel and Palestine) reported findings relevant to our research questions. The studies included students, clinical populations, trainees and professionals in health care, education, and law enforcement. Combining results across studies revealed 3 key findings.

First, mindfulness was strongly associated with improvements in intergroup or antibias outcomes, with big effects on explicit responses such as attitudes, feelings, and observed behaviors and medium effects on implicit attitudes that operate outside of conscious awareness and control.

Second, mindfulness may enhance the well-being of marginalized people by increasing their resilience to negative societal messages about their group.

Third, among intervention studies, effects did not vary by the duration of the intervention or specific target group (e.g., Black Americans, the homeless). However, mindfulness-based interventions had a stronger positive effect on bias in the general population compared to those in the helping professions (e.g., teachers, counselors, medical staff).

In sum, mindfulness can reduce biases and help people find more egalitarian, anti-bias ways of relating to themselves and others.  In practice, it might look something like this:

As the man encounters the disheveled woman, he notices his negative thoughts about the poor and unhoused, involuntary tension in his body, feelings of disgust, and a desire to move away. Adopting an attitude of openness, curiosity, and kindness, he interprets these reactions as ingrained habits of mind that are reinforced by a culture that blames the poor for being poor, and reminds himself that people's contexts (as well as their choices) shape their life outcomes. He acknowledges that he does not know the specific chain of events in this woman's life that brought her to this moment of need.  Reminding himself of his core values of generosity, kindness, and compassion, he pauses and brings his attention to his body, inhibiting the impulse to walk past her outstretched hand. He slows his pace, meets her gaze, and offers her a few bills, affirming their shared humanity. 


For Further Reading

Chang, D.F., Donald, J., Whitney, J., Miao, I.Y., & Sahdra, B. (2023). Does mindfulness improve intergroup bias, internalized bias, and antibias outcomes? A meta-analysis and systematic review of the evidence. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. https://doi.org/10.1177/01461672231178518

Pettigrew, T. F., & Tropp, L. R. (2006). A meta-analytic test of intergroup contact theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90(5), 751–783. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.90.5.751


Doris F. Chang is a clinical psychologist and an Associate Professor at the New York University Silver School of Social Work. She studies factors associated with ethnic minority mental health and develops culturally-affirming interventions for clinical and educational contexts that integrate mindfulness and other contemplative traditions.

Generation Empathy: The Surprising Surge of Compassion in Modern Youth

"The world is passing through troublous times. The young people of today think of nothing but themselves." – Peter the Hermit (1050 – 1115 AD)

Throughout history, each generation of adults has complained about the youth of their day. This complaint found support in research by Dr. Sara Konrath and colleagues, which noted a decline in empathic traits among U.S. undergraduates from 1979 to 2009. Simultaneously, self-centered traits like narcissism and individualism rose, painting a bleak picture of an increasingly self-absorbed society.

But the story doesn't end there. Our latest research, extending beyond 2009, suggests an encouraging rebound in empathic traits.

Examining Published Research

We re-examined published research that measured empathy in American undergraduates since 1979.  Konrath and her colleagues reviewed research prior to 2009. We added findings from 126 new studies and six sets of data from our own laboratory that had not been published before. In total, we analyzed the responses of 38,693 undergraduates to get a clear picture of recent trends in empathy.

Our analysis focused on two types of empathy—empathic concern and perspective-taking.  Both had previously shown declines over time. We used a statistical method known as cross-temporal meta-analysis and looked for linear changes such as an overall decline or overall rise in empathy over time. We also looked for fluctuations in empathy over time. We measured various characteristics of research participants, such as economic factors and broader cultural values to examine whether changes in empathy could be linked to shifts in these broader societal trends.

Although we did not find a significant linear change in empathy over the entire period, there was a notable wave-like trend. Perspective-taking and empathic concern remained relatively stable from 1979 to 1999, followed by a significant decline from 2000 to 2007.  From 2008 onwards, there was a significant increase. These trends remained robust even after accounting for various demographic, economic, and interpersonal factors. These results confirm that after a period of decline, both empathic concern and perspective-taking have recently increased among American undergraduates (see Figure 1).

College Students' Empathic Concern and Perspective-Taking Scores from 1979-2018
Figure 1. College Students' Empathic Concern and Perspective-Taking Scores from 1979-2018 (Study 1)

Nationally Representative Surveys

We next wanted to confirm these findings using data from nationally representative surveys. We analyzed perspective-taking trends using data from the American Freshman Survey and empathic concern trends using the Monitoring the Future survey. These surveys provided annual responses from first-year college students and high school seniors, respectively.

The survey results reinforced our findings. Perspective-taking declined from 1979 to 1999, showed no significant change from 2000 to 2007, and then significantly increased from 2008 to 2018. Empathic concern showed a similar trend, with a significant decline from 1976 to 1999, no change from 2000 to 2007, and a marginal increase from 2008 to 2018. These results underscore the non-linear, fluctuating nature of empathy among young Americans, with a notable increase in recent years (see Figure 2).

First year college students’ perspective taking and high school seniors’ empathic concern from 1979-2018
Figure 2. First-year college students’ perspective taking (Study 2a; American Freshman Survey) and high school seniors’ empathic concern (Study 2b; Monitoring the Future Survey) from 1979-2018

Why Does Empathy Fluctuate Over Time?

Neither economic factors (such as the inflation rate or unemployment rate) nor worldview factors (such as trust in institutions or optimism about the future) explained these changes in empathy. Instead, changes in empathy were related to interpersonal dynamics, such as changes in how frequently people socialized and their feelings of loneliness. Empathy increased when socializing decreased and loneliness increased.

We were surprised to find that empathy levels were higher during periods of increased loneliness. This seems to contradict previous research, which suggests that people with generally higher empathy tend to be less lonely. However, our findings align with a recent study that intentionally made participants feel lonely which increased their motivation to empathize. It's possible that being lonely acts like a 'social hunger,' driving people to seek out and empathize with others. However, until more research investigates this link, it is premature to draw any conclusions about whether feeling lonely causes people to be more empathic.

Our findings challenge the narrative that empathy is steadily declining among American youth. The post-2008 increase in empathy, particularly in perspective-taking, offers a more optimistic view of young Americans today. However, the story of empathy is far from complete. Our society is continuously evolving, and with it, the factors that shape our ability to empathize. The COVID-19 pandemic, for instance, is likely to have had significant implications for empathy, given its profound impact on social interactions and worldviews.

Conclusion

Our research highlights the dynamic nature of empathy across generations. Research shows not only periods of decline but also remarkable rebounds and growth in empathic traits among youth. Contrary to the age-old adage of declining empathy among youth, our findings reveal a more complex and hopeful scenario. Young people are not uniformly less empathetic than their forebears; instead, the empathy of youth today ebbs and flows, much like the societal currents they are part of.


For Further Reading

Konrath, S., Martingano, A. J., Davis, M., & Breithaupt, F. (2023). Empathy Trends in American Youth Between 1979 and 2018: An Update. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 0(0). https://doi.org/10.1177/19485506231218360 
 

Alison Jane Martingano is an Assistant Professor at the University of Wisconsin-Green Bay. Her research focuses on understanding the nature of empathy as well as designing interventions to promote it.

Willful Ignorance is Bliss, but at a Cost

BY Linh Vu

Ivanka Trump testified recently in a fraud trial, in which her father—Donald Trump—is accused of inflating the value of assets to obtain favorable loans. When presented with documents reflecting her involvement in securing the loans, which Ms. Trump personally benefited from, she maintained that she was not privy to her father's financial statements.

If Ms. Trump was indeed ignorant, she was most likely engaging in what scientists called "willful ignorance:" intentional avoidance of information about the potential harm of one's action. This behavior is widely evident, not only in cases of corruption but also in everyday life. Despite growing scientific evidence of climate change, many people still avoid engaging with facts about global warming. People do not always want to know about the harsh living conditions of farm animals. Consumers also often ignore the ethical origins of the products they purchase.

I wanted to know how common and harmful willful ignorance is, as well as why people engage in it. So, together with my colleagues, I conducted a meta-analytic review, summarizing 22 research projects that involved more than 6,000 participants altogether. 

Studying Willful Ignorance

In these experiments, scientists asked participants to choose between two options that determine their and their partner's earnings in one of two settings. In the transparent setting, participants had to decide between receiving a smaller reward ($5) and a larger reward ($6). If they chose the smaller $5 reward, their partner would also receive $5. If they chose the larger $6 reward, however, their partner would receive only $1.

In the ambiguous setting, participants knew which option gave them the larger $6 reward. They did not know immediately, however, if their partner would receive $1 or $5 if they would choose this larger reward for themselves, as both possibilities are equally likely. Participants were then offered an opportunity to resolve the ambiguity. They could learn the outcomes for the partner before making their choice effortlessly by clicking a button. That is, if they wanted to know.

I found that in the transparent setting, in which people were told the consequences of their choices, 55% of participants chose altruistically, giving up a part of their earnings to share equally with their partner. However, when participants had to choose whether to know how their choice would impact their partner, 40% remained ignorant. Not knowing freed participants to choose the higher reward for themselves without the burden of knowing how their choice deprived their partner. This ignorance led to a 16-percentage-point decrease in altruistic choices, down from 55% to 39%.  

Is It Willful?

But how do we know if this ignorance was willful? Did participants intentionally avoid information because they wanted an excuse to be selfish or were they simply distracted or confused by the experiment? To understand the motivation behind ignorance, I conducted a second analysis.

I looked at how some participants behaved after they chose to receive information about the consequences in the ambiguous setting. Interestingly, these participants were 7 percentage points more likely to make altruistic choices than participants who were told the consequences in the transparent setting. This finding suggests that these participants were truly altruistic: They sought out the relevant information to benefit their partner even at a cost for themselves.

On the flip side, the finding also suggests that some participants chose ignorance willfully, at least partly because they needed an excuse to be selfish. That is, if all of ignorance was driven by distraction or confusion alone, participants would all be equally likely to obtain information regardless of their intention to benefit their partner. That was not the case. 

Implications

Taken together, my review suggests that some altruistic behaviors are done reluctantly. Take, for example, fast fashion. When people know how some companies take advantage of their workers and source their materials unsustainably, they feel obligated to not support those brands and look for more ethical and expensive alternatives. But when such information is unclear and people must take action to discover whether the brands they like are engaging in green-washing or not, they may want to remain ignorant. Turning a blind eye to unethical business practices allows people to continue buying trendy clothes at competitive prices without feeling guilty or feeling like a bad person.

So how can you combat willful ignorance? Decisions like those I studied here are framed in a moralistic way—people can benefit themselves at the expense of others. Moralistic framing poses a threat to people's self-images and creates fertile ground for willful ignorance. Avoiding a strong moral emphasis on decisions may make people feel less threatened, and hence, less inclined toward willful ignorance, an idea that should be tested more systematically in future research. Instead, you can opt for other methods to promote altruistic behaviors such as making the ethical options the default option or encouraging people to think more positively about doing a good deed rather than guilt-tripping people for what they failed to do well. 


For Further Reading

Vu, L., Soraperra, I., Leib, M., van der Weele, J., & Shalvi, S. (2023). Ignorance by choice: A meta-analytic review of the underlying motives of willful ignorance and its consequences. Psychological Bulletin, 149(9-10), 611–635. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000398  


Linh Vu is a doctoral candidate at the University of Amsterdam in the Netherlands, where she studies how people make ethical decisions and why.

Male Suicide: A Public Health Emergency

Male suicide is a global public health crisis. In almost every country, more men die by suicide than women. In the United States and the United Kingdom, suicide is a leading cause of death for men. Scientists urgently need to understand both risk factors and interventions to help more men access a meaningful life.

With these goals in mind, our research team reviewed two decades of research into male suicide. We looked at 78 studies encapsulating insights from over 1,695 people. The studies came from 18 countries, including Canada, the UK, Australia, Brazil, Ghana, Uganda, and Norway. We examined all English language studies that used qualitative or mixed methods, were peer-reviewed, and involved participants aged 18 and over. In addition, participants in these studies were men who have experienced suicidal thoughts, feelings, or attempts or people bereaved by male suicide.

In 96% of studies, cultural norms of masculinity seemed to increase suicide risk. Cultural norms of masculinity refer to expectations for how men should behave in specific communities or cultures. Our study identified the following norms as potentially elevating male suicide risk: suppression of emotions, pressure for men to succeed, and diminishing men's needs for relationships. Pressure to conform to these norms meant some men seemed to experience dysregulation within three core psychological areas: 1. their emotions; 2. sense of self; and 3. relationships with others.  Dysregulation, in this context, means thoughts and feelings have become overwhelming and difficult to control. In our review, we saw evidence that men's emotions, their thoughts and feelings about themselves, and their relationships with others became full of pain and hard to manage. It's crucial to understand that these three areas—emotions, self, and relationships—are all connected. Like cogs in a wheel caught in a chain reaction, harm in one area can lead to harm in others. The interaction of these harms seemed to increase men's emotional pain and suicide risk.

In 92% of studies, emotional suppression appeared to increase suicide risk. Norms that encourage men to hide their emotions and cope with problems alone left some men vulnerable to overwhelming psychological pain without any effective release. As painful challenges in life increased, some men's emotions became overwhelming. To cope with their distress, many men used behaviours like drinking or drugs which provided temporary relief but left many men feeling ashamed and isolated over the long term. Many men appeared trapped in pain, feeling like it would never end. A desire to escape this overwhelming distress was the most frequent description of suicidal behaviours. A 36-year-old man in Australia who had attempted suicide described his emotional isolation as follows: "I'm a dad of three kids and a husband. I've got a good job. I don't want you to know that I'm so sad that I cry at red lights." (Fogarty et al., 2018, p. 264)

In 76% of studies, pressures to meet standards of male success seemed to increase suicide risk. In our data, standards of male success related to various areas of life, including work, money, exams, relationships, sexuality, and health. When men thought they were not meeting these standards of male success, they felt like a failure. Some men described hiding their feelings of failure by pretending they were doing well which exacerbated shame and loneliness. Certain men described their suicidal thoughts and behaviors as a means to escape feelings of failure. A Brazilian man described his suicide attempt in the following way: "I tried to set up a business for myself and my family and it didn't work. I lost money and there was no other alternative except killing myself" (Ribeiro et al., 2016, p. 5). To a lesser extent, men described suicide as a means to regain control over a life spiraling out of control due to not meeting male standards of success. 

In 82% of studies, suppressing relationship needs seemed to increase suicide risk. Masculine norms of emotional suppression, self-reliance, and independence appeared to affect how some men built and navigated relationships with others. Some men described extreme isolation and loneliness, difficulties in trusting others, problems managing relationship intimacy, relationship conflict, and breakdowns. Some men described overwhelming isolation or consuming relationship-related difficulties as driving their suicidal despair. Another Brazilian man who had attempted suicide shared the following regarding his suicide attempt: "My family slowly abandoned me, or rather, I abandoned them and ended up alone …and I would often get depressed, drink, use drugs and would really feel like ending it, end all the suffering that my life had become. (Ribeiro et al., 2016, p. 4)

Recovering a Meaningful Life

We also reviewed the 78 studies to identify factors that help men cope with suicidal distress.  We have 22 recommendations to support men's recovery. These recommendations revolve around three primary goals for men at suicide risk: increase understanding and management of emotions, build more compassionate ideas of the self, and strengthen relationships with others. Interventions that provide psychological and practical help to tackle issues like debt or addiction would support men at suicide risk. Doctors and therapists should be trained to identify how masculinity norms impact some men's suicidal pain, including how men express distress. Peer and community support groups could help men reluctant to seek medical support.  At a societal level, we need to broaden ideas of masculinity and celebrate male emotions, develop expansive male selfhoods, and foster male intimacy and connection with others. Our study underscores the importance of collectively acknowledging the harm some aspects of our cultures may inflict on certain men. We hope our meta-analysis of male suicide risk can contribute towards a deeper and more compassionate conversation about the male experience and motivate changes to protect men from suicidal despair.


For Further Reading

Bennett, S., Robb, K. A., Zortea, T. C., Dickson, A., Richardson, C., & O'Connor, R. C. (2023). Male suicide risk and recovery factors: A systematic review and qualitative metasynthesis of two decades of research. Psychological Bulletin, 149(7-8), 371–417. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000397

Fogarty, A. S., Spurrier, M., Player, M. J., Wilhelm, K., Whittle, E. L., Shand, F., Christensen, H., & Proudfoot, J. (2018). Tensions in perspectives on suicide prevention between men who have attempted suicide and their support networks: Secondary analysis of qualitative data. Health Expectations, 21(1), 261–269. https://doi.org/10.1111/hex.12611

Ribeiro, D. B., Terra, M. G., Soccol, K. L. S., Schneider, J. F., Camillo, L. A., & Plein, F. A. D. S. (2016). Reasons for attempting suicide among men who use alcohol and other drugs. Revista Gaúcha de Enfermagem, 37(1), Article e54896. https://doi.org/10.1590/1983-1447.2016.01.54896


Susanna Bennett is a PhD candidate at The University of Glasgow exploring male suicide risk and recovery factors.