The 'likes' have become fuel for self-esteem. Daily, millions of users post images with a single purpose: to get a large number of reactions from your followers.
It is because of that Facebook has considered eliminating the number of 'likes' on its platform, with the aim of highlighting the quality of the content over the popularity of the user. But to what extent is it true that 'likes' influence psychological well-being?
Technological development has made it possible to implement new ways of relating, such as social networks. Immediacy, global connectivity, skills exchange and entertainment are some of its most notable advantages.
However, these they can also potentially affect mental health, especially to a group that is especially vulnerable, adolescents. That is why, in recent years, multiple researchers have focused on the Child and adolescent psychology, investing their training and experience in studying the influence of this type of platform on the mental health of its users.
According to research led by Lauren Sherman at the University of California, Los Angeles, young people experience a sensation similar to eating chocolate or earning money from receiving a large number of 'likes' in your photos.
Specifically, both the nucleus accumbens, a brain region that is part of the reward circuit, as well as the social brain and other areas related to visual attention show a considerable increase in their activity.
The participants were shown a total of 148 images, including those that they had previously presented themselves. During the session, in which the number of 'likes' obtained in each photograph was also exposed, the researchers analyzed brain activity through functional magnetic resonance imaging.
Through this test, the researchers were able to observe that when the number of 'likes' was higher, the probability that they liked the image more also increased than another with a lower number, demonstrating the influence of the interaction on both self-esteem and the perception of taste..
But does this vulnerability by 'likes' affect all users equally? Anthony Burrows, Professor at Cornell University, seems to have the answer. In a study of 102 students, he found that those with a weaker life purpose experienced a increase in your self-esteem by receiving a lot of interactions in your photos.
Participants in this study had to fill out a form filling in measures of their sense of purpose. Subsequently, they had to photograph themselves and upload them to a platform similar to Facebook and then receive a high, low or average number of 'likes' at random..
The results obtained are related to those of Sherman's research, suggesting that there is a certain profile of users in the network that relies on the approval of others to have a purpose, an objective, or a sense of being that they have not been able to obtain. otherwise.
Scientific research has been rejecting the 'likes' in the different social networks. From the evidence obtained in various studies, the Facebook platform has considered the possibility of hiding the number of interactions received in each photo.
A few months ago, the social network Instagram (developed by Facebook) conducted a test in Canada, preventing other users from seeing the number of 'likes'. One of the spokespersons of the platform confirmed this in an interview collected by CNN: “We are testing this because we want the followers to focus on the photos and videos that are shared, not on the amount of 'likes' they receive ".
The idea of the social media giant is that only the user who publishes the content is the one who can see the amount of interactions obtained. So you don't have to worry about your friends knowing how popular or engaging your posts are..
However, it seems that this new approach has failed to fully convince the experts. According to Association for Psychological Science (Association of Psychological Sciences), although Facebook's strategy could reduce exposure to problems related to self-esteem, the truth is that the user will still be able to see the 'likes' they receive in their own publications, for what risk could persist.
Yet No Comments