New research shows that while true Instagram addiction is rare, the widespread habit of labeling everyday scrolling as an “addiction” can sap users’ confidence, fuel self-blame, and steer them away from practical habit-change strategies that actually work.
Study: Overestimates of social media addiction are common but costly. Image credit: chainarong06/Shutterstock.com
In two recent studies conducted within a single article published in Scientific Reports, researchers examined whether people mistake frequent Instagram use for ‘addiction’, focusing on the reasons for this misperception and how it influences their self-blame and sense of control.
Their findings indicate that many people overestimate their level of addiction. This may reduce their self-efficacy, as framing heavy use as addiction makes it more difficult for them to adopt practical strategies to change their habits.
Why “social media addiction” often misleads the public
Researchers increasingly note that heavy social media use is often described as an ‘addiction,’ even by public figures such as the U.S. Surgeon General. However, this label may be misleading.
Existing studies frequently rely on narrow or clinical samples and often equate high usage with addiction without confirming whether users show clinically meaningful symptoms such as cravings, withdrawal, impaired control, or conflict with daily life. Moreover, some people who report addiction-like symptoms also experience positive effects from social media, suggesting that the relationship between use and well-being is complex.
Meta-analyses show only small and inconsistent links between social media and poor mental health, partly because each user’s experience is highly individualized. Negative outcomes may also be overstated because research often focuses on problematic or at-risk users.
Measuring habits, symptoms, and media influences
Across two studies, the researchers examined how often users of Instagram show clinical addiction symptoms and how self-labeling use as an ‘addiction’ affects perceptions of control.
In Study 1, a quota-matched U.S. sample of 380 adult Instagram users (matched on gender, age, race, and political orientation) completed validated self-report measures. Addiction symptoms were assessed with a six-item addiction scale questionnaire, as the Bergen Instagram Addiction Scale, and habit strength was measured with an automaticity scale.
Participants also reported weekly social media use, perceived addiction, perceived habit, emotional evaluations of the platform, perceived control, attempts to regulate use, and attributions for overuse. Extreme or duplicate responses were excluded.
The researchers also conducted a media-content analysis using Buzzsumo to quantify how often U.S. media outlets used the terms “social media addiction” versus “social media habit.” They found 4,383 articles referencing addiction but only 50 referencing habits over three years, suggesting a strong media bias toward addiction framing. This analysis supports the idea that widespread media discourse may contribute to users’ overestimation of their own addiction.
Study 2 recruited 824 U.S. daily Instagram users and randomly assigned them to an addiction-reflection condition or a control condition. All participants completed the same addiction and habit scales.
Those in the addiction-reflection condition read official-style warnings about social media addiction and wrote brief reflections about times they felt (or could imagine feeling) addicted. Afterwards, participants rated their perceived control, control expectations, self-blame, and feelings about the platform, as well as their desire to reduce their use.
This design enabled comparison of natural self-labeling (Study 1) with experimentally induced addiction framing (Study 2).
Addiction framing lowers control and increases blame
Together, the studies show that true clinical addiction symptoms are rare, but self-perceived addiction is much more common and could be psychologically harmful. In Study 1, only 2 % of users met the clinical symptom threshold for potential addiction, yet 18 % said they felt at least somewhat addicted, and 5 % strongly agreed they were addicted.
Many who self-labeled as addicted showed no symptom pattern consistent with clinical criteria. Salience (time spent thinking about or planning to use the platform) was the most common symptom, while withdrawal and life conflict were the least common.
Nearly half of users reported strong usage habits. Still, habit strength was different from addiction: only perceived addiction (not habit) predicted withdrawal, conflict, repeated failed attempts to cut down, lower perceived control, more self-blame, and more efforts to regulate use.
Study 2 confirmed these patterns experimentally. When participants were prompted to think of their behavior as an addiction, they immediately reported higher perceived addiction, lower control, worse expected future control, greater self-blame, greater blame directed at the app’s design, and more negative feelings about the platform, even though their actual symptom and habit scores were unchanged. Participants also reported a significantly higher desire to reduce their use of Instagram.
Thus, the ‘addiction label’ itself can create or amplify negative psychological outcomes. Overall, the research suggests that mislabeling common, habitual Instagram use as ‘addiction’ may undermine users’ sense of control and wellbeing.
Clearer language can improve user wellbeing
The researchers conclude that calling frequent Instagram use an ‘addiction’ can unintentionally harm users by lowering their sense of control and increasing self-blame. Their findings also challenge how the addiction label is often applied to everyday behaviors.
Most Instagram users may not show the cravings, withdrawal, or life disruption characteristic of clinical addiction; instead, excessive use is usually driven by well-learned habits. Although a small minority reported symptoms suggesting risk, even these estimates may be inflated by exposure to media narratives about ‘social media addiction.’
The authors argue that overusing addiction language blurs the boundary between habits and true pathology, potentially leading to ineffective solutions. They suggest focusing on habit-change strategies, such as reducing cues and creating alternative routines, which may better support users’ self-efficacy. Overall, framing heavy Instagram use as habitual rather than addictive offers clearer guidance for both users and policymakers.
Download your PDF copy now!
AI helps detect early signs of alcoholism in firefighters with 80% accuracy