Mental health and eating styles: a comparative analysis of account types and content on social media
Introduction: the use of social media platforms like Instagram and TikTok has grown exponentially. The types of accounts and content followed may negatively affect eating styles and mental health in young adults. Objectives: to compare restrictive and emotional eating styles, as well as stress and anxiety levels, based on the types of accounts and content followed on social media by adults aged 18 to 35 in Chile. Methods: a cross-sectional, comparative study was conducted with 549 participants aged 18 to 35, who completed self-report questionnaires to assess anxiety, stress, and eating styles. Content type was classified into two categories: A) recipes and B) weight loss and fitness recommendations. Accounts followed were grouped into three types: A) professional, B) mixed, and C) unknown origin. Results: female Instagram users showed higher levels of restrictive eating (M = 2.61, SD = 1.00) and emotional eating (M = 2.45, SD = 1.12), stress (M = 20.53, SD = 10.57), and anxiety (M = 15.77, SD = 11.32) compared to male users. Weight loss-oriented content was associated with significantly higher restrictive eating levels in women. Accounts managed by trained professionals were linked to lower stress and anxiety levels for both sexes. Conclusions: social media usage influences eating styles and mental health, especially among women. Following professional accounts was associated with lower levels across all indicators, highlighting the need to regulate social media content and ensure that health and nutrition information is communicated by qualified professionals.
Authors
- Nelson Hun (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7614-9990)
- Víctor Sepúlveda Sanhueza
- Felipe González-Fernández
Institutions
- Universidad Santo Tomás (CO)
Publication Details
- Journal
- Nutrición Hospitalaria
- Published
- 2025-01-01
- DOI
- https://doi.org/10.20960/nh.05620
- Citations
- 2
- Primary Topic
- Eating Disorders and Behaviors
- Type
- article
- Field-Weighted Citation Impact
- 4.61