1. University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
2. University of Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany.

*             Correspondence: ulrichht@univie.ac.at

Keywords: Digital Media, Addiction, Online

1. INTRODUCTION

The defining paradox of the 21st century may be that of a world more connected than ever, yet populated by individuals experiencing profound loneliness. The ubiquitous presence of digital media, from social networking sites and messaging apps to immersive gaming worlds, has promised a new age of boundless social connection [1]. However, alongside this technological proliferation, researchers, clinicians, and policymakers are grappling with two intertwined epidemics: a crisis of loneliness and the escalating prevalence of digital media addiction. This juxtaposition challenges the utopian narrative of digital connection and compels a deeper investigation into the nature of our relationship with the technologies that mediate our social lives. For many years, the discourse surrounding digital media addiction has been dominated by models adapted from substance abuse, focusing on neurobiological reward pathways, impulsivity, and individual psychopathology [2]. While valuable, these frameworks often neglect the powerful social context in which these behaviors are embedded. They risk pathologizing the individual user without adequately questioning the role of their environment or the design of the technology itself. In response to these limitations, a more holistic social model of digital media addiction has gained traction. This model reframes problematic use not merely as a symptom of individual dysfunction, but as a response to unmet social needs, particularly the painful, subjective experience of loneliness [3]. This review article aims to synthesize and critically evaluate the literature supporting a social model of digital media addiction, with a specific emphasis on loneliness as its central driver. It argues that for many, the compulsive and often detrimental immersion in digital worlds is a rational, albeit maladaptive, strategy to cope with the absence of fulfilling offline social connections [4,3]. To provide a robust and globally relevant analysis, this review draws on a wide range of cross-cultural studies, incorporating findings from over 21 countries across Europe, Asia, North America, and beyond. This international perspective is crucial, as it reveals how the universal human experience of loneliness intersects with culturally specific norms and values to shape digital behaviors [5]. By exploring the social displacement and compensation hypotheses, analyzing the role of platform design, and examining cross-cultural variations, this article seeks to build a comprehensive case for understanding digital media addiction as a fundamentally social phenomenon, with profound implications for research, public policy, and clinical intervention.

2. CONCEPTUAL FOUNDATIONS: DIGITAL MEDIA ADDICTION AND LONELINESS

To build a coherent model, it is essential to first establish clear conceptual definitions for its core components: digital media addiction and loneliness.

2.1. From Problematic Use to Behavioral Addiction

The term “addiction” when applied to digital media use remains a subject of academic debate. Initially conceptualized as “Internet Addiction Disorder” (IAD) the concept has since evolved. Critics argue the term “addiction” is overly pathologizing and lacks a clear physiological dependence marker akin to substance abuse. Consequently, terms like Problematic Internet Use (PIU), Compulsive Internet Use (CIU), and Pathological Social Media Use have been proposed to describe a broader spectrum of maladaptive behaviors [6]. Despite this debate, there is a growing consensus that, for a subset of individuals, digital media use can be classified as a behavioral addiction. This framework defines addiction by a set of core components, including: (1) salience, where the activity dominates a person’s thoughts and feelings; (2) mood modification, the experience of a “high” or escape; (3) tolerance, requiring increasing amounts of the activity to achieve the same mood effect; (4) withdrawal symptoms, such as irritability or anxiety when unable to engage; (5) conflict with other life areas (work, relationships); and (6) relapse after periods of abstinence [7].This review adopts this behavioral addiction framework, as it allows for an analysis of the most severe forms of problematic use while acknowledging the underlying motivations, which the social model seeks to explain [8].

2.2. Loneliness: The Subjective Experience of Social Deficit

Loneliness is not synonymous with objective social isolation. While isolation is a quantitative measure of the number of social contacts, loneliness is a subjective, distressing emotional state resulting from a perceived discrepancy between one’s desired and actual social relationships [9]. A person can be surrounded by others and still feel intensely lonely if those connections lack meaning, intimacy, or reciprocity.

Weiss (1973) famously distinguished between two types of loneliness:

• Social loneliness: The absence of an engaging social network and a sense of community belonging.
• Emotional loneliness: The absence of a close, intimate attachment figure, such as a romantic partner or a best friend.

This distinction is critical for understanding digital media addiction. The specific type of loneliness an individual experiences may drive them toward different online activities [10]. For example, someone experiencing social loneliness might seek out large online communities or fan groups, while someone experiencing emotional loneliness might be more drawn to one-on-one interactions in dating apps or private messaging, seeking a digital substitute for intimacy [11].

3. A SOCIAL MODEL: UNPACKING THE DYNAMICS OF LONELINESS AND DIGITAL ADDICTION

The social model posits that loneliness is not just a correlate of digital media addiction, but a primary antecedent. It comprises several interconnected hypotheses that explain why lonely individuals are particularly vulnerable.

3.1. The Social Displacement Hypothesis: Trading Strong Ties for Weak Ties

First proposed in their seminal HomeNet study, the Social Displacement Hypothesis suggests that time spent online, particularly on low-quality social activities, displaces time that would otherwise be spent in more meaningful, face-to-face interactions [12]. This displacement can weaken existing social ties and inhibit the formation of new ones, thereby increasing loneliness. The individual may then turn back to the internet to alleviate this heightened loneliness, creating a vicious cycle. Recent research provides a more nuanced view [13]. The quality, not just the quantity, of online time matters. Passive consumption of social media (e.g., scrolling through feeds) is consistently linked to increased loneliness and decreased well-being, whereas active, directed communication (e.g., messaging a close friend) can sometimes strengthen relationships for the lonely individual, however, the low-stakes, low-effort nature of passive consumption may be more appealing than the more demanding work of active engagement, thus reinforcing the displacement cycle [14].

3.2. The Social Compensation Hypothesis: The “Poor-Get-Richer” Model

In direct contrast to displacement, the Social Compensation Hypothesis argues that the internet can be a valuable tool for individuals who lack offline social skills or opportunities. For those who are socially anxious, shy, or marginalized, the unique affordances of online communication can lower social barriers and help them form connections they struggle to make offline [15]. This is often termed the “poor-get-richer” model, as those poor in offline social capital can use the internet to become richer in social connection. Key online affordances that facilitate this include:

• Anonymity/Anonymity: Reduces fear of social judgment and rejection.
• A synchronicity: Allows time to craft and edit responses, reducing conversational pressure.
• Curated Self-Presentation: Enables individuals to present an idealized version of themselves, boosting confidence.
• Access to Niche Communities: Connects individuals with similar interests or identities, providing a sense of belonging that may be absent offline.

While these features can be genuinely beneficial, they also hold the potential for addiction. The very factors that make online interaction safe and appealing for lonely individuals can make offline interaction seem comparatively risky and unrewarding [16]. The user may come to prefer the controlled, validating world of online sociality, leading to compulsive use and further withdrawal from the complexities of face-to-face relationships. The compensatory tool becomes a crutch, and eventually, a cage [17].

3.3. The Reinforcing Spiral: When Displacement and Compensation Collide

Modern scholarship suggests that displacement and compensation are not mutually exclusive but can operate in a dynamic, reinforcing spiral. An individual, feeling lonely (the antecedent), turns to digital media for social compensation [18]. They find temporary relief and a sense of belonging. However, this online engagement displaces offline activities and skill-building opportunities. Their offline social world deteriorates further, increasing their baseline loneliness. This heightened loneliness makes the compensatory promise of the online world even more attractive, deepening their dependency and driving compulsive use This spiral model helps explain the progressive and often intractable nature of digital media addiction, framing it as a feedback loop between social need and technological affordance [19].

4. A GLOBAL PERSPECTIVE: CROSS-CULTURAL EVIDENCE ON THE SOCIAL MODEL

The relationship between loneliness and digital media addiction is a global phenomenon, but its expression is shaped by cultural context. Synthesizing findings from large-scale international studies, such as the EU Kids Online project, the World Internet Project, and comparative studies from over 21 nations, reveals key cultural moderators.

4.1. Prevalence and the Individualism-Collectivism Dimension

Cross-national surveys consistently show variations in the prevalence of problematic internet use. Nations in East Asia (e.g., South Korea, China) often report higher rates than those in Europe or North America This difference is often analyzed through the cultural dimension of individualism versus collectivism [20]. In collectivist cultures, which emphasize group harmony, social obligation, and conformity, the internet can offer a private space for self-expression and escape from intense social pressures. For lonely individuals in these contexts, the anonymity of the online world may provide a particularly potent form of compensation for the high social costs of offline non-conformity Conversely, failure to meet social expectations can lead to shame and withdrawal, with the internet becoming a primary refuge [21,9,1]. In individualistic cultures, which prioritize personal achievement and autonomy, loneliness may stem from a lack of deep, intimate ties rather than group exclusion. Here, digital media might be used to maintain a wide but shallow network of connections, a form of “social snacking” that temporarily alleviates loneliness but fails to provide deep fulfillment The pressure to present a successful and popular self-image online can also exacerbate feelings of inadequacy and loneliness if one’s online presence fails to garner sufficient validation (e.g., likes, shares) [22].A 21-country study found that both loneliness and social anxiety were universal predictors of problematic social media use, but the strength of these relationships varied, suggesting that cultural values moderate how these internal states are translated into external behavior[23].

4.2. Cultural Norms around Social Support and Communication

The perceived acceptability of seeking social support also varies. In some cultures, expressing emotional vulnerability is stigmatized, particularly for men. For lonely individuals in such contexts, the anonymous and disinhibited nature of online forums or gaming communities can be the only perceived safe space to share their feelings and seek support, strengthening the compensatory pull of these platforms [24]. Furthermore, communication styles differ. In high-context cultures (e.g., Japan, Arab nations), where communication relies heavily on non-verbal cues and shared understanding, the explicit and text-based nature of much online interaction can be either a barrier or a liberating simplification. For those who struggle with nuanced offline social cues, the directness of online communication can be a powerful draw [23,7].

4.3. Socio-Economic and Infrastructural Factors

Beyond cultural values, socio-economic conditions play a crucial role. In countries with high youth unemployment, limited recreational facilities, or unsafe public spaces, the internet may be one of the few accessible and affordable venues for social life and entertainment [2,8]. A comparative study across several European and South American nations revealed that lower socio-economic status was linked to higher rates of problematic media use, suggesting that a lack of offline opportunities can push individuals online. Thus, a social model must also be a socio-ecological model, accounting for the physical and economic environment that shapes an individual’s social opportunities [9].

5. CRITIQUES AND NUANCES OF THE SOCIAL MODEL

While powerful, the social model is not without its limitations and should not be seen as a totalizing explanation. First, it risks understating the role of individual predispositions. Neurobiological factors, such as deficits in the brain’s reward system, and psychological traits like high neuroticism, low self-esteem, and poor emotion regulation are also strong predictors of addictive behaviors The most accurate model is likely an integrative one, where social factors (like loneliness) interact with individual vulnerabilities to create a high-risk profile [25]. Second, the question of causality remains complex. Is loneliness the cause of digital media addiction, or is addiction the cause of loneliness? The spiral model suggests a bidirectional relationship, where each reinforces the other over time [1,8]. Longitudinal studies are crucial for untangling this “chicken-and-egg” problem, and the evidence to date largely supports this cyclical view Finally, the design of the technology itself is a powerful agent in this dynamic. Persuasive design techniques—such as variable reward schedules (like notifications), infinite scroll, and social validation metrics (likes)—are engineered to maximize engagement and can foster compulsive use irrespective of a user’s pre-existing social condition A complete social model must therefore also be a critical model, acknowledging that users are engaging with systems designed to be addictive [19].

6. IMPLICATIONS FOR INTERVENTION, POLICY, AND PLATFORM DESIGN

Adopting a social model has profound implications for how we address digital media addiction.

1. Clinical Intervention: Instead of focusing solely on abstinence or “digital detoxes,” interventions should prioritize the building of offline social skills and connections. Therapeutic approaches like social skills training, group therapy, and community-based activities can help individuals address the root cause of their loneliness. The goal becomes not just to reduce screen time, but to improve the quality of one’s social life.
2. Public Policy: A public health approach is needed to combat loneliness as a societal issue. This includes funding for community centers, public spaces that encourage social interaction, support for clubs and volunteer organizations, and mental health services that are accessible and destigmatized. School-based programs focusing on social-emotional learning and digital citizenship are also essential.
3. Platform Design and Responsibility: Tech companies must be held accountable for the social consequences of their designs. A shift towards humane design is needed, prioritizing user well-being over engagement metrics. This could include features like hiding like counts by default, providing users with more control over notifications, designing “off-ramps” that encourage breaks, and creating algorithms that foster meaningful connection rather than passive consumption or social comparison.
4. CONCLUSION

The phenomenon of being “lonely online” is a defining challenge of our hyper-connected world. A social model of digital media addiction provides an indispensable framework for understanding this paradox. It moves the conversation beyond individual pathology to consider the powerful role of our fundamental human need for belonging and the ways technology both promises to meet and fails to fulfill that need. By framing compulsive digital media use as a maladaptive response to loneliness, the model highlights that this is not merely a technical problem, but a deeply human and social one. The cross-cultural evidence from across the globe underscores that while the underlying mechanisms may be universal, their expression is culturally contingent. This necessitates tailored, culturally sensitive approaches to prevention and intervention. The social model does not discount the importance of individual factors but embeds them within a wider socio-ecological context, offering a more complete and compassionate understanding. Ultimately, solving the problem of digital media addiction requires us to look away from the screen and towards each other. It demands that we build a society with more robust offline communities, foster genuine social connection, and demand technologies that serve our social well-being rather than exploit our social vulnerabilities.

REFERENCES

1. Blachnio, A., Przepiórka, A., Gorbaniuk, O., McNeill, M., Bendayan, R., Ben-Ezra, M., … & Benvenuti, M. (2024). Lonely online: A social model of digital media addiction: A study in 21 countries. The Social Science Journal, 1-12.
2. Błachnio, A., Przepiórka, A., Gorbaniuk, O., McNeill, M., Bendayan, R., Ben-Ezra, M., … & Benvenuti, M. (2023). Lonely online: a social model of digital media addiction. A study in 21 Countries. Journal of Behavioral Addictions, 12(S1), 26-27.
3. Lissitsa, S., & Kagan, M. (2025). Generations X, Y, Z: The Moderating Role of Self-Reliance in Relationships Between Loneliness, Social Media Addiction, and Life Satisfaction in Men. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 28(3), 178-186.
4. Kalınkara, Y., & Talan, T. (2025). Psychological balances in the digital world: Dynamic relationships among social media addiction, depression, anxiety, academic self-efficacy, general belongingness, and life satisfaction. The Journal of Genetic Psychology, 186(2), 85-113.
5. Liebherr, M., Heyder, A., Brailovskaia, J., Burkardt, T. M., Latrouite, C., Montag, C., & Antons, S. (2025). The Digital Media-use Effects (d-MUsE) Model: A comprehensive framework for exploring/studying functional and dysfunctional effects on adolescent wellbeing. Journal of behavioral addictions, 14(1), 100-113.
6. Chen, S., Ebrahimi, O. V., & Cheng, C. (2025). New Perspective on Digital Well-Being by Distinguishing Digital Competency From Dependency: Network Approach. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 27, e70483.
7. Wang, Z., Jiang, C., Dai, H., & Xu, Y. (2025). Internet gaming addiction or online social networking addiction? Evidence from Chinese adolescents facing parental phubbing. International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction, 1-15.
8. Zewude, G. T., Natnael, T., Woreta, G. T., & Bezie, A. E. (2025). A multi-mediation analysis on the impact of social media and internet addiction on university and high school students’ mental health through social capital and mindfulness. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 22(1), 57.
9. Zhu, S., Liu, N., Zhang, W., Sun, Y., Song, H., Tang, K., & Zhang, X. (2025). The relationship between loneliness and psychological distress among Chinese college students: the mediating role of mobile phone addiction and the moderating role of core self-evaluation. Psychology, Health & Medicine, 30(1), 148-164.
10. Wang, J., Li, L., Wu, Q., Zhang, N., Shangguan, R., & Yang, G. (2025). Effects of parental psychological control on mobile phone addiction among college students: the mediation of loneliness and the moderation of physical activity. BMC psychology, 13(1), 60.
11. Jamil, M. S., Umber, S., Ali, M., & Shah, Z. (2025). Investigating the Psychological Effects of Digital Media Content Consumption on University Students: A Quantitative Study on the Moderating Role of Media Literacy in Shaping Mental Health Outcomes. ACADEMIA International Journal for Social Sciences, 4(3), 749-762.
12. Savolainen, I., Brailovskaia, J., Sirola, A., Celuch, M., & Oksanen, A. (2025). Just a few more minutes: Longitudinal and cross-national perspectives on the role of online identity bubbles in addictive internet use. Computers in Human Behavior, 165, 108555.
13. Akeren, İ., Koçak, L., Özgöl, M., & Demir, M. (2025). Social Media Interaction Motivation Scale: Development and Relations with Fear of Missing Out, Phubbing, Social Media Disorder, Gender and Time Spent. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 1-15.
14. No, P. (2025). A Buddhist Inquiry into Digital Addiction.
15. Vettriselvan, R., Velmurugan, P. R., Varshney, K. R., EP, J., & Deepika, R. (2025). Health Impacts of Smartphone and Internet Addictions Across Age Groups: Physical and Mental Health Across Generations. In Impacts of Digital Technologies Across Generations(pp. 187-210). IGI Global Scientific Publishing.
16. Ge, M. W., Hu, F. H., Jia, Y. J., Tang, W., Zhang, W. Q., Zhao, D. Y., … & Chen, H. L. (2025). The relationship between loneliness and internet or smartphone addiction among adolescents: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Psychological Reports, 128(3), 1429-1451.
17. Parveen, A., Shabir, I., Ganie, A. N., Jabeen, S., Bashir, F., Zimik, P., & Jan, U. (2025). Social Networking Impacting Ones’ Mental Health: A Systematic Review” No Health without Mental Health.
18. Wang, Y., Sun, Y., & Li, T. (2025). The longitudinal relationship between loneliness and problematic social networking site use in college students: the mediating role of trait-and state-fear of missing out. Frontiers in Psychology, 16, 1477239.
19. Fatima, A. (2025). Addiction of Watching Korean Drama Series, Loneliness, Frustration and Mental Health Problems in University Students. Insights-Journal of Health and Rehabilitation, 3(1 (Health & Allied)), 741-750.
20. Muris, P., Otgaar, H., Donkers, F., Ollendick, T. H., & Deckers, A. (2025). Caught in the Web of the Net? Part I: Meta-analyses of Problematic Internet Use and Social Media Use in (Young) People with Autism Spectrum Disorder. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review, 1-22.
21. Yousef, A. M. F., Alshamy, A., Tlili, A., & Metwally, A. H. S. (2025). Demystifying the new dilemma of brain rot in the digital era: A review. Brain Sciences, 15(3), 283.
22. García-Ortiz, C., Lorenzo-González, M., Fernández-Sánchez, J., Solano-Lizcano, V., Del Coso, J., & Collado-Mateo, D. (2025). Recommendations for physical exercise as a strategy to reduce problematic use of the internet and digital devices: A perspective. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 22(5), 753.
23. Coker, K. K., Hale, D., AlSaleh, D. A., & Thakur, R. (2025). Social media addiction and stress: insights from US Facebook and TikTok consumers. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 42(3), 349-364.
24. Gezgin, D. M. (2025). Fear of missing out (FoMO) and social media addiction: the moderated mediation role of mental well-being and mindfulness.
25. Elkin, N., Mohammed Ashraf, A. K., Kılınçel, O., KılınçeL, Ş., Ranganathan, M., Sakarya, A. K., & Soydan, A. M. (2025). Screens and scars: SEM analysis of the relationship between childhood trauma, emotion regulation, and social media addiction. Frontiers in Psychology, 16, 1502968.