How many students were in the study?

The study included between 5,000 and 5,227 Italian students, according to the digests. *El Comercio* reported 5,000, while *ALnavío* gave the figure as 5,227. The exact number was not clarified in the available material.

Did the study prove social media causes lower grades?

No, the study was observational and did not establish causation. All three digests noted this limitation. The research found a link between early social media use and academic deficits but did not rule out other factors.

What was the academic deficit measured in the study?

The deficit was described as equivalent to six months of schooling. *El Comercio* and *ALnavío* both reported this figure, while *El Nacional* did not specify the deficit in months but linked it to distractions.

All stories

16px

Science & Tech59 outlets ran this3 min read

Italian study links early social media use to academic deficits

Observational research on 5,000 students found a six-month schooling gap but no proof of causation

MediaBias Comparison Desk

AI-assisted coverage comparison, editor-supervised

This article was written at the MediaBias News desk from the one-paragraph digests an aggregator publishes for each of the outlets listed below it, together with 2 of those outlets' own reports read in full. How we do it

4 Aug 2026, 19:45Updated 4 Aug 2026, 20:45

Italian study links early social media use to academic deficits

What this story says

An observational study of 5,000 to 5,227 Italian students found a link between early social media use and lower academic performance.
Students who opened social media accounts at ages 11-12 showed a deficit equivalent to six months of schooling compared to those who started at 14.
The study, published in *Nature Human Behaviour*, did not establish causation between social media use and academic deficits.
All three digests below reported the sample size and the six-month deficit, but none included the name of the lead researcher or the exact publication date.

Who covered it

Left 27%(6)Centre 37%(8)Right 36%(8)

Percentages are shares of the 22 outlets carrying a published leaning rating. 37 of the 59 outlets we know ran this story carry no rating and are not counted in them. Coverage measured 4 Aug 2026, 20:12.

Trust

42/100

Craft

55/100

Hype

35/100

59 sources · methodology

A study of Italian students found that those who began using social media between the ages of 11 and 12 performed worse in language and mathematics tests than peers who started at 14. The difference was described as equivalent to six months of schooling. The research, published in *Nature Human Behaviour*, was observational and did not prove that social media use caused the deficit.

The sample size was reported as 5,000 students by *El Comercio* and 5,227 by *ALnavío*. The study measured academic performance but did not isolate other factors that might contribute to the gap, such as family background or screen time outside social media. None of the digests specified the exact age range of the students beyond the starting ages of 11-12 and 14.

What the digests included and left out

*El Comercio* and *ALnavío* both reported the six-month schooling deficit and the sample size, though *ALnavío* gave the higher figure of 5,227 students. *El Nacional* did not specify the deficit in months but described the link as related to distractions and lack of attention. All three digests noted that the study was observational and did not establish causation.

None of the digests named the lead researcher or the institution behind the study. The exact publication date in *Nature Human Behaviour* was also omitted. *ALnavío* alone mentioned the journal by name, while the other two digests did not. *El Nacional* was the only outlet to use the phrase "excessive use" of social media, though the study itself did not define what constituted excessive use.

What the coverage left out

The digests did not include the specific academic tests used to measure the deficit, such as whether they were standardised national exams or custom assessments. None reported whether the study controlled for variables like socioeconomic status, parental education, or screen time from other sources. The digests also omitted any discussion of potential mechanisms behind the observed link, such as sleep disruption or reduced study time.

Tags:#SocialMedia #AcademicPerformance #ItalyStudy #ObservationalResearch #TeenDevelopment

Still developing. We have re-checked which outlets are covering this 4 times, most recently on 4 Aug 2026, 21:00, and will add the sides that appear.

How other outlets pictured it

Which photograph to run is each newsroom’s own choice. The leaning beside a name is that outlet’s published rating, not a claim that the pictures divide along it. Every picture is shown from the outlet’s own server and links to the article it ran in.

Un equipo de la Universidad de Milán ha realizado la investigaciónJoan Mateu Parra / Shooting — La VanguardiaLeft

How each side covered it

Our own reading of the reporting listed below, written from the outlets’ articles rather than quoted from them. The reasoning is set out on our methodology page.

Left

6 rated outlets

The six left-rated outlets all reported that an Italian study of 5,227 students linked earlier social media use to lower scores in standardised maths and Italian tests at ages 15 to 16. The digests and full reports agreed the effect was equivalent to six months of lost schooling for those who opened accounts at 11 to 12 years old, compared with peers who waited until 14 or later.
Gizmodo and La Vanguardia led on the finding that students who joined social media in the 6th or 7th grade repeated a year more often. Both quoted the study’s conclusion that these students showed “poorer outcomes across nearly every school-related dimension.” La Vanguardia added that parental supervision was less common among earlier adopters.
None of the digests mentioned the study’s observation that the negative impact on grades grew worse over time. Gizmodo and La Vanguardia both noted the study was observational and did not prove causation, though Gizmodo described the correlation as “smaller but still meaningful” for 7th-grade adopters.

Centre

8 rated outlets

The centre-rated outlets led on the study’s core finding: earlier social media use correlated with lower test scores in Italian, English, and mathematics. All eight digests reported the link between account creation age and academic performance, using data from 5,227 students in northern Italy.
Five digests specified the age range of participants as 7 to 16 years. Four noted the study’s appearance in *Nature Human Behaviour*. Three included the authors’ suggestion that delaying social media use until ages 13 or 14 might mitigate the effect. None of the digests quoted a dissenting voice or an alternative explanation for the results.
The Times and Phys.org provided the clearest numerical detail: pupils who opened accounts at 11 or 12 scored worse by age 16, with The Times framing the gap as equivalent to six months of learning. Newsweek alone quoted a study author directly, though the digest did not reproduce the exact wording.

Right

8 rated outlets

The six right-rated outlets all reported that an Italian study linked early social media use to lower academic performance. They agreed on the sample size of 5,227 students and the finding that those who started using social media at ages 11 or 12 scored worse in standardised tests.
Handelsblatt and 조선일보 led on the distraction caused by social media as the reason for poorer grades. Observador and la Nacion included the specific deficit of 0.22 standard deviations, equating it to less than six months of learning. Il Sole 24 Ore incorrectly linked the findings to early bank account use rather than social media.
None of the digests mentioned the universities conducting the study by name, nor did they quote researchers or educators. 조선일보 was the only outlet to specify the subjects affected, maths and Korean language, while the others referred to grades or test results generally.

Read it at the source

59 outlets, grouped by the leaning a published rating gives them. Every headline links to the original; an underlined outlet name opens our profile of that publisher.