Table 3 Within-person associations between adolescents’ use of Instagram and well-being.

From: The effect of social media on well-being differs from adolescent to adolescent

 Categorical associations
Use versus no use
(N participants = 60; N assessments = 2,112)
Dose–response associations
Duration of use
(N participants = 60; N assessments = 1,075)
Model 3A
Fixed effects
Model 3B
Random effects
Model 4A
Fixed effects
Model 4B
Random effects
B(SE)pβB(SE)pB(SE)pβB(SE)p
Fixed part
Intercept5.64(.10) < .0017.895.64(.10) < .0015.69(.10) < .0017.625.69(.10) < .001
Assessment (WP).08(.04).031.09.08(.04).033.05(.05).347.09.05(.05).276
Passive use (WP).15(.07).027.14.15(.07).041.03(.07).695.14.06(.07).440
Active use (WP).14(.09).137.13.13(.09).164.05(.06).428.06.01(.07).879
Random part
σ2 residual (WP)1.18(.11) < .001 1.17(.10) < .0011.11(.12) < .001 1.07(.12) < .001
σ2 between-person (BP).54(.08) < .001 .54(.08) < .001.47(.08) < .001 .47(.08) < .001
σ2 passive use (BP)  .02(.05).335 .06(.04).068
σ2 active use (BP)  .05(.07).217 .04(.04).142
Model fit
Deviance6,503.546,501.673,287.593,279.66
AIC6,515.546,517.673,299.593,295.33
BIC6,549.486,562.913,329.473,335.17
Chi2 (df) 1.37 (2).503 19.92 (2) < .001
  1. For investigating the categorical associations, the passive and active use predictors were dummy coded (passive use: 0 = no passive use of Instagram; 1 = passive use of Instagram; and active use: 0 = no active use of Instagram; 1 = active use of Instagram, respectively). WP = within-person; BP = between-person. All predictors were person-mean centered. Models for the duration of use only include assessments during which participants had used Instagram, either actively or passively. p-values of the fixed part of the model are two-sided, p-values of the random part of the model are one-sided.