This is a guest blog post from one of DigiSus seed funded projects from 2024, “Digital wellbeing – sustainability amid disruption”.
Digitalization is a defining phenomenon of our time. Over the past 15 years, the development of digital technologies has been revolutionary, transforming how we interact with others, access societal services, and manage daily tasks. The rapid rise of artificial intelligence is accelerating this transformation even further, reshaping everyday life at an unprecedented rate.
At the same time, digitalization has a significant impact on people’s well-being. While it brings many benefits, digital technologies create divisions and inequalities. Not all services are equally accessible or available to everyone, and the advantages and disadvantages of digital transformation often accumulate unevenly across different groups. Individuals with low digital readiness or limited control over technology use are more likely to face challenges in adapting to the changing landscape. People also differ in how they adapt and perceive technologies and their overall impacts.
Social Psychological Determinants of Digital Well-Being
Subjective digital well-being refers to one’s self-evaluation of their quality of life when digital technologies are present. This perspective highlights that technologies are not inseparable from other areas of life and have impacts that extend beyond the momentary. Our research acknowledges that today’s technologies crucially shape psychological experiences and the sense of self as human-technology interaction is rapidly intensifying and technologies are increasingly capable and independent.
In our research, we investigated how new technologies relate to three essential components of well-being: need for autonomy, competence, and relatedness. We accounted for factors influencing the fulfillment of these needs, such as social relationships and individual factors. The social psychological context should be better acknowledged in the outcomes of digital well-being, as people navigate their lives and digitalization within larger social contexts—such as societies, communities, and groups, which shape attitudes, beliefs, and norms around technologies.
“Shared technological identity supports relatedness, but seems to diminish autonomy and competence”
Our research shows that socially shared technological identity predicts how people engage with new technologies, and further, how new technology related basic psychological needs are fulfilled. Identifying with other technology users supports the satisfaction of relatedness but seems to diminish feelings of autonomy and competence. Hence, while providing a sense of connection and support from other users, higher technological identity may undermine the psychological resources needed for independent and confident technology use, resulting in a sense of incompetence or loss of autonomy. Rather than acting purely as a positive resource, social identification with technology users can reduce feelings of autonomy and competence, impacting overall digital well-being and highlighting the complex role of social belonging in shaping technology experiences.
We observed this finding in six European countries (Finland, France, Germany, Ireland, Italy, and Poland) emphasizing the consistent role of identity in digital well-being despite cultural differences.
Outcomes of the Use of Health and Well-Being Technologies are Mixed
A significant advantage of digital technology is its potential to promote health and well-being directly. With the widespread adoption of digital devices, health interventions and services can now reach people at an unprecedented scale. The popularity of health and well-being technologies is evident in the sheer number of healthcare and medical apps; approximately 50,000 are available on both the Google Play Store and the Apple App Store.
We used cross-national data to examine whether well-being technology users report better health outcomes over a one-year period. The results were mixed. While the use of well-being technology was associated with increased happiness in Finland, Ireland, Italy, and Poland, its impact on health behaviors and mental well-being was inconsistent and sometimes even negative. In Germany, frequent use of well-being technology was linked to poorer mental well-being.
One explanation could be that when anticipated health outcomes are not realized, users may experience frustration and distress. Dissatisfaction with the perceived ineffectiveness of such technology, or failure to meet personal health goals, can lead to increased stress and diminished mental well-being. Excessive monitoring of bodily states can also distort body image and increase anxiety when users feel unable to control health outcomes.
However, in the long term, well-being technology use was associated with improved self-rated health and happiness in several countries. While the short-term effects may be mixed, well-being technologies have the potential to enhance overall happiness and health in certain contexts. Improved design and standardization of the approaches employed by these technologies are needed to achieve lasting well-being outcomes.
Promoting Digital Well-being
Supporting the well-being of digital technology users by fostering their sense of competence, autonomy, and relatedness is critical for a sustainable digital future. Digitalization holds great potential to improve everyday life, but its benefits will only be fully realized when technology is designed and implemented in ways that empower users, support psychological well-being, and promote equitable access across different populations.
Further, research emphasizes that the impacts of technologies are not uniform among individuals, and there is a need for a deeper understanding of the human factors leading to disparities in digital well-being.
***
Authors: Tampere University’s Emerging Technologies Lab researchers of the Digital wellbeing – sustainability amid disruption project supported by DigiSus seed funding.
Pictures: Jonne Renvall / Tampere University.