Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T09:22:08.716Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

8 - Marginalized and Understudied Populations Using Digital Media

from Part II - Digital Media in the Adolescent Developmental Context

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 June 2022

Jacqueline Nesi
Affiliation:
Brown University, Rhode Island
Eva H. Telzer
Affiliation:
University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill
Mitchell J. Prinstein
Affiliation:
University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill

Summary

Despite the pervasive use of social technology among minoritized youth, digital media research has been primarily based on White samples of older adolescents and emerging adults. It is critical to understand how overlooked populations including racial-ethnic, sexual and gender, and other minorities use digital media for purposes associated with their marginalized backgrounds. As social media adopters are becoming younger, we must explore how the pervasiveness of constant exposure and use affects marginalized identity development in early adolescence. This chapter provides an overview of how understudied subgroups of adolescents, namely racial/ethnic minorities, LGBTQ+, economically disadvantaged, and neurodiverse individuals, are influenced by online representations affecting their identity development, and inherent opportunities for risk and resilience. Social media research needs a) to begin at earlier developmental stages to capture critical identity development online and offline; b) more nuanced research beyond digital access to examine online connections for healthy identity exploration of marginalized adolescents.

Type
Chapter
Information
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2022
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NCCreative Common License - ND
This content is Open Access and distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 https://creativecommons.org/cclicenses/

The current generation of adolescents were born into an omnipresent digital world in which offline and online societal and cultural contexts can influence one’s developing sense of belonging and identity. Rapid technological advancements, such as widespread adoption of smartphones, streaming technologies, and online influencers, have changed the way adolescents have been primed and groomed to adapt to the shifting environment. As the field of digital media and social technologies continues to grow, the attention to digital divides becomes less about access to digital technologies and more about how young populations use these technologies in healthy (or unhealthy) ways. By 2013, the vast majority of youth had access to the Internet, including Black (92%), Hispanic (88%), and even youth in low-income neighborhoods (89%; Madden et al., Reference Madden, Lenhart, Duggan, Cortesi and Gasser2013). However, the scholarly reporting of cultural, racial, and economic differences in digital media use typically covers access to the Internet, mobile phones, and favorite social media sites rather than how youth from different marginalized groups actually use technology.

To date, most research has been conducted on White and college samples (Zhang & Leung, Reference Zhang and Leung2014). This further deepens the knowledge gap (or a “second-level digital divide”; Hargittai & Hinnant, Reference Hargittai and Hinnant2008) in understanding how overlooked populations, such as racial-ethnic minorities, sexual and gender minorities, and other vulnerable adolescent populations, may be not only accessing digital media in different ways but also using and repurposing them to subvert the dominant mainstream narratives. Unlike the mainstream media of the 20th century, this socially networked age of the 21st century provides users opportunities to co-construct their identities in the same social and entertainment environments as where they receive their commercial media programming (Manago, Reference Manago, Scott and Kosslyn2015). Since most US-based studies have focused on White or college-based samples to understand social media use (but see Chapter 7 for discussion of cultural differences across the world), there is a silencing of voices that exemplify the diverse identity factors among understudied subgroups of our youth’s digital worlds (Stevens et al., Reference Stevens, Gilliard-Matthews, Dunaev, Woods and Brawner2017). This chapter will discuss the role of digital media on marginalized identity development during adolescence, risk and resilience experiences of social media within these understudied adolescent groups, and challenges and future directions in researching the experiences of these subgroups.

Much like the mainstream televised media messages that dominated past generations, the ever-evolving landscape of digital media is a persistent source of societal messages for adolescents to digest – from unacceptable and acceptable behavior to peer and family relationships to gender and sexual roles to stereotypes and values (Mayhew & Weigle, Reference Mayhew and Weigle2018). Two major developmental tasks for adolescents aged 10–24 are exploring intimacy with others and developing stable personal, social, and collective identities that incorporate gender, racial/ethnic, sexual, moral/religious, and political components (Subrahmanyam et al., Reference Subrahmanyam, Smahel and Greenfield2006). In the sections below, we will explore the role of social media in developing marginalized identities pertaining to race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, homelessness, and disability. Because the emergent development of marginalized identities such as sexual orientation (e.g., Pew Research Center, 2013) or race/ethnicity (e.g., Umaña-Taylor et al., Reference Umaña-Taylor, Quintana and Lee2014) more often developmentally crystalizes in later adolescence and into emerging adulthood (ages 18–24), there is a limited understanding in the literature on how these identity explorations and formations prospectively develop in early and mid-adolescence (ages 10–17), often relying on retrospective accounts (e.g., Charmaraman, Grossman, & Richer, Reference Charmaraman, Grossman and Richer2021). Many of the studies in this chapter illustrate the experiences of older youth to shed some light on how tweens or teens may have similar experiences. The less common studies that focused on younger teens and tween experiences are highlighted whenever available.

Role of Digital Media in Development of Marginalized Racial-Ethnic Identities

One form of identity that becomes an integral part of the adolescent developmental period is racial and ethnic identity formation. This particular identity formation is stratified into periods of exploration and commitment (Phinney & Ong, Reference Phinney and Ong2007; Umaña-Taylor et al., Reference Umaña-Taylor, Quintana and Lee2014), all of which are considered a point of cultural strength contributing to minority youth resiliency (Masten & Reed, Reference Masten, Reed, Snyder and Lopez2002). Early (ages 10–13) and mid-adolescence (ages 14–17) is a key period for the exploration of racial-ethnic identity prior to commitment, which occurs during development in conjunction with heightened priorities of social impact, connectedness, and autonomy (Williams et al., Reference Williams, Bolland, Hooper, Church, Tomek and Bolland2014). Theoretical research has positioned racial and ethnic identity as an internalized feeling of belonging to a particular racial-ethnic group and is thought to be formed in later adolescence and young adulthood (Phinney, Reference Phinney1990; Yip et al., Reference Yip, Seaton and Sellers2006). Compared to children’s conceptions, adolescents’ notions of race and ethnicity are more abstract and complex, which is marked by a heightened group consciousness perspective (Quintana, Reference Quintana1994). It is worth noting for this chapter that in the context of the United States, racial and ethnic minorities are individuals who identify as non-White.1 There are unique histories (e.g., slavery, internment and incarceration, segregation) tied to the individual subgroups of racial and ethnic minorities in the USA, which contribute to the upbringing and identity formation of young people today. With these histories being told and readily accessible in the era of the Internet, exposure from an earlier age of these perceptions is bound to influence the development and well-being of children and teens.

While adolescence is a salient time for exploring racial-ethnic identity, it is a complex process that involves the influence of nested ecologies surrounding an adolescent, such as family (more proximal), school, community, and political climate (more distal) (Charmaraman & Grossman, Reference Charmaraman and Grossman2010; Spencer et al., Reference Spencer, Dupree and Hartmann1997), all of which also influence youth outcomes. One might consider the ubiquitous use of technology, especially social media, among young people as an additional digital ecology that has become a larger part of the processes in racial-ethnic identity exploration. The dominance of digital media exposure and social media use in adolescence across all races and ethnicities (Anderson & Jiang, Reference Anderson and Jiang2018) has potential consequences, both negative and positive, for youth exploration of what it means to be a person of color in their communities and its effects on mental health.

Risk for Racial-Ethnic Minority Youth

Racial-ethnic differentiation inherently creates opportunities for discrimination and negative stereotypes of minoritized groups to become perpetuated through digital media, which is a well-documented stressor and risk factor for poorer outcomes (Berry, Reference Berry2000; Trent et al., Reference Trent, Dooley and Dougé2019). As offline risk factors are shown to be mirrored online (Przybylski & Bowes, Reference Przybylski and Bowes2017), discrimination on digital media, and especially social media, has increased stress during an already dynamic time of development. Racial-ethnic discrimination online comes in many forms and may include racial slurs or jokes, negative stereotyping such as “criminals” or “thugs,” body shaming of skin tone or body figure, and even threat of harm, simply due to racial-ethnic profiles. Tynes and colleagues (Reference Tynes, English, Del Toro, Smith, Lozada and Williams2020) conducted the first study of its kind to investigate the mental health implications of online discrimination among Black and Latinx adolescents (6th–12th grade) over time. This novel study reveals that increases in experienced individual and vicarious online racial discrimination among Black and Latinx adolescents increases risks for higher levels of depressive and anxiety symptoms. Uniquely, older Black adolescent males were more likely to report high exposure to online discrimination at a younger age with decreasing discrimination over time compared to Latinx adolescent males. Yet, those who experienced high and stable vicarious online discrimination and those who were exposed to high levels of individual racial discrimination online at an early age experienced worse psychological outcomes over time, regardless of gender. This example shows the distinct experience of racial-ethnic online discrimination risks of Black and Latinx adolescents. In our work at the Youth, Media, & Wellbeing Research Lab, we demonstrated that Black and Latinx adolescents (5th–9th grade) adopt social media younger than their White peers, further exposing them to behavioral health difficulties such as sleep disruption due to screen content they were exposed to (Zhai et al., Reference Zhai, Jordan, Reeves-Miller, Xiao and Charmaraman2020).

Much like the historical contexts of racial-ethnic discrimination against Black and Latinx populations in the USA, individuals of Asian heritage have been subjected to severe historical discrimination (Gee et al., Reference Gee, Ro, Shariff-Marco and Chae2009). Despite having the highest reported accessibility to the Internet and social media (Spooner, Reference Spooner2001), Asian American youth still remain underrepresented in the literature around digital media and well-being. Asian Americans are often subject to stereotypes such as the “model minorities,” “honorary Whites,” or even the perpetual foreigners (Kiang et al., Reference Kiang, Witkow and Champagne2013, p. 1714), which may have damaging effects on the racial-ethnic exploration among youth. For instance, Asian Americans in later adolescence (18–24 years) are more likely to be cyberbullied compared to White or Hispanic counterparts (Charmaraman et al., Reference Charmaraman, Chan, Chen, Richer and Ramanudom2018). At the same time, Asian Americans are the least likely to report negative occurrences on social media in order to reduce “losing face” and maintain a positive image to the external world. Studies have demonstrated that Asian Americans experience stigma and shame when it comes to their mental health problems and treatment (Surgeon General, 2001; Wang et al., Reference Wang, Barlis and Do2020), with cultural stereotypes implying that seeking professional help is a sign of weakness, lack of self-discipline, or may cause shame to the family name (Uba, Reference Uba1994). Thus, it is unsurprising that Asian American youth would withhold their emotional turmoil from the public eye on social media platforms.

A more recent example of Asian Americans feeling targeted is through the current implications of the global pandemic, which has caused a rapid resurgence of hate and racial profiling among the Asian American communities (Croucher et al., Reference Croucher, Nguyen and Rahmani2020). According to the Integrated Threat Theory (Stephan & Stephan, Reference Stephan, Stephan and Oskamp2000), this poses a realistic threat and generalized out-group stereotypes of this given event has driven the increases in discriminatory behaviors against Asian Americans, specifically Chinese Americans. Asian American adolescents are among those with highest access to the Internet and social media that leads to early exposures to these racial-ethnic discriminations online. There is emerging evidence indicating that a strong racial-ethnic and/or immigrant identity can protect against the negative effects of online harassment and depression in early adolescence (e.g., Hernandez & Charmaraman, Reference Hernandez and Charmaraman2021).

Indigenous and Native American adolescents are heavy consumers of digital media (Rushing & Stephens, Reference Rushing and Stephens2011) but are also a population vastly affected by mental health problems such as substance abuse and suicide (Park-Lee et al., Reference Park-Lee, Lipari and Bose2018). Racial-ethnic identity exploration among current Indigenous youth is often met with an internal conflict of relating immediate relevant experiences with historical cultures and traumas (Wexler, Reference Wexler2009, p. 272) that contributes to outcomes of well-being. Among Indigenous adolescents, it has been shown that perceived discrimination and historical oppression of Native American populations have been strong indicators of poor mental health outcomes such as alcohol abuse and depression (Cheadle & Whitbeck, Reference Cheadle and Whitbeck2011). Taking into consideration that offline discrimination is likely to be transferred online (Przybylski & Bowes, Reference Przybylski and Bowes2017), it can be hypothesized that exposure to racial-ethnic discrimination on digital platforms such as social media may also amplify the risk of poor mental health outcomes among Indigenous adolescents. Yet research remains extremely limited in the digital media domain for the population and should be further explored.

Resilience for Racial-Ethnic Minority Youth

As the counternarrative to risks, there is a growing body of literature focused on protective mechanisms of social technologies for youth of color. Among a cohort of racial-ethnic minority adolescents (i.e., Black, Latinx, Asian, and multiracial), research has shown a stronger sense of racial and ethnic identity centrality among Black and Latinx adolescent females showing greater identity centrality compared to males (Charmaraman & Grossman, Reference Charmaraman and Grossman2010). This is consistent with the theoretical groundwork of the phenomenological and ecological framework (PVEST) that has been applied to race and ethnic identity formation (Spencer et al., Reference Spencer, Dupree and Hartmann1997). A scoping review by Williams and Moody (Reference Williams and Moody2019) uses the PVEST framework to understand the role of identifying as a Black and female youth and its impacts on well-being in the digital age. Young Black girls are among the highest consumers of social media, and their identities are being supported in ways that are mirrored among other non-Black youth, such as elevating self-esteem and peer affirmations. But because of a long-standing history of stereotypic media portrayal of the young Black female (e.g., nurturing, aggressive, hypersexualized), these messages and stereotypes have translated onto social media that makes identity exploration increasingly complex. This exemplifies that exposure to an online space helps to amplify marginalized youths’ voices, but also amplifies the systemic issues surrounding the Black community today that plays a significant role in racial identity exploration.

A developmental consideration during adolescence is the prioritization of social connectedness, and this connectedness through shared heritage, culture, and histories can be strengthened by digital connection. Despite the systemic risk factors related to race and ethnicity that exist in the USA, there is a shift in focus away from deficit-based approaches and toward recognizing the assets and strength within these communities, especially among young people, which help them thrive in a difficult system. In terms of combating the isolation that many adolescents feel, our Youth, Media, & Wellbeing Research Lab demonstrated that Black and Latinx youth aged 11–15 were more likely than White and Asian adolescents to join online groups that made them feel less lonely and isolated (Zhai et al., Reference Zhai, Jordan, Reeves-Miller, Xiao and Charmaraman2020). These online communities included group chats on Snapchat, House Party, WhatsApp, Discord, anime fandom, and sports or hobby-related groups. In addition, Black youth preferred YouTube video content that was about relationships or friendships, whereas Latinx youth were more likely to seek opportunities to learn how to cope with stress and anxiety and to use social media to stay in touch with family and relatives compared to White youth.

Another powerful example of racial-ethnic based online communities is the Black Twitter culture that erupted in 2015. This online culture was a profound way that millions of Black community members came together to share experiences, but more importantly to create a form of resistance to the marginalization that has long-standing impacts to justice and well-being in the Black community (Florini, Reference Florini2014). A more recent study highlighted that Black adolescents are among the vast users of these online spaces to increase their social capital, but also to facilitate connections to such identity-based communities while amplifying their voices and representation online (Borough et al., Reference Borough, Literat and Ikin2020).

Latinx adolescents often feel the need to suppress the expression of their culture on social media due to potential discrimination or not enough affirmation (e.g., “likes”) compared to when they post more “Americanized” cultures like Thanksgiving or Christmas holiday posts (Borough et al., Reference Borough, Literat and Ikin2020). Despite this finding, Latinx adolescents still sought out positive aspects of expanding social capital on social media platforms that supported the prospects of job and education opportunities, which is an important factor tied to identity and well-being outcomes for this marginalized group. Another example of the strength in racial-ethnic identity in the digital age for Latinx youth is ethnic identity exploration, such that expressing higher levels of connectedness to the culture via the exploration of their identity is a protective factor against problematic externalizing and internalizing behaviors related to online racial-ethnic discrimination (Umaña-Taylor et al., Reference Umaña-Taylor, Tynes, Toomey, Williams and Mitchell2015).

There are still limited accounts of research that emphasize the opportunities and experiences of Asian American and Indigenous adolescents’ racial-ethnic identity exploration, especially during early (ages 10–13) and mid-adolescence (ages 11–17), and the role that social media and other digital ecosystems play in this process. In a mixed-method study among older adolescents (ages 18–25), Asian Americans reported using social media as a way of seeking out social support during difficult times in more privatized online channels, which is thought to be a way of navigating the stigma around mental health and impression management that reigns as a priority in many Asian cultures (Charmaraman et al., Reference Charmaraman, Chan, Chen, Richer and Ramanudom2018). Recent findings in response to the rise in racism among Asian Americans have shown online spaces to be a space of demonstrating comradery and resistance to such discrimination, similarly seen in Black Twitter, thus preventing harmful outcomes (Abidin & Zeng, Reference Abidin and Zeng2020). While this work has yet to be shown in the adolescent developmental period, this is another exemplar of the power of collective racial-ethnic identity in an online community.

Among Indigenous youth and resiliency online, while empirical work is vastly minimal, the work of an online space WeRNative to support Native teens exemplifies the unique affordances digital media can have to support the identities and well-being with a greater reach than before (Rushing et al., Reference Rushing, Stephens and Dog2018). To support Indigenous youth during a conflict in ethnic identity, there is an opportunity for digital technologies to bridge the gaps between historical contexts and current experiences to enhance the connection to the heritage of Indigenous communities. Work with Indigenous youth in content creation to address health literacy via digital media (e.g., videos) shows that this not only promotes healthy behaviors, but is also a mechanism to address stressors related to culture and ethnic identity (Stewart et al., Reference Stewart, Riecken, Scott, Tanaka and Riecken2008). Indigenous teens and emerging adults have taken to social media as a means for creative expression of the Native racial-ethnic identity and solidarity, which is said to be a way of reconnecting with the heritage and reaching a broader population of youth in this community (Monkman, Reference Monkman2020; Noor, Reference Noor2020). Such strength in racial-ethnic identification among a high-risk group of youth is imperative for support of well-being, and the expanded reach and social capital that social media provides can be vastly beneficial for developing Indigenous adolescents.

It is evident that there are risks associated with online discrimination exposure for youth of color, yet there are vast opportunities through social capital, connectedness, and empowerment that youth of color experience with social technologies. Mirroring of risks in online and offline environments can be taken into consideration when building a digital ecosystem that supports diverse groups of adolescents during this time of identity development.

Role of Digital Media in Development of Sexual and Gender Minority Identities

For a subset of youth, referred to in this chapter as LGBT+,2 processes of identity formation and development during adolescence center around sexual orientation and gender. In this context, identity development is understood as the process by which an individual attaches labels and meaning to their experiences of sexual attraction and gendered existence (Gordon & Silva, Reference Gordon and Silva2014; Robertson, Reference Robertson2013). Among social scientists, sexuality and gender are understood as social constructions; much like race, rather than manifesting in the individual as innate biological traits, they are influenced by the social forces that define normative and nonnormative behaviors (Gordon & Silva, Reference Gordon and Silva2014; Robertson, Reference Robertson2013). For instance, an adolescent attempting to articulate a minority sexual orientation might be deterred from doing so by compulsory heterosexuality, the set of societal norms that presume and dictate heterosexual behavior and identity (Robertson, Reference Robertson2013). Sexual identity development is a highly variable process, but integration of a sexual identity with other aspects of the self is often signified when individuals become comfortable with others knowing their sexuality, actively disclose their identity to others, or engage with the broader LGBT+ community (Rosario et al., Reference Rosario, Schrimshaw and Hunter2008). Gender identity is often developed through intrapersonal processes, and alongside other aspects of gender-related experience, including gender presentation and self-image. While gender norms are often even more rigid than those pertaining to sexuality, the ability to express one’s gender identity both internally and to an external social world has positive associations with well-being (Kuper et al., Reference Kuper, Wright and Mustanski2018). Although young adults often face significant interpersonal consequences when they express marginalized sexual and gender identities, group identification can also be a source of protection and well-being for LGBT+ youth (Scroggs & Vennum, Reference Scroggs and Vennum2020).

Since the Internet’s early days, digital media has provided LGBT+ users with spaces to gather, construct identity, and share content with one another. In many respects, various niche online communities today constitute “queer cultural archipelagos” (Ghaziani, Reference Ghaziani2014, p. 137): concentrated areas that, some argue, have replaced gay bars and “gayborhoods” as safe spaces for those who identify as LGBT+ (Cavalcante, Reference Cavalcante2019). As this migration online occurs, LGBT+ adolescents are being exposed to these digital spaces – and simultaneously helping to construct the cultures that define them. One study found that LGBT+ adolescents as young as 13 years old, on average, spend more time online than their heterosexual, cisgender counterparts (Palmer et al., Reference Palmer, Kosciw, Greytak, Ybarra, Korchmaros and Mitchell2013). Another study, although it did not find differences in time spent online and excluded transgender youth from its sample, was able to show that sexual minority youth aged 18–24 tended to use the Internet differently than heterosexual youth, expanding their activity across a greater variety of social networking sites and engaging more purposefully in identity development online (Ceglarek & Ward, Reference Ceglarek and Ward2016). While existing scholarship has begun to examine the ways in which LGBT+ young adults navigate cyberspace, LGBT+ youth, especially those under 18 years old, are still a critically understudied population. Research on the ways transgender youth navigate social media remains especially rare.

Often, the ways in which LGBT+ youth learn about themselves and their communities online are directly related to identity development. This type of online engagement may take many forms, including traditional learning, in which users seek out information about identity-related terminology and then apply these to their own experiences; social learning, in which users observe and identify LGBT+ role models on social media; experiential learning, which involves active participation in the online LGBT+ community, especially through the use of dating apps; and teaching others, which occurs when LGBT+ individuals use social media platforms to provide others with information on LGBT+ issues, including experiences with coming out (Fox & Ralston, Reference Fox and Ralston2016). While each of these processes allow LGBT+ youth to better define their personal, social, and collective identities, this digital learning also incorporates an understanding of the stressors that LGBT+ youth may face when they actively express and practice their gender and sexuality online.

A commonly used term used to discuss social networking’s impact on LGBT+ youth well-being is context collapse: a phenomenon that occurs when the individual, by sharing content on a social media platform, exposes that content to a variety of different audiences, some of whom may not respond positively (Fox & Ralston, Reference Fox and Ralston2016; McConnell et al., Reference McConnell, Néray, Hogan, Korpak, Clifford and Birkett2018). For LGBT+ youth, this conflict is particularly salient, since people they know in various social contexts may have drastically different levels of awareness about their sexuality or gender identity. Context collapse can therefore profoundly impact the ways in which young LGBT+ people navigate disclosure and the coming out process. Coming out itself has complex associations with well-being; while it can positively influence the lives of LGBT+ youth in certain relational contexts, in other contexts it can limit identity formation or negatively impact mental health (McConnell et al., Reference McConnell, Néray, Hogan, Korpak, Clifford and Birkett2018, p. 3).

Many LGBT+ individuals seem able to circumvent some of the difficulties associated with context collapse by dividing their online activity between a variety of social media sites. DeVito et al. (Reference DeVito, Walker and Birnholtz2018) argue that for LGBT+ users, social media activity should be conceptualized as an ecosystem, that is, users are able to manage their self-presentation by targeting content to different audiences on different platforms, in addition to the use of privacy controls within one platform. Examining interactions on specific platforms allows researchers to define some of the key characteristics of the LGBT+ adolescents’ online ecosystems. For instance, on Facebook, a platform where users primarily interact with people they already have relationships with offline, LGBT+ youth seem to subscribe to the lowest common denominator model, in which they tailor identity presentations toward whichever audiences are most likely to express disapproval toward them (McConnell et al., Reference McConnell, Néray, Hogan, Korpak, Clifford and Birkett2018). Tumblr, meanwhile, has had success engaging young LGBT+ users, which is often attributed to its features that enable LGBT+ youth to connect to others in the LGBT+ community with minimal threat of exposing their identities, such as anonymity and the privileging of content sharing over content creation (Cavalcante, Reference Cavalcante2019).

As LGBT+ youth come of age on the Internet, social media provides a space for them to cultivate personal, social, and collective identities. In some cases, this process occurs as learning, primarily positive interactions that allow individuals to practice being LGBT+ in relative safety and connection with others. However, LGBT+ participation online coexists with the awareness that nonnormative experiences of sexuality and gender may incur negative social responses. This danger forces LGBT+ youth to navigate coming out and expressing identity with care, manifesting in differential usage of social media platforms, which itself can affect adolescent well-being.

Risk for Sexual/Gender Minority Youth

Existing scholarship on LGBT+ populations’ activity online has identified the Internet as a space where youth can be exposed to harassment, discrimination, and other forms of bullying that may be easier to perpetrate in online spaces. Multiple studies have found that LGBT+ youth are more likely to be harassed online than non-LGBT+ youth (Palmer et al., Reference Palmer, Kosciw, Greytak, Ybarra, Korchmaros and Mitchell2013; Ybarra et al., Reference Ybarra, Mitchell, Palmer and Reisner2015). Cyberbullying is perpetrated against LGBT+ youth in a variety of ways, including verbal victimization, relational victimization, and electronic actions, all of which are often combined with in-person harassment (Varjas et al., 2013). These distinctions highlight the variety of modes through which the cyberbullying of LGBT+ youth can occur, including sexual harassment, the use of slurs, purposeful social exclusion, and the targeting of social media content using viruses. It is also notable that, in a sample that did not include gender minority youth, several instances were identified in which the LGB adolescents interviewed were themselves perpetrators of bullying, including online verbal harassment (Varjas et al., 2013); this finding complicates the assumption that sexual minority youth are solely victims in their online interactions.

The effects of online harassment include increased depression and suicidality among LGBT+ youth (Schimmel-Bristow & Ahrens, Reference Schimmel-Bristow, Ahrens, Moreno and Radovic2018), dangers that are especially salient given that LGBT+ youth are particularly vulnerable to cybervictimization, since revealing their experiences to parents may mean that they risk coming out or losing access to digital technologies (Cooper & Blumenfeld, Reference Cooper and Blumenfeld2012). However, it is possible that the role of cyberbullying in LGBT+ adolescents’ digital landscape may be shifting. Data collected in the fall of 2019 by our Youth, Media, and Wellbeing Lab, for instance, found no difference between the amount of heterosexual and sexual minority youth who reported experiencing cyberbullying online. Our sample included children under 13, of which 25% experienced nonheterosexual attraction (Charmaraman, Hodes, & Richer, Reference Charmaraman, Grossman and Richer2021). However, there are several indicators that sexual minority youth today may experience more social isolation online than their peers do. These youth tended to have fewer friends on social media, and were less likely to use social media to engage positively with friends, including sharing content that was comedic or that they enjoyed. They also were less likely to be friends with family members, peers, or acquaintances on their social media networks, indicating that the links between in-person and online communities may be weaker for LGBT+ youth than other adolescents. Sexual minority youth also reported feeling isolated more often than heterosexual youth. Therefore, there is reason to be concerned that even when young LGBT+ populations are not directly attacked online, they still experience victimization via structural exclusion from the heteronormative social circles that make up their real-world contacts.

As a consequence of context collapse, LGBT+ youth also often find themselves at heightened risk when they share personal information online. Our Youth, Media, and Wellbeing Lab found that sexual minority youth were less likely to have private settings on their social media accounts (Charmaraman, Hodes, & Richer, Reference Charmaraman, Grossman and Richer2021), and Varjas et al. (2013) discussed sexual minority teenagers’ willingness to share personal information with those they talked to virtually as a possible drawback of online activity. Panizo (Reference Panizo2018), in a study of teenagers aged 14–19 in Spain who identified as gay, also noted the recurrence of anecdotes in which teenagers’ disclosure of their sexual orientation online was discovered by relatives, forcing them “out of the closet indirectly and involuntarily” (p. 67). While these results are open to further interpretation, they do imply that LGBT+ youth place themselves at higher risk when sharing information about themselves through digital media due to the stark division that sometimes exists between their expression of identity online and offline.

Finally, Youth, Media, and Wellbeing Lab data shows that sexual minority youth report seeing more content related to self-harm on social media and are more likely to have actually attempted self-harm (Charmaraman, Hodes, & Richer, Reference Charmaraman, Grossman and Richer2021). These sexual minority youth were also found to have higher depressive scores. These findings are in line with concerns about the potential of specific sites, like Tumblr, to foster dangerous subcultures that correspond with social isolation and poor mental health outcomes (Cavalcante, Reference Cavalcante2019).

Resilience for Sexual/Gender Minority Youth

Despite its documented risks, digital media use often provides numerous ways for LGBT+ youth to build resilience. Many forms of online resilience-building are closely related to the process of identity formation. Hillier and Harrison (Reference Hillier and Harrison2007) were among the first to argue that internet communities constitute safe spaces for LGBT+ youth who face hostile environments at home or school. In their study of same-sex attracted Australian youth aged 14–21, they assert that in digital spaces, anonymity and the lack of geographic boundaries provide the ideal practice ground for constructing coming out narratives, engaging with a communal gay culture, experimenting with nonheterosexual intimacy, and socializing with other same-sex-attracted youth. Sexual minority youth have been found to perceive their online friends as significantly more socially supportive than their in-person friends, and LGBT+ youth are more likely to have friends they only know online. Despite the finding that youth across sexual and gender identities feel relatively safe online, researchers note that strong online social support still does not appear to reduce the likelihood of online or in-person harassment and victimization (Ybarra et al., Reference Ybarra, Mitchell, Palmer and Reisner2015). The Youth, Media, and Wellbeing Lab also found that sexual minority youth they surveyed were more likely to join an online group in order to reduce social isolation or feelings of loneliness (Charmaraman, Hodes, & Richer, Reference Charmaraman, Grossman and Richer2021), which similarly implies that LGBT+ youth have been able to engage with social media networks in supportive and fortifying ways.

Hillier and Harrison (Reference Hillier and Harrison2007) also note that accessing resources pertaining to sexual orientation, sexual health, and sexual identity can be a critical form of internet use for same-sex-attracted youth, a utility that is echoed in other studies of LGBT+ adolescents. Fox and Ralston (Reference Fox and Ralston2016) reported that participants used online resources to educate themselves about terminology related to sexual orientation and gender identity, to learn about gender transition, and, in a crossover with their offline context, to identify LGBT+ spaces in physical proximity to them. The Internet can also be a useful tool to identify LGBT+-friendly physicians, therapists, and other care providers (Schimmel-Bristow & Ahrens, Reference Schimmel-Bristow, Ahrens, Moreno and Radovic2018).

A final form of resilience-building, also with its roots in identity development, is the use of online platforms as springboards for LGBT+ activism. Education nonprofit GLSEN reported that LGBT+ youth aged 13–18 were about twice as likely as non-LGBT+ youth to participate in civic engagement activities, and 77% had been part of an online community in support of a social cause (Palmer et al., Reference Palmer, Kosciw, Greytak, Ybarra, Korchmaros and Mitchell2013). Connection to online community fosters sexual citizenship, which occurs when one’s politicized identity prompts one to engage in social activism (Robards et al., Reference Robards, Churchill, Vivienne, Hanckel, Byron, Aggleton, Cover, Leahy, Marshall and Rasmussen2019). Thus, social media often serves as a tool for LGBT+ youth to communicate about social issues that impact them, and allows them to build strengthened connections to both their immediate and virtual communities.

Ultimately, it is clear that despite the potential of facing victimization, LGBT+ youth wield considerable agency in their online interactions. Much of the time, their vulnerabilities coexist with a demonstrated ability to navigate digital space, in ways that positively supplement or contrast with their offline environments.

Role of Digital Media in the Development of Other Marginalized Youth Identities

In this section, we explore how digital media influences the identities, risk, and resilience of youth from other marginalized backgrounds, ranging from those living in disadvantaged neighborhoods to homeless and neurodiverse youth.

In the case of youth in disadvantaged neighborhoods, Oldenburg (Reference Oldenburg1989) argues that high levels of poverty, decreased employment prospects, and the lack of safe gathering spaces without threat of violence or drug activity lead to a problem of place. These urban youth often have a dilemma of geographic identity – at once proud and connected to one’s neighborhood but needing a third space to feel safe and secure to hang out. Soukup (Reference Soukup2006) articulated a “digital third space” wherein online communities are key to developing one’s neighborhood identity and can be located within a local geographic area, allowing participants to be fully immersed in a computer-mediated environment contributing to a sense of connectedness and sense of refuge.

Homelessness is often an invisible identity that is intentionally hidden from outsiders such as classmates at school or future employers (Whitbeck & Hoyt, Reference Whitbeck and Hoyt1999). The majority of research on the digital media use of homeless youth focuses on health information seeking (Eyrich-Garg, Reference Eyrich-Garg2010) and less on social connections with others. Prior research on nonhomeless youth suggests that having a cell phone in one’s possession increases feelings of safety and security while on the move, and merely owning a cell phone makes youth feel socially connected (Wei & Lo, Reference Wei and Lo2006). This may be a particularly salient part of homeless youths’ identities – having a lifeline to a networked world may be more critical to maintain those connections they most value.

Prior research has demonstrated that social media has provided people with intellectual disabilities an opportunity to express their preferred personal and social identities (Caton & Chapman, Reference Caton and Chapman2016), which may include reflections on their identities as neurodiverse, but also serves as an online space where they can be just like everyone else. For instance, in a study with people with Down syndrome, online profiles were places to be vocal about their thoughts, feelings, and needs (Seale, Reference Seale2007). Studies have shown those with intellectual disabilities publicize their disability in blogs, even when these online venues provided space to focus on other aspects of their lives (McClimens & Gordon, Reference McClimens and Gordon2008). Other research has observed that some individuals with intellectual disabilities prefer to not mention the label of intellectual disability in an online profile, providing a chance to escape the identity stigma associated with these disabilities (Löfgren-Mårtenson, Reference Löfgren-Mårtenson2008).

Risk of Other Marginalized Youth

Adolescents from lower-income households have been found to spend on average an hour and a half more on screens than their higher-income peers (George et al., Reference George, Jensen and Russell2020). They are also more likely to be passively viewing content and less frequently using screens for research and learning (OECD, 2016). In the new digital divide of remote learning (Odgers & Robb, Reference Odgers and Robb2020), lower-income households not only have less digital access but also fewer adults who can scaffold digital support, which is critical given the increased risk for mental health symptoms.

In a study by VonHoltz and colleagues (Reference VonHoltz, Frasso, Golinkoff, Lozano, Hanlon and Dowshen2018), individuals who do not have easy access to the Internet, such as may be the case with youth experiencing homelessness, demonstrate the need to be more purposeful when using public computers. For instance, using the Internet for social media is limited when other basic needs are not being met, such as housing, food, and unemployment. When youth do not have easy access to health care or resources to understand their health ailments, they turn to the Internet to self-diagnose, often finding the terminology and sheer volume of information to be too complex. In terms of being connected with others online, young homeless women have been found to be less likely to stay in touch with friends and less likely to post public messages, signaling a weaker social network to rely on and a greater likelihood of social isolation (Guadagno et al., Reference Guadagno, Muscanell and Pollio2013).

Prior research on social technology use among adolescents with physical or intellectual health conditions, such as autism spectrum disorder, have focused on their unique challenges in understanding social situations and managing peer relationships. This can lead individuals with disabilities to turn to technology as a less threatening way of interacting with others (Davidson, Reference Davidson2008). Unfortunately, having a noticeable or visible disability increases the chances of being a victim of cyberbullying, particularly for those who use the Internet more frequently and are already bullied in person (Kowalski et al., Reference Kowalski, Morgan, Drake-Lavelle and Allison2016). People with intellectual disabilities have also been found to disclose more personal information about themselves and photos online, increasing the potential for financial, sexual, and personal safety threats (Holmes & O’Loughlin, Reference Holmes and O’Loughlin2014). Adolescents with a diagnosis of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) have been shown to not only be likely victims but also perpetrators of cyberbullying peers. Those with ADHD who were victimized reported higher incidents of loneliness and lower levels of self-efficacy and social support compared to nonvictims (Heiman et al., Reference Heiman, Olenik-Shemesh and Eden2014).

Resilience of Other Marginalized Youth

Digital media and mobile technology access may be especially difficult for homeless youth who are also at increased risk for behavioral and mental health problems associated with substance abuse and violence, compared to housed youth (Rice et al., Reference Rice, Milburn, Rotheram-Borus, Mallett and Rosenthal2005). Despite the barriers, studies have dispelled the myth of a digital divide for homeless youth, such that around 85% of the homeless population access the Internet at least once a week and 62% of homeless youth had a cell phone, mostly related to instrumental purposes, such as looking for jobs or staying connected with social workers trying to track them down (Rice et al., Reference Rice, Lee and Taitt2011). Besides using their personal devices, homeless youth are accessing the Internet through social service agencies (60%), public libraries (54%), and internet cafes (14%) (Pollio et al., Reference Pollio, Batey, Bender, Ferguson and Thompson2013). Only 9% of homeless youth indicated that they did not have a social media profile (Young & Rice, Reference Young and Rice2011). Rice and colleagues (Reference Rice, Lee and Taitt2011) found that homeless youth are most likely to stay in touch via cell phones with friends they knew before they were homeless, followed by siblings, parents, and street-based peers, which underlines the critical social network that friends can provide for these youth. Besides studies on digital access and seeking health-related information, there is limited research examining what homeless youth actually communicate about on their social media sites. These studies have found that youth discussed both risk-taking behaviors such as having sex with someone they met online or drug use, but also prosocial discussion topics such as school, family, work, setting goals, and even their homelessness (Barman-Adhikari et al., Reference Barman-Adhikari, Rice, Bender, Lengnick-Hall, Yoshioka-Maxwell and Rhoades2016).

Studies focused on youth with intellectual or socioemotional disabilities are almost always centered on cyberbullying and the promise of technology-facilitated interventions (Schimmel-Bristow & Ahrens, Reference Schimmel-Bristow, Ahrens, Moreno and Radovic2018), rather than how these young people use social media in resilient ways. A recent review suggested that potential benefits of social media use in young people with intellectual disabilities include increased opportunities to make and maintain relationships, decreased loneliness (Kydland et al., Reference Kydland, Molka-Danielsen, Balandin and Fallmyr2012), increasing self-confidence and self-esteem through learning new technical skills, and having fun (Caton & Chapman, Reference Caton and Chapman2016).

Challenges and Future Directions

Moving Beyond Differential Access

Researchers have recently made a call to action on moving away from quantity of time spent on digital technologies, and more toward understanding the quality of experiences online that may have larger impacts to youth well-being (Ito et al., Reference Ito, Odgers and Schueller2020; Odgers & Jensen, Reference Odgers and Jensen2020). In doing so, the research will be able to provide evidence for how the most pervasive forms of digital media in the current moment is impacting the lives of adolescents, especially those who are marginalized and understudied. In the case of youth who are homeless, access to digital technologies (e.g., mobile phones and public computers) and being able to keep in touch with loved ones is a primary concern for both the research participants and the researchers who study them. However, little is known about which social media platforms are being accessed by this vulnerable population and for what purposes, how often, etc.

Hard to Reach and Hidden Subpopulations

Racial-ethnic identity formation during adolescence is met with many challenges and opportunities in the digital age, especially among the growing diversity in the population. While we have only scratched the surface of the possible implications that this identity development process can have in online and social media spaces, there is still much to be explored. A major challenge that research has going forward is accounting for the wide range of races and ethnicities within the USA, and accounting for bi- and multiracial-ethnic identities. There are also many approaches to mapping out the racial-ethnic identity development during this critical period of adolescence, and prior research has had a stronger focus on the identity commitment during late adolescence and young adulthood (e.g., college samples). As digital media and social media adopters are becoming younger at a rapid rate, we must further explore how the pervasive nature of constant exposure and use affects racial and ethnic identity development in the earlier stages of adolescence. Parents and educators might consider discussions with youth from marginalized backgrounds to prepare for biased language and to arm them with the tools to be proactive with learning about and/or establishing their social identities online.

Despite the fact that some youth may identify as LGBT+ at ages as young as 9 (Calzo & Blashill, Reference Calzo and Blashill2018), research about LGBT+ adolescent behavior online is extremely limited for populations under 18 years old. Information about the digital media use of LGBT+ children under 13 years old is virtually nonexistent, and the Youth, Media, and Wellbeing Lab’s data is among the only to date that include children in middle school. Much of the existing research also fails to include transgender youth in its samples, or frames its analyses of this population as secondary to findings about LGB individuals. Thus, future research on LGBT+ social media use has an opportunity to focus on each of these vulnerable populations. As children gain access to social media earlier in middle school, and even in late elementary school, information about how they begin to develop LGBT+ identity or learn about gender and sexuality can provide important context for parents and teachers. Transgender youth, meanwhile, face unique barriers to positive identity formation throughout their developmental years (Palmer et al., Reference Palmer, Kosciw, Greytak, Ybarra, Korchmaros and Mitchell2013); therefore, research devoted to the mental health impacts of transgender digital media use, especially as compared to other members of the LGBT+ community, is a valuable area for future exploration.

Adolescent development may also be compounded with intersectional identity formations. In a diverse mixed-method study of adolescents and young adults aged 12–25, Charmaraman and colleagues (Reference Charmaraman, Chan, Price, Richer, Tassie and Brown2015) found that girls and women of color participated in more online blogs and were more likely to report revealing their stress on social media compared to both White and male participants. The unique issues faced by LGBT+ youth who are racial minorities or have other marginalized identities are also understudied, such that race overlaps with terms used and content posted about sexuality (e.g., Wargo, Reference Wargo2016). More expansive qualitative and mixed-method research is necessary to understand how particular experiences of sexual orientation and gender are racialized differently online. GLSEN also suggests that lack of internet access for LGBT+ youth living in rural areas merits future investigation, since many of these adolescents are already isolated from any form of LGBT+ community (Palmer et al., Reference Palmer, Kosciw, Greytak, Ybarra, Korchmaros and Mitchell2013).

Social Media Site Affordances/Hindrances

As noted in earlier sections, it is shown that collective online spaces for interactive and passive use such as social media platforms (e.g., Twitter, Instagram, Facebook, TikTok) have proven to be a space of racial-ethnic empowerment for young people and a way to promote the social capital needed to support well-being during adolescent development. Despite the dark side of the online ecosystems related to racial discrimination and injustices in the algorithmic makeup of these social media spaces, there are vast opportunities for these tools to be utilized to support historically marginalized racial and ethnic youth to navigate and build their identities to promote mental well-being. For instance, Facebook conspicuously does not allow users to define their race on their profiles, but users can display their cultural background through their photos or interests. The opportunities must also be promoted by the industry by deviating away from a color-blind and utiopic cyberspace approach, which often further perpetuates the visual classification of other and hampers empowerment of cultural identities (Grasmuck et al., Reference Grasmuck, Martin and Zhao2009). More collaborative research with tech industry user experience teams will improve evidence-based decisions around marginalized youth who are primary users of these apps.

LGBT+ activity on newer social media sites, and the ongoing evolution of these communities’ online presence, also provide fertile ground for future research. For instance, the video-sharing app TikTok has experienced a surge of popularity among adolescents and corners of the app are primarily devoted to LGBT+ social support and resource sharing (Carey, Reference Carey2020; Ohlheiser, Reference Ohlheiser2020). At the same time, several sites, including Tumblr and YouTube, have received criticism for implementing guidelines that, while intended to prevent youth from seeing pornographic content, restrict access to LGBT+ media and resources (Romano, Reference Romano2019; Sybert, Reference Sybert2021); these actions could significantly impact LGBT+ engagement on these platforms. Simpson and Semaan (Reference Simpson and Semaan2020) have detailed the affirming yet fraught relationship many LGBT+ users form with TikTok specifically, and the platform’s potential for algorithmic exclusion. Finally, certain platforms provide researchers with the opportunity to gather data that is more representative of LGBT+ populations, as demonstrated by Salk et al. (Reference Salk, Thoma and Choukas-Bradley2020); their methodology, in which transgender youth were recruited via targeted social media advertising, has exciting implications for investigators committed to more effectively understanding the unique factors that impact LGBT+ young adults’ digital media use.

Across all of the marginalized populations in this chapter, there are untapped research avenues regarding identity work in online spaces. It is worth recognizing, like many other vulnerable youth communities, offline risk factors such as bullying, victimization and behavioral problems spill over into online spaces, which reinforces heightened risks for negative experiences on social media. It is critical that researchers and technology developers recognize the potential amplification of risks tied to one’s identity of being a part of this particular vulnerable adolescent population (Odgers, Reference Odgers2018). Moving beyond the deficits-based discourse, future research and practice can capitalize on assets-based and empowerment approaches to positive minority youth development in digital spaces. Being a member of a group that is overlooked or faced with discrimination can galvanize individuals with a sense of purpose, tackling a mutual goal of collective sense-making and more authentic visibility, which, in turn, can promote healthy youth development (Wexler et al., Reference Wexler2009). Partnerships with educators, families, clinicians, and the sociotechnical industry can further increase understanding about how to design inclusive online environments and circumstances that can lead to a digital ecosystem that ultimately supports identity development and emotional well-being.

Footnotes

Research reported in this publication was supported by the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development of the National Institutes of Health under award number 1R15HD094281–01. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health. We wish to thank Amanda M. Richer for data management, Alyssa Gramajo for project coordination, Julie Parker for help with translation to a broader audience, and our undergraduate students (Teresa Xiao, Emily Zhai, Kensy Jordan, and Tulani Reeves-Miller) for their contributions to the Diversity Challenge and copyediting assistance.

References

Abidin, C., & Zeng, J. (2020). Feeling Asian together: Coping with #COVIDRacism on subtle Asian traits. Social Media + Society, 6(3). https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305120948223CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Anderson, M., & Jiang, J. (2018, May 31). Teens, social media & technology 2018. Pew Research Center: Internet, Science & Tech. https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2018/05/31/teens-social-media-technology-2018/Google Scholar
Barman-Adhikari, A., Rice, E., Bender, K., Lengnick-Hall, R., Yoshioka-Maxwell, A., & Rhoades, H. (2016). Social networking technology use and engagement in HIV-related risk and protective behaviors among homeless youth. Journal of Health Communication, 21(7), 809817. https://doi.org/10.1080/10810730.2016.1177139CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Berry, G. L. (2000). Multicultural media portrayals and the changing demographic landscape: The psychosocial impact of television representations on the adolescent of color. Journal of Adolescent Health, 27(2, Suppl. 1), 5760. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1054-139X(00)00133-6CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Borough, M., Literat, I., & Ikin, A. (2020). “Good social media?”: Underrepresented youth perspectives on the ethical and equitable design of social media platforms. Social Media + Society, 6(2). https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305120928488Google Scholar
Calzo, J. P., & Blashill, A. J. (2018). Child sexual orientation and gender identity in the adolescent brain cognitive development cohort study. JAMA Pediatrics, 172(11), 10901092. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamapediatrics.2018.2496CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Carey, E. (2020, October 1). TikTok’s Queer “It Girls” are creating new LGBTQ+ safe spaces. them. https://www.them.us/story/tiktoks-queer-it-girls-create-lgbtq-safe-spacesGoogle Scholar
Caton, S., & Chapman, M. (2016). The use of social media and people with intellectual disability: A systematic review and thematic analysis. Journal of Intellectual & Developmental Disability, 41(2), 125139. https://doi.org/10.3109/13668250.2016.1153052CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cavalcante, A. (2019). Tumbling into queer utopias and vortexes: Experiences of LGBTQ social media users on Tumblr. Journal of Homosexuality, 66(12), 17151735. https://doi.org/10.1080/00918369.2018.1511131CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ceglarek, P., & Ward, L. (2016). A tool for help or harm? How associations between social networking use, social support, and mental health differ for sexual minority and heterosexual youth. Computers in Human Behavior, 65, 201209. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.07.051CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Charmaraman, L., Chan, H. B., Chen, S., Richer, A., & Ramanudom, B. (2018). Asian American social media use: From cyber dependence and cyber harassment to saving face. Asian American Journal of Psychology, 9(1), 7286. https://doi.org/10.1037/aap0000109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Charmaraman, L., Chan, H., Price, T., & Richer, A. (2015). Women of color cultivating virtual social capital: Surviving and thriving. In Tassie, K. E. & Brown, S. M. (Eds.), Women of color and social media multitasking: Blogs, timelines, feeds, and community (pp. 119). Lexington Books.Google Scholar
Charmaraman, L., & Grossman, J. M. (2010). Importance of race and ethnicity: An exploration of Asian, Black, Latino, and multiracial adolescent identity. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 16(2), 144151. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0018668CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Charmaraman, L., Grossman, J. M., & Richer, A. M. (2021). Same-sex attraction disclosure and sexual communication topics within families. Journal of GLBT Family Studies, 17(2), 118134. https://doi.org/10.1080/1550428X.2020.1820414CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Charmaraman, L., Hodes, R., & Richer, A. (2021). Young sexual minority adolescent experiences of self-expression and isolation on social technology: A cross-sectional survey. JMIR Mental Health, 8(9), e26207. https://doi.org/10.2196/26207CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cheadle, J. E., & Whitbeck, L. B. (2011). Alcohol use trajectories and problem drinking over the course of adolescence: A study of North American Indigenous youth and their caretakers. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 52(2), 228245. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022146510393973CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cooper, R. M., & Blumenfeld, W. J. (2012). Responses to cyberbullying: A descriptive analysis of the frequency of and impact on LGBT and allied youth. Journal of LGBT Youth, 9(2), 153177. https://doi.org/10.1080/19361653.2011.649616CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Croucher, S. M., Nguyen, T., & Rahmani, D. (2020). Prejudice toward Asian Americans in the Covid-19 pandemic: The effects of social media use in the United States. Frontiers in Communication, 5(39). https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomm.2020.00039CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davidson, J. (2008). Autistic culture online: Virtual communication and cultural expression on the spectrum. Social Cultural Geography, 9(7), 791806. https://doi.org/10.1080/14649360802382586CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DeVito, M. A., Walker, A. M., & Birnholtz, J. (2018). “Too gay for Facebook”: Presenting LGBTQ+ identity throughout the personal social media ecosystem. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, 2(44), 123. https://doi.org/10.1145/3274313CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eyrich-Garg, K. M. (2010). Mobile phone technology: A new paradigm for the prevention, treatment, and research of the non-sheltered “street” homeless? Journal of Urban Health, 87(3), 365380. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11524-010-9456-2CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Florini, S. (2014). Tweets, tweeps, and signifyin’: Communication and cultural performance on “Black Twitter.Television & New Media, 15(3), 223237. https://doi.org/10.1177/1527476413480247CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fox, J., & Ralston, R. (2016). Queer identity online: Informal learning and teaching experiences of LGBTQ individuals on social media. Computers in Human Behavior, 65, 635642. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.06.009CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gee, G. C., Ro, A., Shariff-Marco, S., & Chae, D. (2009). Racial discrimination and health among Asian Americans: Evidence, assessment, and directions for future research. Epidemiologic Reviews, 31(1), 130151. https://doi.org/10.1093/epirev/mxp009CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
George, M. J., Jensen, M. R., Russell, M. A., et al. (2020). Young adolescents’ digital technology use, perceived impairments, and well-being in a representative sample. Journal of Pediatrics, 219, 180187. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpeds.2019.12.002CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ghaziani, A. (2014). There goes the gayborhood? Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gordon, L. E., & Silva, T. J. (2014). Inhabiting the sexual landscape: Toward an interpretive theory of the development of sexual orientation and identity. Journal of Homosexuality, 62(4), 495530. https://doi.org/10.1080/00918369.2014.986417CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grasmuck, S., Martin, J., & Zhao, S. (2009). Ethno-racial identity displays on Facebook. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 15(1), 158188. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2009.01498.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guadagno, R. E., Muscanell, N. L., & Pollio, D. E. (2013). The homeless use Facebook?! Similarities of social network use between college students and homeless young adults. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(1), 8689. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2012.07.019CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hargittai, E., & Hinnant, A. (2008) Digital inequality differences in young adults’ use of the internet. Communication Research, 35(5), 602621. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650208321782CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heiman, T., Olenik-Shemesh, D., & Eden, S. (2014). Cyberbullying involvement among students with ADHD: Relation to loneliness, self-efficacy, and social support. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 30(1), 1529. https://doi.org/10.1080/08856257.2014.943562CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hernandez, J. M., & Charmaraman, L. (2021). Conceptualizing the role of racial-ethnic identity in US adolescent social technology use and wellbeing. [Unpublished manuscript].Google Scholar
Hillier, L., & Harrison, L. (2007). Building realities less limited than their own: Young people practicing same-sex attraction on the internet. Sexualities, 10(1), 82100. https://doi.org/10.1177/1363460707072956CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holmes, K. M., & O’Loughlin, N. (2014). The experiences of people with learning disabilities on social networking sites. British Journal of Learning Disabilities, 42(1), 37. https://doi.org/10.1111/bld.12001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ito, M., Odgers, C., Schueller, S., et al. (2020). Social media and youth wellbeing: What we know and where we could go. Connected Learning Alliance.Google Scholar
Kiang, L., Witkow, M. R., & Champagne, M. C. (2013). Normative changes in ethnic and American identities and links with adjustment among Asian American adolescents. Developmental Psychology, 49(9), 17131722. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0030840CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kowalski, R. M., Morgan, C. A., Drake-Lavelle, K., & Allison, B. (2016). Cyberbullying among college students with disabilities. Computers in Human Behavior, 57, 416427. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.12.044CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuper, L. E., Wright, L., & Mustanski, B. (2018). Gender identity development among transgender and gender nonconforming emerging adults: An intersectional approach. International Journal of Transgenderism, 19(4), 436455. https://doi.org/10.1080/15532739.2018.1443869CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kydland, F., Molka-Danielsen, J., & Balandin, S. (2012). Examining the use of social media tool ‘Flickr’ for impact on loneliness for people with intellectual disability. In Fallmyr, T. (Ed.), NOKOBIT2012: Proceedings of the 2012 Norsk konferanse for organisasjoners bruk av informasjonsteknologi (pp. 253264). Akademika forlag.Google Scholar
Löfgren-Mårtenson, L. (2008). Love in cyberspace: Swedish young people with intellectual disabilities and the internet. Scandinavian Journal of Disability Research, 10(2), 125138. https://doi.org/10.1080/15017410701758005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Madden, M., Lenhart, A., Duggan, M., Cortesi, S., & Gasser, U. (2013). Teens and technology 2013. Pew Research Center. http://www.pewinternet.org/~/media//Files/Reports/2013/PIP_Teensand Technology2013.pdfGoogle Scholar
Manago, A. M. (2015). Media and the development of identity. In Scott, R. & Kosslyn, S. (Eds.), Emerging trends in the social and behavioral sciences (pp. 114). Wiley & Sons, Inc.Google Scholar
Masten, A. S., & Reed, M. G. J. (2002). Resilience in development. In Snyder, C. R., & Lopez, S. J. (Eds.), Handbook of positive psychology (pp. 7488). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Mayhew, A. & Weigle, P. (2018). Media engagement and identity formation among minority youth. Child and Adolescent Psychiatric Clinics of North America, 27(2), 269285. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chc.2017.11.012CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McClimens, A., & Gordon, F. (2008). Presentation of self in everyday life: How people labelled with intellectual disability manage identity as they engage the blogosphere. Sociological Research Online, 13(4), 1. https://doi.org/10.5153/sro.1774CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McConnell, E., Néray, B., Hogan, B., Korpak, A., Clifford, A., & Birkett, M. (2018). “Everybody puts their whole life on Facebook”: Identity management and the online social networks of LGBTQ youth. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 15(6), Article 1078. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph15061078CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Monkman, L. (2020, April 13). First Nations TikTok users hope to inspire youth to learn more about their cultures. CBC. https://www.cbc.ca/news/indigenous/tiktok-inspire-indigenous-youth-1.5528667Google Scholar
Noor, P. (2020, July 1). The Navajo teenager who went viral reporting on coronavirus: “I just want us to be seen.” The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/may/22/navajo-teenager-tiktok-reporting-coronavirusGoogle Scholar
Odgers, C. (2018). Smartphones are bad for some teens, not all. Nature, 554, 432434.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Odgers, C. L., & Jensen, M. R. (2020). Annual research review: Adolescent mental health in the digital age: Facts, fears, and future directions. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 61(3), 336348. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpp.13190CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Odgers, C., & Robb, M. B. (2020). Tweens, teens, tech, and mental health: Coming of age in an increasingly digital, uncertain, and unequal world, 2020. Common Sense Media.Google Scholar
OECD. (2016). Are there differences in how advantaged and disadvantaged students use the internet? http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/5jlv8zq6hw43-enCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ohlheiser, A. (2020, January 28). TikTok has become the soul of the LGBTQ Internet. Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2020/01/28/tiktok-has-become-soul-lgbtq-internet/Google Scholar
Oldenburg, R. (1989). The great good place: Cafés, coffee shops, community centers, beauty parlors, general stores, bars, hangouts, and how they get you through the day. Paragon House.Google Scholar
Palmer, N. A., Kosciw, J. G., Greytak, E. A., Ybarra, M. L., Korchmaros, J., & Mitchell, K. J. (2013). Out online: The experiences of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender youth on the internet. GLSEN.Google Scholar
Panizo, L. C. (2018). Gay teenagers in the digital age: Orientations for educators. Alteridad. Revista de Educación, 14(1), 6272. https://doi.org/10.17163/alt.v14n1.2019.05Google Scholar
Park-Lee, E., Lipari, R. N., Bose, J., et al. (2018, July). Substance use and mental health issues among U.S.-born American Indians or Alaska Natives residing on and off tribal lands. Center for Behavioral Health Statistics and Quality. https://www.samhsa.gov/data/sites/default/files/cbhsq-reports/DRAIANTribalAreas2018/DRAIANTribalAreas2018.pdfGoogle Scholar
Pew Research Center. (2013). A survey of LGBT Americans. Retrieved April 11, 2021. https://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2013/06/13/a-surveyof-lgbt-americans/Google Scholar
Phinney, J. S. (1990). Ethnic identity in adolescents and adults: Review of research. Psychological Bulletin, 108(3), 499514. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.108.3.499CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Phinney, J. S., & Ong, A. D. (2007). Conceptualization and measurement of ethnic identity: Current status and future directions. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 54(3), 271281. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.54.3.271CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pollio, D. E., Batey, D. S., Bender, K., Ferguson, K., & Thompson, S. (2013). Technology use among emerging adult homeless in two US cities. Social Work, 58(2), 173175. https://doi.org/10.1093/sw/swt006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Przybylski, A. K., & Bowes, L. (2017). Cyberbullying and adolescent well-being in England: A population-based cross-sectional study. The Lancet Child & Adolescent Health, 1(1), 1926. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2352-4642(17)30011-1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Quintana, S. M. (1994). A model of ethnic perspective-taking ability applied to Mexican-American children and youth. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 18(4), 419448. https://doi.org/10.1016/0147-1767(94)90016-7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rice, E., Lee, A., & Taitt, S. (2011). Cell phone use among homeless youth: Potential for new health interventions and research. Journal of Urban Health, 88(6), 11751182. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11524-011-9624-zCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rice, E., Milburn, N. G., Rotheram-Borus, M. J., Mallett, S., & Rosenthal, D. (2005). The effects of peer group network properties on drug use among homeless youth. The American Behavioral Scientist, 48(8), 11021123. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764204274194CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Robards, B., Churchill, B., Vivienne, S., Hanckel, B., & Byron, P. (2019). Twenty years of ‘cyberqueer’: The enduring significance of the internet for young LGBTIQ+ people. In Aggleton, P., Cover, R., Leahy, D., Marshall, D., & Rasmussen, M. L. (Eds.), Youth, sexuality, and sexual citizenship (pp. 151167). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351214742-15Google Scholar
Robertson, M. A. (2013). “How do I know I am gay?”: Understanding sexual orientation, identity and behavior among adolescents in an LGBT youth center. Sexuality and Culture, 18(1), 385404. https://doi-org.ezproxy.wellesley.edu/10.1007/s12119–013-9203-4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Romano, A. (2019, October 10). A group of YouTubers is trying to prove the site systematically demonetizes queer content. Vox. https://www.vox.com/culture/2019/10/10/20893258/youtube-lgbtq-censorship-demonetization-nerd-city-algorithm-reportGoogle Scholar
Rosario, M., Schrimshaw, E. W., & Hunter, J. (2008). Predicting different patterns of sexual identity development over time among lesbian, gay, and bisexual youths: A cluster analytic approach. American Journal of Community Psychology, 42(3–4), 266282. https://doi-org.ezproxy.wellesley.edu/10.1007/s10464–008-9207-7CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rushing, S. C., & Stephens, D. (2011). Use of media technologies by Native American teens and young adults in the pacific northwest: Exploring their utility for designing culturally appropriate technology-based health interventions. The Journal of Primary Prevention, 32(3), Article 135. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10935-011-0242-zCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rushing, S. N., Stephens, D., & Dog, T. L. G. (2018). We R Native: Harnessing technology to improve health outcomes for American Indian and Alaska Native youth. Journal of Adolescent Health, 62(2), S83S84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2017.11.168CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Salk, R. H., Thoma, B. C., & Choukas-Bradley, B. (2020). The gender minority youth study: Overview of methods and social media recruitment of a nationwide sample of U.S. cisgender and transgender adolescents. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 49(7), 26012610. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-020-01695-xCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schimmel-Bristow, A., & Ahrens, K. R. (2018). Technology use among special populations. In Moreno, M. A. & Radovic, A. (Eds.), Technology and adolescent mental health (pp. 4355). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-69638-6Google Scholar
Scroggs, B., & Vennum, A. (2020). Gender and sexual minority group identification as a process of identity development during emerging adulthood. Journal of LGBT Youth, 18(3), 287304. https://doi.org/10.1080/19361653.2020.1722780CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seale, J. K., (2007). Strategies for supporting the online publishing activities of adults with learning difficulties. Disability & Society, 22(2), 173186. https://doi.org/10.1080/09687590601141626CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simpson, E., & Semaan, B. (2020). For you, or for “you”?: Everyday LGBTQ+ encounters with TikTok. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, 4(252), 134. https://doi.org/10.1145/3432951CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Soukup, C. (2006). Computer-mediated communication as a digital third place: Building Oldenburg’s great good places on the world wide web. New Media & Society, 8(3), 421440. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444806061953CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spencer, M. B., Dupree, D., & Hartmann, T. (1997). A phenomenological variant of ecological systems theory (PVEST): A self organization perspective in context. UPenn. http://repository.upenn.edu/gse_pubs/4Google ScholarPubMed
Spooner, T. (2001, December 12). Asian-Americans and the internet. Pew Research Center: Internet, Science & Tech. https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2001/12/12/asian-americans-and-the-internet/Google Scholar
Stephan, W., & Stephan, C. W. (2000). An integrated threat theory of prejudice. In Oskamp, S. (Ed.). Reducing prejudice and discrimination (pp. 2346). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Stevens, R., Gilliard-Matthews, S., Dunaev, J., Woods, M. K., & Brawner, B. M. (2017). The digital hood: Social media use among youth in disadvantaged neighborhoods. New Media & Society, 19(6), 950967. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444815625941CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stewart, S., Riecken, T., Scott, T., Tanaka, M., & Riecken, J. (2008). Expanding health literacy: Indigenous youth creating videos. Journal of Health Psychology, 13(2), 180189. https://doi.org/10.1177/1359105307086709CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Subrahmanyam, K., Smahel, D., & Greenfield, P. (2006). Connecting developmental constructions to the internet: Identity presentation and sexual exploration in online teen chat rooms. Developmental Psychology, 42, 395406. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.42.3.395CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Surgeon General. (2001). Mental health: Culture, race, ethnicity. Supplement to mental health: A report of the Surgeon General. US Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
Sybert, J. (2021). The demise of #NSFW: Contested platform governance and Tumblr’s 2018 adult content ban. New Media & Society. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444821996715CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Trent, M., Dooley, D. G., & Dougé, J. (2019). The impact of racism on child and adolescent health. Pediatrics, 144(2), e20191765. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2019-1765CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tynes, B. M., English, D., Del Toro, J., Smith, N. A., Lozada, F. T., & Williams, D. R. (2020). Trajectories of online racial discrimination and psychological functioning among African American and Latino adolescents. Child Development, 91(5), 15771593. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.13350CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Uba, L. (1994). Asian Americans: Personality patterns, identity, and mental health. Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Umaña-Taylor, A. J., Quintana, S. M., Lee, R. M., et al. (2014). Ethnic and racial identity during adolescence and into young adulthood: An integrated conceptualization. Child Development, 85(1), 2139. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12196CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Umaña-Taylor, A. J., Tynes, B. M., Toomey, R. B., Williams, D. R., & Mitchell, K. J. (2015). Latino adolescents’ perceived discrimination in online and offline settings: An examination of cultural risk and protective factors. Developmental Psychology, 51(1), 87100. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0038432CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
US Census Bureau. (2019, October 2). Population estimates show aging across race groups differs. https://www.census.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2019/estimates-characteristics.htmlGoogle Scholar
Varjas, K., Meyers, J., Kiperman, S., & Howard, A. (2013). Technology hurts? Lesbian, gay, and bisexual youth perspectives of technology and cyberbullying. Journal of School Violence, 12(1), 2744. https://doi.org/10.1080/15388220.2012.731665CrossRefGoogle Scholar
VonHoltz, L. A. H., Frasso, R., Golinkoff, J. M., Lozano, A. J., Hanlon, A., & Dowshen, N. (2018). Internet and social media access among youth experiencing homelessness: Mixed-methods study. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 20(5), e184. https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.9306CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wang, C., Barlis, J., Do, K. A., et al. (2020). Barriers to mental health help seeking at school for Asian- and Latinx-American adolescents. School Mental Health, 12(1), 182194. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12310-019-09344-yCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wargo, J. M. (2016). “Every selfie tells a story …”: LGBTQ youth lifestreams and new media narratives as connective identity texts. New Media & Society, 19(4), 560578. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444815612447CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wei, R., & Lo, V. H. (2006). Staying connected while on the move: Cell phone use and social connectedness. New Media & Society, 8(1), 5372. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444806059870CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wexler, L. (2009). The importance of identity, history, and culture in the wellbeing of Indigenous youth. The Journal of the History of Childhood and Youth, 2(2), 267276. https://doi.org/10.1353/hcy.0.0055CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wexler, L. M., DiFluvio, G., & Burke, T. K. (2009). Resilience and marginalized youth: Making a case for personal and collective meaning-making as part of resilience research in public health. Social Science & Medicine, 69(4), 565570.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Whitbeck, L. B., & Hoyt, D. R. (1999). Nowhere to grow: Homeless and runaway adolescents and their families. Aldine de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Williams, J., Bolland, K. A., Hooper, L., Church, W., Tomek, S., & Bolland, J. (2014). Say it loud: The Obama effect and racial/ethnic identification of adolescents. Journal of Human Behavior in the Social Environment, 24(7), 858868. https://doi.org/10.1080/10911359.2014.909343CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, W. S., & Moody, A. L. (2019). Analyzed selfie: Stereotype enactment, projection, and identification among digitally native Black girls. Women & Therapy, 42(3–4), 366384. https://doi.org/10.1080/02703149.2019.1622901CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ybarra, M. L., Mitchell, K. J., Palmer, N. A., & Reisner, S. L. (2015). Online social support as a buffer against online and offline peer and sexual victimization among U.S. LGBT and non-LGBT youth. Child Abuse & Neglect, 39, 123136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2014.08.006CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Yip, T., Seaton, E. K., & Sellers, R. M. (2006). African American racial identity across the lifespan: Identity status, identity content, and depressive symptoms. Child Development, 77(5), 15041517. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2006.00950.xCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Young, S. D., & Rice, E. (2011). Online social networking technologies, HIV knowledge, and sexual risk and testing behaviors among homeless youth. AIDS and Behavior, 15(2), 253260. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10461-010-9810-0CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zhai, E., Jordan, K., Reeves-Miller, T., Xiao, T., & Charmaraman, L. (2020). Self-care and wellbeing on social media for adolescents of color. Panel presented at the Diversity Challenge, Boston College, Boston, MA.Google Scholar
Zhang, Y., & Leung, L. (2014). A review of social networking service (SNS) research in communication journals from 2006 to 2011. New Media & Society, 17(7), 10071024.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×