Physical and Digital Communication: Digital and Physical Communication Should Be Used Together

Digital media has influenced all areas of adolescents’ lives, such as how they form and maintain friendships. Social media platforms have brought new opportunities to connect with other people online, with interpersonal communication as one of the most common activities.While this has created a great opportunity for communication, it has also led to weakening the quality of relationships by increasing loneliness, cyberbullying, problematic social media use, poor self-rated health, and low life-satisfaction. Research has shown that online communication through the Internet is psychologically less effective as opposed to in-person communication. Additionally, the Office of the U.S. Surgeon General’s Advisory on the Healing Effects of Social Connection and Community emphasizes that “social connection is a significant predictor of longevity and better physical, cognitive, and mental health, while social isolation and loneliness are significant predictors of premature death and poor health,” even comparing social isolation to smoking cigarettes. Some ways used to combat this are video calls and evolving messaging tools that are used to help individuals communicate with each other on a more personal level in order to improve digital media to then reduce loneliness. For instance, a study from psychology researchers found that during the COVID-19 pandemic, those who participated in video calls more than the average person demonstrated having better mental health based on the study’s standards. However, they also found that those who participated in face-to-face communication more than average demonstrated having better mental health to a much larger extent compared to video calls, demonstrating how digital communication is currently inadequate on its own compared to physical communication. While digital communication expands access to interaction, it should only replace physical communication to a limited extent, and instead should be used to support existing in person relationships.

Digital communication is insufficient as a replacement for face-to-face interaction because it undermines both physical and mental health. The Office of the U.S. Surgeon General’s Advisory argues that social isolation negatively impacts physical health. They found that adults globally rated their social relationships as the most important source of motivation and purpose in life, leading them to make better health decisions. This reinforces the importance of physical connections, disproving that digital connections can replace them. However, public health researchers Lee et al. directly compare digital and physical communication, arguing that using the Internet for communication is not the same as offline face-to-face communication in enhancing quality of life, citing multiple studies that found that using the Internet for communication leads to people substituting strong ties for weak ones and that online friendships are more limited than in person ones. This further demonstrates the inadequacy of digital communication compared to physical communication. Similar to the Surgeon General’s Office, psychology researchers argue that technological devices and services cannot replace the mental health and well-being benefits of in-person communication. They found in their study that face-to-face was positively associated with positive affect (in terms of mental health) and negatively associated with negative affect, while smartphone-based communication, especially social media, had the opposite affect. Essentially, they found that face-to-face communication benefits individuals’ mental health, while digital smartphone-based communication did the opposite. Thus, further demonstrating the detriments of replacing in-person communication with digital communication. They also state depersonalization theory, which states that “the depersonalization and deindividualization of communication partners in the digital setting may explain why digital communication is less relevant for mental health than face-to-face communication,” adding to Lee et al.’s evidence of digital communication forming weaker bonds than in-person communication. However, forming already strong in-person bonds and then using digital communication to enhance communication between people who have already established strong bonds will benefit relationships and solve the issue of depersonalization caused by digital communication.

Beyond its impact on health, digital communication can lead to negative effects in behavior. According to the American Psychological Association’s Dictionary of Psychology, antisocial behavior refers to behavior “that sharply deviates from social norms and also violates other people’s rights.” Ehrenreich et al. argue that text messaging about antisocial activities relates to later involvement in rule-breaking and aggressive behavior and that text messages are likely an important source of prosocial communication between youth and their peers, parents, and teachers. They were able to prove this in their study. Their results state that antisocial text messages that were sent did lead to rule-breaking behaviour and that text messages were a significant predictor of aggressive behavior. They also state a survey that found that adolescents’ preferred method of communication is text messaging due to its discreet nature and they note this as important for involvement with antisocial behaviors. With the context of the survey, text messaging as a form of digital communication can lead to negative behaviors, due to the fact that it allows more private conversations. However, Lin et al. look into social media use and depression, arguing that social media use was significantly associated with increased depression and that identifying the mechanisms and direction of this association is critical for finding solutions that address social media use and depression. Their results found that the demographics who spent a large amount of time on social media were those who were also considered “highly depressed” by the study’s standards. They concluded that these depressed individuals turn to social media based interactions for validation. This demonstrates how social media as a form of digital communication does not develop healthy communication or connections. Instead of seeking help for their mental health issues, people turn to social media instead, which will not ultimately benefit them. Similarly Primack et al. looks at social media usage, however focusing on social isolation. He found that increased social media usage was strongly and independently associated with increased percieved social isolation. They state that “exposure to such highly idealized representations of peers lives may elicit feelings of envy and the distorted belief that others lead happier and more successful lives, which may increase PSI.” In this way, digital communication detriments health by allowing individuals to distort their own lives, leading to others to feel their lives are worse, even if this is not the case, which they would not be able to do as easily with in person communication. Ultimately, all authors found that digital communication reflects and intensifies existing emotional challenges rather than resolving them.

While digital communication ultimately cannot be used to replace physical communication, some have found that there is support for using digital communication as a replacement. Osoro et al. argue that the growth of megaconstellations increases connections between communities They state that their “assessment finds that LEO constellations provide substantial capacity improvements in the broadband services rural and remote communities can access.” This shows how technology can be used to improve rural and remote communities’ connections to digital media. These communities are far away from each other and other areas in society, making it difficult for them to interact in person. However, this technology allows them to communicate, even over long distances, demonstrating how digital technology can be used to help people communicate with others and maintain their relations over long distances. Similarly, Lacayo-Mendoza et al. argue that social networks can improve collaboration and strengthen professional relationships by increasing interaction among employees, stating that connecting people creates a greater degree of trust and responsibility between them. This demonstrates how digital communication may be used to help employees communicate and form better relationships through communication. Additionally, Ehrenreich et al. reviewed advancements in digital communication and argue that digital communication is important in the lives of adolescents. They state that multiple sources have found that adolescents report that social media makes adolescents feel closer to their friends, more popular, more confident, and less lonely. While these perspectives highlight the accessibility and convenience of digital communication, they rely on the assumption that increased interaction leads to stronger relationships. However, as Lee et al. and Primack et al. demonstrate, increased communication does not equate to emotional depth or reduced isolation. Thus, digital communication can expand access to interaction but cannot solely replicate the quality of in-person relationships.

Digital communication is most effective when used to support rather than replace face-to-face relationships. Psychology researchers found in a correlation test made from the results of their study, finding that individuals with strong offline social networks are more likely to use digital communication to enhance those relationships, while socially isolated individuals benefit less from online interaction. This suggests that those who already have offline support and relationships are able to use digital media to enhance these relationships rather than rely on online relationships. This also shows how those who rely entirely on digital communication are the ones who are negatively affected. Supporting this in a systematic review of adolescent social media use, Khalaf et al. argue that despite association between social media, a major form of digital communication, and adolescent depression, the average child is not harmed from digital technology and that it is necessary for adolescents’ health to be able to communicate in times of need. They find that 81% of students say social media boosts their sense of connectedness to others and that connecting with friends and family is usually cited by teenagers as the main benefit of social media, and prior research typically supports the notion that doing so improves people's well-being. This demonstrates how digital media being used to support already existing relationships, such as those of family and friends, benefits individuals. Similarly, Mostafa et al. argue that digital interventions, such as peer support networks for adolescents and young adults with cancer, can strengthen relationships and expand access to support systems. They found that these programs were effective in strengthening relationships and support for those with cancer in this study. This distinction suggests that the effectiveness of digital communication depends on how it is used, and can be effective for communication and relationships when used to supplement instead of substitute face-to-face communication.

While this solution is optimal, there are limitations. As explained by Primack et al., multiple studies have linked social media use with declines in subjective mood, sense of well-being, and life satisfaction. These studies have found that “passive consumption of social media content—as opposed to active communication—has been associated with decrease in bonding and bridging social capital and increase in loneliness.” Thus, communication over digital mediums may not be what causes loneliness but rather other aspects of these mediums, such as viewing social media content rather than speaking to others over it. Additionally, Pantic argues that the way people have interacted over time has changed significantly due to online social networking, however it is unclear if these changes impact human behavior and cause psychiatric disorders. He states how neither the Internet nor social networking site addiction have been included in the latest disease classification manuals such as Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders as well as that social networking site and Internet-related mental problems are frequently seen together with other diagnosable mental illnesses,  This disproves that digital communication even causes negative effects on mental health in the first place. Moreover, Mostafa et al. mention that most interventions of their study assumed that the participants had the digital literacy, access to the internet and compatible devices required to participate in the intervention. This demonstrates how studies may not account for technological issues and a lack of knowledge of how to use digital media may lead to negative experiences with it rather than the digital communication itself that may skew the results of digital communication.

In conclusion, digital communication alone is insufficient for building deep and meaningful relationships and may contribute to negative mental health and behavioral outcomes when used as a substitute for in-person interaction. However, when used intentionally to support and and maintain existing relationships, it can provide valuable opportunities for connection. This emphasizes that technological advancement does not necessarily improve social well-being, and without proper use, it may weaken the connections it aims to enhance.

Bibliography

American Psychological Association. “APA Dictionary of Psychology.” dictionary.apa.org, 2023. 

https://dictionary.apa.org/antisocial.

Ehrenreich, Samuel E., Madeleine J. George, Kaitlyn Burnell, and Marion K.

          Underwood. “Importance of Digital Communication in Adolescents’ Development:

          Theoretical and Empirical Advancements in the Last Decade.” Journal of Research

          on Adolescence (Wiley-Blackwell) 31, no. 4 (2021): 928–43.

          https://doi.org/10.1111/jora.12643.

Ehrenreich, Samuel E, Marion K Underwood, and Robert A Ackerman. “Adolescents’ Text 

Message Communication and Growth in Antisocial Behavior across the First Year of High School.” Journal of abnormal child psychology, 2015. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24014161/.

Khalaf, Abderrahman M, Abdullah A Alubied, Ahmed M Khalaf, and Abdallah A Rifaey. “The 

Impact of Social Media on the Mental Health of Adolescents and Young Adults: A Systematic Review.” Cureus, 2023. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37671234/.

Lacayo-Mendoza, Alexander, and Carmen de Pablos-Heredero. “Managing Relationships and 

Communications in Higher Education Efficiently through Digital Social Networks: The Importance of the Relational Coordination Model.” Dyna (0012-7353) 83, no. 195 (2016): 138–46. https://doi.org/10.15446/dyna.v83n195.49296.

Lee, Paul S. N., Louis Leung, Venhwei Lo, Chengyu Xiong, and Tingjun Wu. “Internet 

Communication Versus Face-to-Face Interaction in Quality of Life.” Social Indicators Research 100, no. 3 (2011): 375–89. http://www.jstor.org/stable/41476404.

Lin, Liu Yi, Jaime E Sidani, Ariel Shensa, Ana Radovic, Elizabeth Miller, Jason B Colditz, Beth L 

Hoffman, Leila M Giles, and Brian A Primack. “Association between Social Media Use and Depression among U.S. Young Adults.” PubMed, 2016. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26783723/.

Lyyra, Nelli, Niina Junttila, Jasmine Gustafsson, Henri Lahti, and Leena Paakkari. “Adolescents’ 

Online Communication and Well-Being: Findings from the 2018 Health Behavior in School-Aged Children (HBSC) Study.” Frontiers in psychiatry, 2022. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36276330/.

Mostafa, Mashiad, Y. Sarah Chae, Kelcey A. Bland, and Helen McTaggart-Cowan. “The

          Experiences of Adolescents and Young Adults with Digital Supportive Care

          Interventions for Cancer: A Systematic Review of Qualitative Studies.” Cancers

          17, no. 5 (2025): 736. https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers17050736.

Office of the Surgeon General (OSG). “Our Epidemic of Loneliness and Isolation: The U.S. 

Surgeon General’s Advisory on the Healing Effects of Social Connection and Community.” PubMed. Washington (DC): US Department of Health and Human Services, 2023. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK595227/.

Osoro, Ogutu B, Edward J Oughton, Andrew Wilson, and Akhil Rao. “Sustainability Assessment 

of Low Earth Orbit (LEO) Satellite Broadband Mega-Constellations.” ArXiv (Cornell University). Cornell University, September 5, 2023. https://doi.org/10.48550/arxiv.2309.02338.

Pantic, Igor. “Online Social Networking and Mental Health.” Cyberpsychology, behavior and 

social networking, 2014. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25192305/.

Primack, Brian A, Ariel Shensa, Jaime E Sidani, Erin O Whaite, Liu Yi Lin, Daniel Rosen, Jason 

B Colditz, Ana Radovic, and Elizabeth Miller. “Social Media Use and Perceived Social Isolation among Young Adults in the U.S.” American journal of preventive medicine, 2017. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28279545/.

Stieger, S, D Lewetz, and D Willinger. “Face-to-Face More Important than Digital 

Communication for Mental Health during the Pandemic.” Scientific reports, 2023. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37198196/.