Ergenlikte Dijital Ayak İzleri: Sosyal medya gizlilik koruma becerilerinin çevresel, etkileşimsel ve bilişsel belirleyicileri

Abstract

Bu araştırma, adölesanların sosyal medya gizlilik koruma becerilerinin dijital davranışlarını şekillendiren demografik, çevresel, etkileşimsel ve kullanım amacıyla ilişkili boyutlara göre nasıl farklılık gösterdiğini ve bu becerilerin sosyal medya kullanım amaçları ile çevrimiçi arkadaş profilleriyle nasıl ilişkili olduğunu incelemeyi amaçlamaktadır. Araştırmaya Türkiye’nin 81 ilinden 10–18 yaş aralığında toplam 12.194 adölesan (5.275 ortaokul ve 6.919 lise öğrencisi) katılmıştır. Veriler, geçerli ve güvenilir Sosyal Medya Gizlilik Koruma Becerileri Ölçeği kullanılarak toplanmıştır. Adölesanların demografik özelliklerinin ve çevrimiçi davranışlarının gizlilik koruma becerilerini nasıl etkilediğini belirlemek için betimsel istatistikler, bağımsız örneklem t-testleri, tek yönlü ANOVA ve çoklu doğrusal regresyon analizleri uygulanmıştır. Araştırma sonucunda, kız öğrenciler, daha büyük yaş grupları ve kentsel bölgelerde yaşayan adölesanlar; erkek, daha küçük yaş grupları ve kırsal bölgelerde yaşayan akranlarına kıyasla daha yüksek gizlilik koruma becerileri sergilemiştir. Günlük sosyal medya kullanım süresinin artması ve hesap sayısının fazla olması daha düşük beceri düzeyleriyle ilişkilendirilmiştir. Sosyal medyayı bilgi edinme, gündemi takip etme veya akademik amaçlarla kullanan ve arkadaş listelerinde aile bireylerine yer veren adölesanların gizlilik becerileri daha güçlü bulunmuştur. Buna karşın, eğlence, görünürlük artırma ya da ekonomik kazanım odaklı kullanım ile tanımadıkları kişileri arkadaş listesine ekleme davranışları daha zayıf gizlilik becerileriyle ilişkili olmuştur. Bulgular, adölesanların sosyal medyada gizlilik koruma becerilerinin demografik, davranışsal ve kullanım amacına dayalı çeşitli faktörlere göre anlamlı biçimde değiştiğini göstermektedir. Bu sonuçlar, erken ergenlik döneminden itibaren aile ve akran katılımıyla desteklenen, yapılandırılmış ve gelişimsel açıdan uygun dijital gizlilik eğitimlerine duyulan ihtiyacı vurgulamaktadır. Bu tür eğitim programlarının okul müfredatlarına ve günlük dijital pratiklere entegre edilmesi; adölesanların dijital okuryazarlık, farkındalık ve öz-düzenleme becerilerinin güçlenmesine, dolayısıyla daha güvenli ve sorumlu sosyal medya kullanımına katkı sağlayabilir. Özellikle görünürlük ve popüler kültür odaklı etkileşimlerin düşük gizlilik becerileriyle ilişkili olması, popülerlik yerine değer temelli dijital davranışların teşvik edilmesinin çevrimiçi güvenliği artırmada kritik önem taşıdığını göstermektedir.

Keywords

• Adölesanlar
• Dijital Okuryazarlık
• Çevrim İçi Davranış
• Sosyal Medya
• Sosyal Medya Gizliliği

Supporting Institution

Bu araştırma herhangi bir kurum, kuruluş veya fon kuruluşundan destek almamıştır.

Ethical Statement

Trakya Üniversitesi Sosyal ve Beşeri Bilimler Araştırmaları Etik Kurulu'nun 23.02.2022 tarihli toplantısında alınan 02/11 numaralı kararı ile uygun görülmüştür.

Thanks

Türkiye’nin 81 ilinde öğrenim gören öğrencilerden veri toplanması sürecine destek veren Millî Eğitim Bakanlığına bağlı tüm öğretmenlere en içten teşekkürlerimi sunarım. Ayrıca, bu çalışmanın yürütülebilmesi için Trakya Üniversitesi Sosyal ve Beşeri Bilimler Araştırma Etik Kurulundan etik onay alınması sürecindeki değerli katkıları ve destekleri dolayısıyla Prof. Dr. Nilgün Tosun’a içtenlikle teşekkür ederim.

Digital Footprints in Adolescence: Environmental, Interactive, and Cognitive Determinants of Social Media Privacy Protection Skills

Abstract

This study aims to examine how adolescents’ social media privacy protection skills differ across demographic, environmental, interactive, and usage-purpose–related dimensions that shape their digital behaviour, and how these skills relate to their social media usage purposes and online friend profiles. A large-scale sample of 12,194 adolescents aged 10–18, reached through a convenience sampling approach via online data collection across 81 provinces in Türkiye, participated in the study (5,275 secondary school and 6,919 high school). Data were collected using the validated Social Media Privacy Protection Skills Scale. Descriptive statistics, independent samples t-tests, one-way ANOVA, and multiple linear regression analyses were conducted to examine how adolescents’ demographics and online behaviors affect their privacy protection skills. Female, older, and urban adolescents demonstrated higher privacy protection skills than their male, younger, and rural peers. More daily social media use and a higher number of accounts were associated with lower skill levels. Adolescents who used social media for information acquisition, agenda following, or academic purposes, and those who included family members in their friend lists, showed stronger privacy protection skills. In contrast, entertainment, visibility, and economic-oriented use, as well as adding unfamiliar individuals to friend lists, were linked to weaker skills. The findings show that adolescents’ privacy protection skills on social media vary significantly across demographic, behavioural, and usage-related factors. These results highlight the need for structured and developmentally appropriate digital privacy education beginning in early adolescence and supported by family and peer engagement. Integrating such programs into school curricula and everyday digital practices may strengthen adolescents’ digital literacy, awareness, and self-regulation skills, enabling safer and more responsible social media use. Because visibility-driven and popular-culture-oriented engagement is associated with lower privacy skills, encouraging value-based rather than popularity-driven digital behaviour is essential for fostering safer online practices.

Keywords

• adolescents
• digital literacy
• online behaviour
• social media
• social media privacy

Supporting Institution

This research did not receive support from any institution, organization, or funding agency

Ethical Statement

This study was approved by the Trakya University Social and Human Sciences Research Ethics Committee with the decision numbered 02/11, dated 23 February 2022.

Thanks

I would like to express my sincere gratitude to all teachers affiliated with the Ministry of National Education who supported the data collection process involving students from all 81 provinces of Türkiye. I would also like to extend my heartfelt thanks to Nilgün Tosun for her invaluable support and contributions in obtaining the ethical approval from the Trakya University Social and Human Sciences Research Ethics Committee, which made this study possible.

References

1. Acharya, A. S., Prakash, A., Saxena, P., & Nigam, A. (2013). Sampling: why and how of it? Indian Journal of Medical Specialities, 4(2). https://doi.org/10.7713/ijms.2013.0032
2. Aghasian, E., Garg, S., Gao, L., Yu, S., & Montgomery, J. (2017). Scoring Users’ Privacy Disclosure Across Multiple Online Social Networks. IEEE Access, 5, 13118–13130. https://doi.org/10.1109/access.2017.2720187
3. Akar, H., & Akar, F. (2021). Perception of privacy in social media: a survey of university students. Inonu University Faculty of Communication Electronic Journal. 6(1), 285-297. https://doi.org/10.47107/inifedergi.886334
4. Akyol, Z., & Atabey, Z. (2023). Personal Branding Process in Social Media: A Review of Twitter Phenomena. Afyon Kocatepe University Journal of Social Sciences/Afyon Kocatepe University Journal of Social Sciences, 25(3), 929-944. https://doi.org/10.32709/akusosbil.1248420
5. Alacahan, O., & Vatandaş, S. (2021). The Construction Process of Public-Private Space Separation and Social Media. Manas Koomduk Izildoolor, 10(1), 720-733. https://doi.org/10.33206/mjss.760499
6. Alemany, J., Del Val, E., & Garcia-Fornes, A. (2020). Assessing the effectiveness of a gamified social network for applying privacy concepts: an empirical study with teens. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 13(4), 777–789. https://doi.org/10.1109/tlt.2020.3026584
7. Alluhidan, A., Akter, M., Alsoubai, A., Park, J. K., & Wisniewski, P. (2024). Teen Talk: the good, the bad, and the neutral of adolescent social media use. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, 8(CSCW2), 1–35. https://doi.org/10.1145/3686961
8. Amon, M. J., Necaise, A., Kartvelishvili, N., Williams, A., Solihin, Y., & Kapadia, A. (2023). Modeling User Characteristics Associated with Interdependent Privacy Perceptions on Social Media. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, 30(3), 1–32. https://doi.org/10.1145/3577014

9. Atanesyan, A. V., Mkhitaryan, S., & Karapetyan, A. (2025). “Virtual masks” and online identity: The use of fake profiles in Armenian social media communication. Journalism and Media, 6(2), 49. https://doi.org/10.3390/journalmedia6020049
10. Aydoğdu, F., Güngör, B. A., & Öz, T. A. (2023). Does sharing bring happiness? Understanding the sharenting phenomenon. Children and Youth Services Review, 154, 107122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2023.107122
11. Baloğlu, E. (2023). Digital parents of the instagram age: a review in the context of sharenting. TRT Academy, 8(19). https://doi.org/10.37679/trta.1328354
12. Bandura, A. (1986). Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory. Prentice-Hall.
13. Bartsch, M., & Dienlin, T. (2016). Control your facebook: an analysis of online privacy literacy. Computers in Human Behavior, 56, 147-154. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.11.022
14. Baruh, L., Secinti, E., & Cemalcilar, Z. (2017). Online Privacy Concerns and Privacy Management: A Meta-Analytical Review. Journal of Communication, 67(1), 26–53. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12276
15. Berkup, S.B. (2015) Individual privacy sharing in social networks: A comparative analysis between X and Y generations (Publication No. 391357) [Doctoral dissertation, Ege University Institute of Social Sciences]. Retrieved from https://tez.yok.gov.tr/
16. Bohnert, M., & Gracia, P. (2023). Digital use and socioeconomic inequalities in adolescent well‐being: Longitudinal evidence on socioemotional and educational outcomes. Journal of Adolescence, 95(6), 1179–1194. https://doi.org/10.1002/jad.12193
17. Chai, S. (2020). Does cultural difference matter on social media? An examination of the ethical culture and information privacy concerns. Sustainability, 12(19), 8286. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12198286
18. Choi, Y. H., & Bazarova, N. N. (2020). Self-Disclosure and Self-Presentation. The International Encyclopedia of Media Psychology, 1-5. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119011071.iemp0084
19. Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, And Mixed Methods Approaches 4 edition (5th ed.). SAGE. https://online.anyflip.com/pyvm/cvko/mobile/index.html
20. Çoban, Ö., İnan, A., & Özel, S. A. (2021). Facebook Tells Me your gender: An Exploratory study of gender prediction for Turkish Facebook users. ACM Transactions on Asian and Low-Resource Language Information Processing, 20(4), 1–38. https://doi.org/10.1145/3448253
21. De Wolf, R., Martens, M., Vanden Abeele, M., & De Marez, L. (2023). Predicting teens’ privacy management and attitude toward data protection on social media. Cyberpsychology Behavior and Social Networking, 26(3), 153–160. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2021.0338
22. Dienlin, T., & Metzger, M. J. (2016). An Extended Privacy Calculus model for SNSs: Analyzing Self-Disclosure and Self-Withdrawal in a Representative U.S. sample. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 21(5), 368–383. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcc4.12163
23. Dinev, T., & Hart, P. (2006). An extended privacy calculus model for E-Commerce transactions. Information Systems Research, 17(1), 61–80. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.1060.0080
24. Etikan, I. (2016). Comparison of convenience sampling and purposive sampling. American Journal of Theoretical and Applied Statistics, 5(1), 1. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajtas.20160501.11
25. Fang, W. (2023). Social Media Changed the Notion of Privacy. Journal of Education, Humanities and Social Sciences, 14, 388-392. https://doi.org/10.54097/ehss.v14i.8894
26. Fraenkel, J. R., & Wallen, N. E. (2006). How To Design And Evaluate Research in Education (6th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
27. Gelbal Odabaş, Z., İlhan, T., & Kılıçer, K. (2021). Development of social media privacy protection skills scale for adolescents. Journal of Addiction, 22(4), 341-359. https://doi.org/10.51982/bagimli.888283
28. Geurts, S. M., Koning, I. M., Vossen, H. G., & Van Den Eijnden, R. J. (2022). Rules, role models or overall climate at home? Relative associations of different family aspects with adolescents’ problematic social media use. Comprehensive Psychiatry, 116, 152318. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.comppsych.2022.152318
29. Hair, J.F., Black, W.C., Babin, B.J., Anderson, R.E., Tatham, R.L. (2010). Multivariate Data Analysis. 7th ed. New York: Pearson.
30. Hofmans, L., Van Der Stappen, A., & Van Den Bos, W. (2024). Developmental structure of digital maturity. Computers in Human Behavior, 157, 108239. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2024.108239
31. Hofstra, B., Corten, R., & Van Tubergen, F. (2016). Understanding the privacy behavior of adolescents on Facebook: The role of peers, popularity and trust. Computers in Human Behavior, 60, 611–621. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.02.091
32. Hollenbaugh, E. E. (2019). Privacy management among social media natives: An Exploratory Study of Facebook and Snapchat. Social Media + Society, 5(3). https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305119855144
33. Hou, Y., Qin, C., & Xu, P. (2024). Social media use and academic performance in Chinese children and adolescents: a Moderated chain mediation model. Behavioral Sciences, 14(10), 867. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs14100867
34. Infante, A., & Mardikaningsih, R. (2022). The Potential of Social Media as a Means of Online Business Promotion. Journal of Social Science Studies, 2(2), 45-49. https://doi.org/10.56348/jos3.v2i2.26
35. Kaakinen, M., Koivula, A., Savolainen, I., Sirola, A., Mikkola, M., Zych, I., Paek, H., & Oksanen, A. (2021). Online dating applications and risk of youth victimization: A lifestyle exposure perspective. Aggressive Behavior, 47(5), 530–543. https://doi.org/10.1002/ab.21968
36. Katz, E., Blumler, J. G., & Gurevitch, M. (1973). Uses and Gratifications research. Public Opinion Quarterly, 37(4), 509. https://doi.org/10.1086/268109
37. Kircaburun, K., Alhabash, S., Tosuntaş, Ş. B., & Griffiths, M. D. (2018). Uses and Gratifications of Problematic Social Media Use Among University Students: a Simultaneous Examination of the Big Five of Personality Traits, Social Media Platforms, and Social Media Use Motives. International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction, 18(3), 525–547. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11469-018-9940-6
38. Kokolakis, S. (2017). Privacy attitudes and privacy behavior: A review of current research on the privacy paradox phenomenon. Computers & Security, 64, 122-134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cose.2015.07.002
39. Kramer, N. C., & Schawel, J. (2020). Mastering the challenge of balancing self-disclosure and privacy in social media. Current Opinion in Psychology, 31, 67-71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2019.08.003
40. Laohabutr, P., Subchartanan, J., Suteerojntrakool, O., Tempark, T., & Bongsebandhu-Phubhakdi, C. (2021). Thai teens' privacy-related practices on Facebook. Journal of Children and Media, 16(3), 406-414. https://doi.org/10.1080/17482798.2021.1993288
41. Lee, Y., & Yuan, C. W. (2020). The privacy calculus of “Friending” across multiple social media platforms. Social Media + Society, 6(2). https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305120928478
42. Livingstone, S., Mascheroni, G., & Staksrud, E. (2017). European research on children’s internet use: Assessing the past and anticipating the future. New Media & Society, 20(3), 1103–1122. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444816685930
43. Lou, J., Wang, M., Xie, X., Wang, F., Zhou, X., Lu, J., & Zhu, H. (2024). The association between family socio-demographic factors, parental mediation and adolescents’ digital literacy: a cross-sectional study. BMC Public Health, 24(1), 2932. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-024-20284-4
44. Masur, P. K., DiFranzo, D., & Bazarova, N. N. (2021). Behavioral contagion on social media: Effects of social norms, design interventions, and critical media literacy on self-disclosure. PLoS ONE, 16(7), e0254670. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0254670
45. Masur, P. K., Bazarova, N. N., & DiFranzo, D. (2023). The Impact of What Others Do, Approve Of, and Expect You to Do: An In-Depth Analysis of Social Norms and Self-Disclosure on Social Media. Social Media + Society, 9(1). https://doi.org/10.1177/20563051231156401
46. Martins, J. P., Guedes, I. S., Sani, A., & Moreira, S. (2023). Effects of individual and contextual dimensions on an aggregate measure of cybervictimization. Victims & Offenders, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/15564886.2023.2248483
47. Mascheroni, G., & Ólafsson, K. (2015). The mobile Internet: Access, use, opportunities and divides among European children. New Media & Society, 18(8), 1657–1679. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444814567986
48. Meier, Y., & Krämer, N. C. (2024). Differences in access to privacy information can partly explain digital inequalities in privacy literacy and self-efficacy. Behaviour and Information Technology, 44(6), 1183–1198. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929x.2024.2349183
49. Mosleh, M., Pennycook, G., Arechar, A. A., & Rand, D. G. (2021). Cognitive reflection correlates with behavior on Twitter. Nature Communications, 12(1), 921. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-20043-0
50. Neves, J., Turel, O., & Oliveira, T. (2024). Explaining social media use reduction as an adaptive coping mechanism: the roles of privacy literacy, social media addiction and exhaustion. Information Systems Management, 42(1), 89–102. https://doi.org/10.1080/10580530.2024.2332187
51. Norberg, P. A., Horne, D. R., & Horne, D. A. (2007). The Privacy Paradox: Personal Information Disclosure Intentions versus Behaviors. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 41(1), 100–126. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6606.2006.00070.x
52. NUTS. (2023). Türkiye’s Statistical Classification of The Nomenclature of Territorial Units for Statistics. Retrieved July 18, 2025, from https://ka.gov.tr/sayfalar/kalkinma-planlamasinda-istatistiki-bolge-birimleri-siniflandirmasi--24
53. Oksa, R., Saari, T., Kaakinen, M., & Oksanen, A. (2021). The Motivations for and Well-Being Implications of Social Media Use at Work among Millennials and Members of Former Generations. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(2), 803. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18020803
54. Öztürk, D., Eyüboğlu, G., & Göçmen Baykara, Z. (2022). Privacy awareness of university students. Gazi Journal of Health Sciences, 7(2), 68-77. https://doi.org/10.52881/gsbdergi.1014500
55. Petronio, S. (2013). Brief Status Report on Communication Privacy Management Theory. Journal of Family Communication, 13(1), 6–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/15267431.2013.743426
56. Rao, L. (2025). Unmasking Fake Profiles - Machine learning in social network security. International Journal of Scientific Research in Engineering and Management, 09(03), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.55041/ijsrem42173
57. Renu, N. (2023). Role of social networking sites usage in well-being of students. Proceedings of International Conference on Law, Patent, and Technology, 11(3). https://doi.org/10.52783/rlj.v11i3.2098
58. Salemink, K., Strijker, D., & Bosworth, G. (2015). Rural development in the digital age: A systematic literature review on unequal ICT availability, adoption, and use in rural areas. Journal of Rural Studies, 54, 360–371. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2015.09.001
59. Seidman, G., Hudak, L. M., & Langlais, M. (2025). Motivations for active and passive social media use and their relation to wellbeing. Human Behavior and Emerging Technologies, 2025(1). https://doi.org/10.1155/hbe2/8812526
60. Seo, J., Lee, C. S., Lee, Y. J., Bhang, S. Y., & Lee, D. (2021). The Type of Daily Life Stressors Associated with Social Media Use in Adolescents with Problematic Internet/Smartphone Use. Psychiatry Investigation, 18(3), 241-248. https://doi.org/10.30773/pi.2020.0060
61. Setyaningsih, R. D., & Nur, F. A. (2023). Social revolution: The impact of social media in our lives. Proceedings the Symposium of Literature, Culture, and Communication, 3(1), 59. https://doi.org/10.12928/sylection.v3i1.13933
62. Shin, W., & Kang, H. (2015). Adolescents’ privacy concerns and information disclosure online: The role of parents and the Internet. Computers in Human Behavior, 54, 114–123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.07.062
63. Stamenković, I., & Živadinović, T. U. (2022). Social media and interactivity from users' perspective. Media Studies and Applied Ethics, 3(2), 21-36. https://doi.org/10.46630/msae.2.2022.02
64. Steinfeld, N. (2020). Parental mediation of adolescent Internet use: Combining strategies to promote awareness, autonomy and self-regulation in preparing youth for life on the web. Education and Information Technologies, 26(2), 1897–1920. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-020-10342-w
65. Sundar, S. S., & Limperos, A. M. (2013). Uses and Grats 2.0: New gratifications for new media. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 57(4), 504–525. https://doi.org/10.1080/08838151.2013.845827
66. Tabachnick, B.G., Fidell, L.S. (2013), Using Multivariate Statistics. 6th ed. New Jersey: Pearson Education Inc. p1-983.
67. Taibi, D., Scifo, L., Bruno, N., & Fulantelli, G. (2023). Social Media Literacy to Support a conscious use of social media in adolescents and Improve their Psychological Well-Being: A pilot study. Sustainability, 15(17), 12726. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151712726
68. Tariq, A., Sáez, D. M., & Khan, S. R. (2021). Social media use and family connectedness: A systematic review of quantitative literature. New Media & Society, 24(3), 815–832. https://doi.org/10.1177/14614448211016885
69. Tomczyk, Ł. (2023). Digital transformation and digital competences of urban and rural Polish youths. Politics and Governance, 12. https://doi.org/10.17645/pag.7381
70. Tsay-Vogel, M., Shanahan, J., & Signorielli, N. (2016). Social media cultivating perceptions of privacy: A 5-year analysis of privacy attitudes and self-disclosure behaviors among Facebook users. New Media & Society, 20(1), 141–161. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444816660731
71. Türkoğlu, H. S. (2018). The Effective Investigation on Measurement of Exclusion and Difference with the Concept of Social Media. Connectist Istanbul University Journal of Communication Sciences, 163-189. https://doi.org/10.26650/connectist408216
72. Wesarg-Menzel, C., Ebbes, R., Hensums, M., Wagemaker, E., Zaharieva, M. S., Staaks, J. P., Van Den Akker, A. L., Visser, I., Hoeve, M., Brummelman, E., Dekkers, T. J., Schuitema, J. A., Larsen, H., Colonnesi, C., Jansen, B. R., Overbeek, G., Huizenga, H. M., & Wiers, R. W. (2023). Development and socialization of self-regulation from infancy to adolescence: A meta-review differentiating between self-regulatory abilities, goals, and motivation. Developmental Review, 69, 101090. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dr.2023.101090
73. Winstone, L., Mars, B., Haworth, C. M. A., & Kidger, J. (2021). Social media use and social connectedness among adolescents in the United Kingdom: a qualitative exploration of displacement and stimulation. BMC Public Health, 21(1), 1736. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-021-11802-9
74. Zarouali, B., Verdoodt, V., Walrave, M., Poels, K., Ponnet, K., & Lievens, E. (2020). Adolescents' advertising literacy and privacy protection strategies in the context of targeted advertising on social networking sites: implications for regulation. Young Consumers, 21(3), 351-367. https://doi.org/10.1108/yc-04-2020-1122
75. Zhao, D., Inaba, M., & Monroy-Hernández, A. (2022). Understanding teenage perceptions and configurations of privacy on Instagram. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, 6(CSCW2), 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1145/3555608
76. Zhu, X., & Xiong, Z. (2022). Exploring association between social media addiction, fear of missing out, and Self-Presentation online among university students: a Cross-Sectional study. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 13, 896762. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2022.896762