Published in the British Medical Journal, the University of Newcastle study found age assurance measures were not consistently experienced, with many young people reporting continued access to platforms using their own accounts, as well as alternative or shared accounts.

The study followed 408 adolescents aged 12 to 17 before and three months after the introduction of the Social Media Minimum Age Act 2024, which requires identified platforms including Tiktok, X, Facebook, Instagram, YouTube and Snapchat, to take reasonable steps to prevent users under 16 from holding accounts.

Researchers found that more than 85 per cent of adolescents under 16 continued to use restricted social media platforms at follow-up, with around two-thirds reporting exposure to age verification processes.

Lead investigator, University of Newcastle researcher Dr Courtney Barnes, says the findings provided an important early snapshot of how the policy is being experienced in practice.

“In this study, we observed very little change in adolescent social media use in the three months following the introduction of age restrictions, based on self-reported data collected before and after implementation,” Barnes says.

Around two-thirds encountered age verification measures, with self-declared age and photo-based checks the most commonly reported approaches.

“Most adolescents who continued using social media did so with their own accounts, and the most common form of age verification was self-declared age.

Behavioural scientist Professor Luke Wolfenden, says it is important to interpret the findings in the context of early implementation, as there is an expectation that both platform practices and compliance mechanisms will continue to evolve over time.

“There was also clear evidence of circumvention — for example, using fake accounts or accounts belonging to friends or family,” Barnes shares.

Continued access despite restrictions

  • Around 86 per cent of under-16s reported accessing at least one restricted platform in the past week at follow-up
  • Most adolescents continued accessing platforms through their own accounts (around 54–68 per cent of users under 16)
  • Only around two-thirds (66 per cent) of adolescents reported encountering any form of age verification
  • The most commonly reported age verification methods were self-declared age (24–39 per cent) and uploading a photo (‘selfie’) (13–27 per cent)

Circumvention behaviour

  • Around 15–19 per cent of adolescents reported using a fake account to access platforms
  • Between 9 per cent and 29 per cent reported accessing platforms through someone else’s account
  • Up to 11 per cent reported using private browser modes to bypass restrictions

Changes in social media use

  • Daily social media use trends varied by age: Usage remained stable among 12–13-year-olds, declined among 14–15-year-olds (78 per cent to 69 per cent), and increased among those aged over 16 (80 per cent to 89 per cent) over the study period.
  • Time spent on social media per day showed a similar pattern: It stayed steady for 12–13-year-olds and those over 16, but decreased among 14–15-year-olds (from 3.40 to 3.13 on the scale).
  • There was no substantive change in daily use or time spent on social media.

In response to growing concerns about the potential harm of social media use to adolescent health and wellbeing, governments internationally are considering or implementing age-based restrictions.

“This is one of the first evaluations of its kind, which is important because other countries are watching Australia closely. It provides early evidence of how these restrictions are functioning,” Barnes says.

Co-investigator, University of Newcastle behavioural scientist Professor Luke Wolfenden, says it is important to interpret the findings in the context of early implementation, as there is an expectation that both platform practices and compliance mechanisms will continue to evolve over time.

“Our study focuses on access and use rather than broader outcomes, but it contributes to a growing body of evidence suggesting that patterns of social media use are shaped by a range of behavioural and environmental factors,” Wolfenden says.

“The findings suggest that where adolescents are still able to access platforms, patterns of use are unlikely to differ substantially, as the underlying access to these services appears largely unchanged.

“The results point to the importance of how age assurance is operationalised in practice, as the effectiveness of any restriction is likely to depend on the robustness and consistency of these measures.”

The research team acknowledges the full impacts of the legislation may take years to emerge and that longer-term evaluation will be critical.

“This study provides early evidence on how the policy is functioning in practice, and contributes to ongoing efforts to understand how such measures may influence adolescent behaviour over time,” Wolfenden says.

“Our main recommendation is for more rigorous, long-term evaluations. It takes time for policy implementation to stabilise and for impacts – particularly on wellbeing – to emerge.”

‘Assessing the early effects of Australia’s ‘Social Media Minimum Age Act’ on adolescent social media use’ is published in the British Medical Journal and can be read here.