Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Machine learning analysis reveals five distinct nonsuicidal self-injury subgroups on social media, suggesting targets for personalized digital interventions.
Objective: Adolescent non-suicidal self-injury (NSSI) is widely discussed on social media, highlighting the need for early and targeted online interventions. This study developed a typology of social media users at risk for NSSI by jointly modelling post-level textual features and platform usage patterns using unsupervised machine learning.Methods: Public posts and metadata were collected from X, formerly Twitter using the Korean keyword ‘jahae’ (self-injury) over a 1-year period. After preprocessing, transformer-based embeddings were applied for natural language processing and clustering was conducted at the post and user levels.Results: Twelve content categories were identified from five domains: everyday interaction, sharing interests, community engagement, stress expression, and affective expression. These categories include family-, academic-, diet-, and sleep-related stress; suicidal ideation; internal and external negative affect; self-denigration; and self-harm positive expressions. For usage behavior, six indicators were examined follower-to-following ratio, user-reaction-to-response ratio, proportion of media posts, average post length, average posting time, and salient hashtags. Based on these textual and behavioral features, 1,224 users with NSSI-related posting activity were clustered into five subgroups: online communication seekers, negative emotion and stress expressers, online relationship immersers, internal self-injury ideators, and active self-injury posters. The subgroups showed distinct content signals and usage patterns.Conclusion: These findings provide a framework for characterizing users who display NSSI-related risk signals on social media and offer implications for prevention and intervention. The proposed typology may inform research and support professionals working with adolescents in digital contexts.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jang et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: