Social media age restrictions evaluation

Our Lead Academic Partner and Academic Advisory Group

eSafety appointed an Academic Advisory Group of eleven leading experts, led by Stanford University’s Social Media Lab, to support the robust and transparent evaluation of the SMMA law.

Throughout the evaluation, the Academic Advisory Group provides independent, evidence‑based guidance across the design, analysis and implementation stages. Their expertise helps ensure the evaluation accurately measures how well the obligation is meeting its goals, while also identifying any unexpected or unintended effects.

Members of the Lead Academic Partner include:

• Professor Jeff Hancock, Stanford University Social Media Lab
• Dr Sunny Xun Liu, Stanford University Social Media Lab
• Dr Anja Stevic, Stanford University Social Media Lab
• Dr Angela Yuson Lee, Stanford University Social Media Lab
• Dr Y. Anthony Chen, Stanford University Social Media Lab
• Zacariah Smith-Russack, Stanford University Social Media Lab 

Members of the Academic Advisory Group include:

• Distinguished Professor Bronwyn Carlson, Head of Critical Indigenous Studies, Macquarie University
• Associate Professor, Munmun De Choudhury, Director of Social Dynamics and Well-Being Laboratory, and Co-Lead of Children's Healthcare of Atlanta Pediatric Technology Center, Georgia Institute of Technology
• Professor Peter Etchells, School of Psychology, Bath Spa University
• Professor Katherine Keyes, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University
• Distinguished Professor Mitch Prinstein, Co-Director of the Winston Center for Technology and the Developing Mind, University of North Carolina, and Chief Science Officer, American Psychological Association
• Professor Jo Robinson, Professorial Fellow and Director, Centre for Youth Mental Health, University of Melbourne
• Professor Susan Sawyer, Chair of Adolescent Health, University of Melbourne, and Director, Centre for Adolescent Health, Royal Children’s Hospital
• Professor Julian Sefton-Green, School of Education, Deakin University
• Associate Professor Aliza Werner-Seidler, Black Dog Institute, University of New South Wales
• Professor Amanda Third, Professorial Research Fellow and Co-Director, Young and Resilient Research Centre, Western Sydney University
• Professor Amy Orben, Programme Leader Track Scientist at the MRC Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit, University of Cambridge

Read the Academic Advisory Group consensus statement outlining their role and approach to the evaluation.

How does the Academic Advisory Group work?  

The Academic Advisory Group meets quarterly. These meetings enable members to review progress, provide independent advice, and guide emerging lines of inquiry. Input is also provided out of session, as needed.

Meeting agendas and minutes will be published on this page as they become available.

Youth involvement

Six members of the eSafety Youth Advisory Council, aged 14 to 23, are working with us as peer researchers in the evaluation. This means they help shape and take part in different parts of the project – such as helping design how we engage young people, helping run group discussions, and contributing to how we make sense of both the stories and the data we collect. Their involvement ensures the evaluation reflects young people’s real experiences and perspectives.

Peer researchers receive training and hands on experience in research methods from eSafety’s research team. When they take part in formal data collection activities – like co-facilitating focus groups – they are paid for their time, following the same approach used for the Youth Advisory Council. We also have strong duty of care processes in place, including tailored onboarding and ongoing support, to make sure peer researchers feel safe, prepared and supported throughout their involvement.

Fieldwork contractor

The Social Research Centre (SRC) has been contracted to coordinate fieldwork for the evaluation. The SRC will be working with several subcontractors to support data collection across Australia, including their probability-based panel and several non-probability-based panels.

Data linkage contractor

The Data Linkage and Integrating Authority at the Australian Institute for Family Studies (AIFS) has been appointed to conduct data linkage services for the evaluation. Using an accredited data linkage authority is important because it ensures that personal information is handled safely, securely and in line with strict national standards. 

Their expertise helps protect people’s privacy while allowing us to combine information in a way that supports high‑quality, reliable evaluation findings.

Foundational publications

When available, this page will include reports that have informed the approach eSafety and our contractors and partners are taking for the evaluation of the social media age restrictions.

Open Science Framework

The Open Science Framework is an online platform that supports open and transparent research. It allows organisations and researchers to share their study plans, methods and materials so that others can see how a project was designed and how key decisions were made.

Publishing our study protocol on the Open Science Framework reflects eSafety’s commitment to transparency and good research practice. It gives the community, government, and other stakeholders a clear view of how the evaluation is set up from the outset.

In our preprint of the study protocol, available on Open Science Framework registration, you can expect to find:

• the aims and scope of the evaluation
• our study design and planned methods
• key outcomes we are measuring
• information about data management, ethics and analysis plans
• any updates made as the project progresses.

Together, these details help show how the evaluation is being conducted and provide a consistent record of our approach.

Evaluation findings

eSafety and the Academic Advisory Group have made a commitment to publishing the findings of the evaluation transparently, and in a timely and accessible manner. When available, these reports will be published on our website:

• Public-facing reports: Easy-to-understand summaries of the key emerging evaluation insights.
• Scientific publications: More detailed and technical analyses that will appear in peer-reviewed academic journals. Where possible, we will also share these publications here, noting that access may depend on individual journal policies.