Ergin, Esra. “Parenting in the Age of Social Media: A Bibliometric Analysis of ‘Sharenting’ with R”. Diyanet İlmî Dergi 61/4 (2025), 1689 -1718. https://doi.org/10.61304/did.1770689
Parenting in the Age of Social Media: A Bibliometric Analysis of “Sharenting” with R*
Research Article
Received: 22 August 2025 Accepted: 17 December 2025
Esra Ergin
Dr. Öğr. Üyesi / Assistant Professor
Selçuk Üniversitesi / Selçuk University
Eğitim Fakültesi / Faculty of Education
https://ror.org/045hgzm75
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3810-4142
Abstract
This study aims to examine the conceptual structure of the sharenting literature, its dominant themes, and underexplored areas through a bibliometric analysis based on the Web of Science Core Collection (WoSCC) and Scopus databases. The datasets were processed using EndNote 21, and duplicate records were removed prior to analysis. Bibliometric analyses were conducted using R (version 4.2.2) and the Bibliometrix/Biblioshiny package. The WoSCC thematic analysis indicates that existing studies predominantly focus on the themes of “youth,” “communication,” and “privacy,” while “media” and “internet” emerge as developing themes. In contrast, topics such as “hate” and “identity verification” remain marginal. The WoSCC TreeMap analysis further highlights “experience” and “privacy” as prominent areas, whereas “race,” “culture,” and “addiction” appear to be insufficiently examined. According to the Scopus thematic analysis, research primarily concentrates on the themes of “human,” “child,” and “woman,” with “social media” and “online sharing” identified as emerging areas. Conversely, “attention,” “gender,” and “family” are relatively limited themes. The Scopus TreeMap analysis shows that although “children” and “social media” receive substantial attention, issues related to “privacy,” “identity theft,” “legal dimensions,” and “mental health” remain underexplored. Overall, the findings demonstrate that sharenting research largely centers on children, parents, social media, and privacy, while legal, cultural, and psychological dimensions have yet to receive adequate scholarly attention.
Keywords: Education, Bibliometric Analysis, Digital Age, Parenting, Sharenting.
* This article is published under the CC BY-NC 4.0 licence.
Sosyal Medya Çağında Ebeveynlik: R ile “Sharenting”in Bibliyometrik Analizi*
Araştırma Makalesi
Geliş Tarihi: 22 Ağustos 2025 Kabul Tarihi: 17 Aralık 2025
Öz
Bu çalışma, sharenting literatürünün kavramsal yapısını, odaklandığı temaları ve ihmal edilen alanları Web of Science Core Collection (WoSCC) ve Scopus veritabanları üzerinden bibliyometrik analizle açıklamayı amaçlamaktadır. Veri setleri EndNote 21 ile işlenmiş ve tekrar eden kayıtlar çıkarılmıştır. Analizler R (4.2.2) ve Bibliometrix/Biblioshiny ile gerçekleştirilmiştir. WoSCC tematik analizine göre, çalışmalar “gençlik”, “iletişim” ve “mahremiyet” temalarına odaklanmakta; “medya” ve “internet” yükselen, “nefret” ve “kimlik doğrulama” ise sınırlı temalar olarak öne çıkmaktadır. WoSCC TreeMap analizinde “deneyim” ve “mahremiyet” öne çıkarken, “ırk”, “kültür” ve “bağımlılık” yeterince incelenmemiştir. Scopus tematik analizine göre ise çalışmalar “insan”, “çocuk” ve “kadın” temalarına odaklanırken; “sosyal medya” ve “çevrimiçi paylaşım” yükselen, “dikkat”, “cinsiyet” ve “aile” ise sınırlı temalardır. Scopus TreeMap analizi, “çocuk” ve “sosyal medya” öne çıkarken, “mahremiyet”, “kimlik hırsızlığı”, “hukuki boyutlar” ve “ruh sağlığı” alanlarının yeterince incelenmediği belirlenmiştir. Bulgular, sharenting araştırmalarının çocuklar, ebeveynler, sosyal medya ve mahremiyet odaklı olduğunu ve hukuki, kültürel ile psikolojik boyutların yeterince ele alınmadığını göstermektedir.
Anahtar Kelimeler: Eğitim, Bibliyometrik Analiz, Dijital Çağ, Ebeveynlik, Sharenting.
* Bu makale CC BY-NC 4.0 lisansı altında yayımlanmaktadır
Summary
This study investigates how family-related policies have been framed, prioriThis study aims to examine the concept of “sharenting” through bibliometric analysis. The Web of Science Core Collection (WoSCC) and Scopus databases were used for the analysis, and the datasets were processed using EndNote 21 to remove duplicate records. Bibliometric analyses were conducted using R (version 4.2.2) and the Bibliometrix/Biblioshiny packages. The Thematic Map and TreeMap analyses of sharenting research in the WoSCC and Scopus databases provide a comprehensive overview of the field’s conceptual structure, research trends, and gaps in the literature. According to the WoSCC Thematic Map analysis, concepts such as “adolescents,” “age,” “communication,” “experiences,” “privacy,” and “children” are densely clustered in the “Motor Themes” quadrant, indicating the core focal areas of sharenting research. This finding suggests that existing studies primarily concentrate on the online experiences, communication processes, and privacy concerns of adolescents and children. In the “Niche Themes” quadrant, concepts such as “hate,” “identification,” and “source credibility” display high density but low centrality, indicating that while these topics are examined in depth within specialized subfields, they remain weakly connected to the broader sharenting literature. Concepts such as “media,” “internet,” and “impact,” located in the “Basic Themes” quadrant, exhibit high centrality values, suggesting that they represent foundational and emerging research areas within the field. Finally, the presence of “Instagram” in the “Emerging or Declining Themes” quadrant indicates that the evolution of social media platforms and their influence on parent–child interactions constitute an important emerging trend in sharenting research.
The WoSCC TreeMap analysis offers a more detailed view of the relative frequency and prominence of key concepts within the research field. According to the analysis, the highest frequency values are associated with the concepts of “experiences” (7%), “privacy” (7%), “children” (6%), and “media” (6%). This pattern indicates that sharenting research primarily concentrates on children’s experiences, privacy concerns, and media-related processes. Subsequent concepts include “parents,” “Facebook,” “mother,” “boundaries,” and “internet,” suggesting that children’s media experiences are frequently examined within the family context and that parental-particularly maternal-social media practices occupy a significant place in the literature. In contrast, the relatively low frequency of concepts such as “race,” “culture,” “abortion,” “addiction,” and “victimization” indicates that these areas remain underdeveloped and point to the need for further scholarly attention in future research.
Findings from the Scopus database confirm similar trends while offering an additional perspective on the literature. In the Scopus Thematic Map analysis, the “Motor Themes” quadrant includes the concepts of “human,” “child,” and “female,” indicating core themes that are well established and constitute the primary focus of sharenting research. The “Niche Themes” quadrant features concepts such as “sharing,” “photo sharing,” and “social networking (online),” reflecting specialized themes developed within the context of social media and online sharing, yet demonstrating limited integration with the broader field. The presence of “children online” in the “Basic Themes” quadrant suggests that issues related to children’s online behavior and digital environments represent important but still developing areas of research. Conversely, the placement of “attention,” “gender,” and “family” in the “Emerging or Declining Themes” quadrant indicates that these topics currently receive limited attention or are experiencing a decline in scholarly interest within the sharenting literature.
The Scopus TreeMap analysis provides detailed insight into the research focus and relative importance of key concepts based on their frequency values. The concepts of “child” and “social media” display the highest frequencies, indicating that sharenting research primarily centers on children and social media platforms. The prominence of the terms “human” and “female” suggests an emphasis on individual perspectives, particularly those of mothers. Other thematically significant concepts include “social network,” “photo sharing,” “child–parent relationship,” “parents,” “privacy,” and “identity theft,” highlighting the impact of social media–based sharing practices on family interactions and children’s privacy. In contrast, the relatively low frequency of concepts such as “legal aspect” and “mental health” indicates that legal and psychological dimensions remain insufficiently explored, pointing to the need for further research in these areas. Finally, the appearance of geographic identifiers such as “Spain” and “Czech Republic” suggests that existing research is concentrated in specific regions, revealing potential gaps in cross-cultural and comparative studies.
Overall, the analysis of both databases indicates that sharenting research is primarily centered on children, parents, privacy, and social media. While niche and emerging themes include social media platforms, online sharing practices, family relationships, and legal and psychological dimensions, areas such as gender, family structure, cultural differences, and psychological processes remain insufficiently explored in the literature. Given its potential long-term effects on children’s mental health, sharenting has become an issue that warrants increased attention from both families and policymakers. This study seeks to examine the impact of sharenting-an increasingly influential phenomenon in the digital age-on children through bibliometric analysis. Based on the findings, the study underscores the importance of strengthening the protection of children’s rights and promoting comprehensive, globally coordinated interventions for the safeguarding of personal data, with the aim of ensuring a safer digital environment for children.
Geniş Özet
Bu çalışma, “sharenting” kavramını bibliyometrik analiz yöntemiyle incelemeyi amaçlamıştır. Analizler için WoSCC ve Scopus veritabanları kullanılmış, veri setleri EndNote 21 aracılığıyla işlenmiş ve tekrar eden kayıtlar çıkarılmıştır. Analizler R (4.2.2) ve Bibliometrix/Biblioshiny paketleriyle gerçekleştirilmiştir. WoSCC ve Scopus veri tabanları üzerinden yapılan “sharenting” araştırmalarının Tematic Map ve TreeMap analizleri, bu alandaki kavramsal yapıyı, araştırma eğilimlerini ve literatürdeki boşlukları kapsamlı bir şekilde ortaya koymaktadır. WoSCC Tematic Map analizine göre, sağ üstte yer alan “Motor Themes” alanında “ergenler”, “yaş”, “iletişim”, “deneyim”, “gizlilik” ve “çocuk” gibi kavramlar yoğun bir şekilde bulunmakta olup, sharenting çalışmalarının temel odak noktalarını temsil etmektedir. Bu durum, araştırmaların özellikle ergenler ve çocukların çevrimiçi deneyimlerini, iletişim süreçlerini ve gizlilik konularını merkezine aldığını göstermektedir. Sol üstteki “Niche Themes” alanında ise “nefret”, “kimlik” ve “kaynak güvenirliği” gibi kavramlar yüksek yoğunluk değerleri ile öne çıkmakla birlikte düşük merkezilikleri, bu konuların belirli uzmanlık alanlarında derinlemesine çalışıldığını ancak genel sharenting literatürü ile sınırlı etkileşimde kaldığını ortaya koymaktadır. Sağ alt alandaki “Basic Themes” kategorisinde yer alan “medya”, “internet” ve “etki” kavramları ise yüksek merkezilik değerleri ile alanın gelişmekte olan temel araştırma konularını işaret etmektedir. Sol alt alandaki “Emerging or Declining Themes” alanında yer alan “instagram” kavramı ise sosyal medya platformlarının evrimi ve bu platformların çocuk ve ebeveyn etkileşimleri üzerindeki etkisinin yükselen trendler arasında olduğunu göstermektedir.
WoSCC TreeMap analizi, araştırma alanındaki kavramların frekans ve önemine ilişkin daha ayrıntılı bilgiler sunmaktadır. Analiz sonuçlarına göre, en yüksek frekans değerleri “deneyim” (%7), “gizlilik” (%7), “çocuk” (%6) ve “medya” (%6) kavramlarında yoğunlaşmaktadır. Bu bulgu, sharenting araştırmalarının temel odağının çocukların deneyimleri, gizlilik konuları ve medya ile ilişkili süreçler üzerine şekillendiğini göstermektedir. Takip eden kavramlar arasında “aile”, “facebook”, “anne”, “sınırlar” ve “internet” yer almakta olup, bu durum çocukların medya deneyimlerinin aile bağlamında incelendiğini ve ebeveynlerin özellikle annelerin sosyal medya tutumlarının araştırmalarda önem kazandığını ortaya koymaktadır. Öte yandan, “ırk”, “kültür”, “istismar”, “bağımlılık” ve “kurban” gibi kavramların düşük frekansla yer alması, literatürde bu alanların henüz gelişmekte olan konular olduğunu ve gelecekte bu konulara yönelik araştırma ihtiyacının bulunduğunu göstermektedir.
Scopus veri tabanı bulguları, benzer eğilimleri doğrulamakta ve literatüre ek bir perspektif kazandırmaktadır. Scopus Tematic Map analizinde sağ üstte yer alan “Motor Themes” alanı, “insan”, “çocuk” ve “kadın” kavramlarını içermekte olup, bu alan literatürde sağlam temellere sahip ve araştırmaların odak noktası olan temel temaları temsil etmektedir. Sol üstteki “Niche Themes” alanında yer alan “paylaşım yapma”, “fotoğraf paylaşma” ve “sosyal ağ (çevrimiçi)” kavramları, sosyal medya ve çevrimiçi paylaşımlar bağlamında gelişmiş niş temaları göstermekte ve alanın belirli alt alanlarıyla sınırlı ilişkisini ortaya koymaktadır. Sağ alt alandaki “Basic Themes” kategorisinde yer alan “çevrimiçi çocuklar” kavramı, çocukların çevrimiçi davranışları veya dijital ortamlarıyla ilgili konuların önemli ancak gelişmekte olan bir tema olduğunu göstermektedir. Sol alt alandaki “Emerging or Declining Themes” alanında yer alan “dikkat”, “cinsiyet” ve “aile” temaları, literatürde bu konulara ilişkin ilginin henüz sınırlı olduğunu ya da azalma eğiliminde olduğunu göstermektedir.
Scopus TreeMap analizi, kavramların araştırma odağı ve önemini frekans değerleriyle detaylandırmaktadır. Analiz sonuçlarına göre, “çocuk” ve “sosyal medya” kavramları en yüksek frekansa sahip olup, çalışmaların temel odağının çocuklar ve sosyal medya platformları olduğunu ortaya koymaktadır. “İnsan” ve “kadın” kavramlarının öne çıkması, araştırmaların bireysel perspektiflere ve özellikle anne deneyimlerine vurgu yaptığını göstermektedir. Tematik olarak öne çıkan diğer kavramlar arasında “sosyal ağ”, “fotoğraf paylaşma”, “çocuk aile etkileşimi”, “aileler”, “gizlilik” ve “kimlik hırsızlığı” yer almakta olup, bu kavramlar sharenting araştırmalarında sosyal medya araçları üzerinden yapılan paylaşımların çocuk-aile etkileşimi ve mahremiyet üzerindeki etkilerini ön plana çıkarmaktadır. Düşük frekanslı kavramlar arasında yer alan “hukuki boyut” ve “ruh sağlığı”, hukuki ve psikolojik boyutların araştırmalarda yeterince ele alınmadığını ve bu alanlara yönelik araştırma gerekliliğini göstermektedir. Coğrafi dağılım ipuçları olarak “İspanya” ve “Çek Cumhuriyeti” gibi terimler, araştırmaların belirli coğrafi bölgelerde yoğunlaştığını işaret etmektedir.
Genel olarak her iki veri tabanı analizlerinde “sharenting” araştırmalarının temel odağının çocuklar, ebeveynler, gizlilik ve sosyal medya ekseninde şekillendiği sonucuna ulaşılmıştır. Niş ve gelişmekte olan temalar, sosyal medya araçları, çevrimiçi paylaşım, aile ilişkileri ile hukuki ve psikolojik boyutları içerirken; literatürde henüz yeterince incelenmemiş alanlar arasında cinsiyet, aile yapısı, kültürel farklılıklar ve psikolojik süreçler öne çıkmaktadır. Günümüzde “sharenting” olgusu bu noktada çocukların ruh sağlığı açısından uzun vadeli etkisi olan hem ailelerin hem de politika yapıcıların üzerinde durması gereken bir konu haline gelmiştir. Bu çalışma dijital çağda giderek etkisi artan bir olgu haline gelen “sharenting” kavramının çocuklar üzerindeki etkisini bibliyometrik analizle irdelemeyi hedeflemiştir. Bu amaçla araştırmada ulaşılan sonuçlar neticesinde çocuklar için daha güvenilir bir yaşamın sağlanması noktasında çocukların haklarının korunmasına dikkat edilmesi ve kişisel verilerin korunması için dünya genelinde bir müdahale sağlanması önemli görülmektedir.
Introduction
Blogging plays a significant role in shaping today’s online sharing culture.[1] Blogs, where parents express themselves creatively through writing, allow them to share their parenting philosophy while also enabling them to build digital communities with families who support them. Today, social platforms have evolved from being effective personal spaces for individuals to find friends or establish new social networks into virtual spaces where individuals express and share their personal experiences.[2] This process, coupled with the widespread use of smartphones and social media, has led to the emergence of the concept of “sharenting” today.[3] On social networks such as Facebook and Instagram, individuals’ sharing of their daily routines in relation to parenting has made the concept of “sharenting” more visible in the literature as a reflection of contemporary culture. Parallel to this, the concept of “sharenting” has become widely used in everyday conversation to describe some parental digital sharing practicesv.[4] The concept of “sharenting” was first proposed by Steven Leckart[5] and defined in the Collins Dictionary[6] as “the habit of sharing news, images, and similar content related to one’s children on social media”.
As a global trend related to “sharenting”, it has been determined that an average of 973 photos of children are shared online by the time they reach the age of five, which corresponds to approximately 195 photos shared by parents each year.[7] Another study found that 42.8% of parents’ posts included their children.[8] Additionally, another important finding is that two-thirds of children have their photos shared by close relatives within the first 24 hours after birth, and 92% by the time they reach approximately two years of age.[9] This demonstrates that social media plays a significant role in parents’ lives.[10]
Studies on “sharenting” have found that the frequency with which parents share their children on social media varies according to gender. According to these studies, while both parents share their children on online media platforms, mothers are more likely than fathers to share photos of their children and family on social media.[11] Additionally, these findings reflect the traditional family model, as women tend to take a more active role in maintaining family bonds compared to men.[12]
Among the reasons parents share their children on social networking sites is that it provides effective opportunities to inform others about their children’s developmental processes from birth onwards.[13] Other reasons cited for sharing include receiving social support[14], preserving memories[15], and contributing to the parent’s self-construction.[16]
However, parents sharing photos of their children also has negative consequences. Parents sharing inappropriate content of their children (such as naked photos of them in the sea or bathtub) exposes them to paedophilia.[17] Parents sharing their children’s photos and these photos being copied is defined as “digital child abduction”.[18] In addition to the social support, community building, and digital memory recording purposes of sharing content about their children, parents’ behavior has also led to privacy violations due to the negative consequences of exposing inappropriate content.[19] In the context of digital culture, a mother sharing her children is seen as a socially accepted element that contributes to the image of a “good mother”.[20] Parents who disregard their children’s privacy concerns and lack of consent in order to promote themselves and gain social approval in their posts are harming their children’s autonomy and digital identities.[21] Indeed, to protect children from such negative situations, Article 3 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) states that children’s interests must be a primary consideration in all actions involving them.[22] Ouvrein and Verswijvel[23] concluded in their study, which surveyed children’s opinions on their parents sharing their photos, that this situation could lead to embarrassing consequences for children and damage their online identity. Therefore, the study recommends that parents limit the frequency with which they share content related to their children and obtain their consent before doing so. Gökçe Saygılı and Üstüner Top[24] state that research on sharenting in Turkey has revealed that social media posts made by parents, mostly with good intentions, can unknowingly violate children’s privacy and that these posts can expose children to various risks and negativities in the long run. Acar and Koyuncu[25] also explore the effects of increased social media use on children, driven by digitalization, within the framework of the concept of “social media motherhood”. In this study, social media mothers gain followers, generate income, and provide content to other mothers by sharing videos and photos of their children. However, this situation has negative consequences, violating children’s privacy, exposing them to risks, and facilitating access to images by malicious individuals. It appears that the concept of “sharenting” is a phenomenon that requires careful attention within legal boundaries and meticulously addressed in terms of children’s privacy, safety, and rights.
Theoretically, parents sharing photos of their children can be approached from Belk’s[26] definition of children as objects of ownership. According to Belk’s[27] concept of the extended self, individuals’ selves expand through the elements they possess in both the real and virtual worlds and their past experiences. Within this framework, it is predicted that personal characteristics such as the desire to be different, the need to learn, and the tendency towards materialism may influence the extended self.[28] In this approach, parents view their children as an extension of their own aesthetic perceptions. Accordingly, children should reflect the parent’s “ideal family” metaphor and support the parent’s social status.[29] This situation can also be explained by the family development model, which describes the mother’s transition from a singular self to a relational identity from the moment of the child’s birth.[30] An example of this is when a mother shares her child’s individual success as if it were her own and sees herself as part of her child. At this juncture, digital environments offer a new arena for staging family relationships, and social media algorithms invisibly manipulate family interactions. In this context, Goffman’s[31] perspective on dramaturgical sociology can be applied to understand how families present an idealized image online at the forefront while concealing conflicts and flaws in the backstage. The digital age, however, blurs the boundaries between the forefront and the backstage, allowing audiences to be algorithmically selected and individuals to use new tools to orchestrate their performances. Families collaboratively project the image of a happy and successful family on social media platforms, acting as a “performance team,” with each member managing their own online persona and presentation to the audience. Overall, these dynamics illustrate how contemporary sharenting practices are shaped not only by parents’ identity construction processes but also by the algorithmic and performative demands of digital platforms, transforming family life into a carefully curated and strategically managed public performance.
Based on this importance, study aims to reveal the conceptual structure of the “sharenting” literature, its main themes, and neglected areas using bibliometric science mapping techniques based on the WoSCC and Scopus databases. In line with this objective, the sub-objectives of the study are as follows:
Performing a thematic map analysis of studies accessed using the Web of Science Core Collection (WoSCC) database,
Performing a TreeMap analysis of studies accessed using the Web of Science Core Collection (WoSCC) database,
Performing a thematic map analysis of studies accessed using the Scopus database,
Conducting a TreeMap analysis of the studies accessed using the Scopus database.
2. Method
This study aims to reveal the conceptual structure of the “sharenting” literature, its main themes, and neglected areas using bibliometric science mapping techniques based on the WoSCC and Scopus databases. To this end, data obtained from the Web of Science Core Collection (WoSCC) database and the Scopus database were analyzed.
2.1. Procedure
The WoSCC and Scopus databases were used to conduct a bibliometric analysis and descriptive content analysis of the concept of “sharenting” in the study. Data up to August 2023 were analyzed in the study. In addition, certain filters were applied during the data collection process, and these restrictions are presented in Table 1. The data obtained were transferred to the EndNote 21 software for use in the analysis process, and no restrictions were applied in the study in terms of year, index, type, language, etc.
Table 1: Databases used in The Study and Filters Applied
Database | Code scanned | Number of studies |
Web of Science | Topic “sharenting” | 88 studies |
Scopus | Article title, abstract, keywords, authors “sharenting” | 110 studies |
2.2. Data Analysis
In this study, bibliometric analysis was used to examine academic trends related to “sharenting”. In the study, two separate data sets were created by searching for the keyword “sharenting” in WoSCC and Scopus to analyze the data. The datasets were transferred to the EndNote 21 softweare, and duplicate records were removed through manual checks to obtain the final analysis data. During the data analysis phase, the open-access R software[32] (R 4.2.2.) and the Biblioshiny interface within the Bibliometrix tool were used.[33] The R package and Bibliometrix software are recommended for conducting comprehensive scientific mapping analyses.[34] Subsequently, Thematic Map analysis and TreeMap analysis were performed on the data obtained from both databases. These analyses visualized the distribution of keywords and the density and centrality values of thematic structures, thereby highlighting the core, niche, emerging, and declining themes in a comparative manner based on the database.
TreeMap Analysis: This mapping method is used to visualize the most frequently occurring words in a data set. In the analysis, rectangles are created whose sizes vary according to the frequency of the keywords. In TreeMap analysis, rectangles are formed hierarchically as main and subcategories. The size of the rectangles varies according to the frequency value. In the analysis, large and brightly colored rectangles represent prominent or central themes. Additionally, rectangles with similar themes are grouped together based on similar colors.[35]
Thematic Map Analysis: In this mapping method, the importance and development level of the subject are explained on two axes formed by considering the criteria of density (level of development) and centrality (degree of connection with the area). In thematic mapping, classification is made according to four areas. These are[36];
a. Motor Themes: These themes are positioned in the upper right area, with high density and high centrality values, and represent advanced and important themes in the field.
b. Basic Themes: These themes are positioned in the lower right area, with low density and high centrality, and are developing themes.
c. Emerging or Declining Themes: These themes are positioned in the lower left area, with both low centrality and low density, representing new or less-discussed topics.
d. Niche Themes: These themes are positioned in the upper left area, with high density but low centrality, representing different topics within the field.
2.3.Ethical Procedure
This research does not require an ethics committee document.
3. Results
The findings of the study are explained and discussed according to four sub-objectives.
3.1. Findings Related to WoSCC Database Thematic Map Analysis
Figure 1: WoSCC Database Thematic Map
In Figure 1, the conceptual structure of research related to “sharenting” accessed in the WoSCC database is explained in the thematic map analysis under four thematic categories.
The concepts of “adolescents”, “age”, and “communication” in the area labelled “Motor Themes” in the upper right corner of the map, along with the concepts of “experiences”, “privacy”, and “children”, reflect the focus of sharenting studies.
In the “Niche Themes” area at the top left of the map, specialized topics such as “hate”, “identification”, and “source credibility” are represented with high density but low centrality values. This finding shows that these themes are studied in depth in specific areas of expertise but have limited interaction with the general “sharenting” literature.
The “Basic Themes” section in the bottom right corner of the map includes concepts such as “media”, “internet”, and “impact”, which have high centrality but relatively low density values, indicating that these are emerging research topics in the field.
The presence of the word “Instagram” in the “Emerging or Declining Themes” area at the bottom left of the map indicates that research on the evolution and impact of social media platforms is a rising trend. This thematic distribution provides an important framework for understanding the interdisciplinary nature of “sharenting” research and its conceptual evolution over time.
3.2. Findings Related to WoSCC Database TreeMap Analysis
Figure 2: WoSCC Database TreeMap
The frequency and percentage distribution of keywords in Figure 2 reflect prominent trends and research gaps in the field of research. According to the results of the WoSCC database TreeMap analysis in the field of “sharenting”, the terms “experiences” (7%), “privacy” (7%), “children” (6%), and “media” (6%) are the terms with the highest frequency values, indicating that the core focus of “sharenting” research converges around the concepts of experiences, privacy, children, and media. Following this, the prominence of the concepts of “parents” (5%), “Facebook” (5%), “mother” (3%), “boundaries” (3%), and “internet” (3%) indicates that children’s media experiences are shaped within the family context. It also highlights the importance of parents’ (especially mothers’) attitudes towards social media and internet use at this point.
When thematic groupings are examined in the context of conceptual relationships, words related to “family”, “technology” and “digital platforms”, and “risks and ethical concerns” stand out. In contrast, the lower usage of words such as “race” (1%), “culture” (2%), “abortion” (1%), “addiction” (1%), and “victimization” (1%) in the studies indicates that these concepts are emerging topics in studies related to the field of “sharenting”.
3.3. Findings Related to Scopus Database Thematic Map Analysis
Figure 3: Scopus Database Thematic Map
According to the results of the Thematic Map analysis of the studies accessed from the Scopus database in Figure 3, the conceptual structure is explained by four thematic areas:
The themes in the area named “Motor Themes” in the upper right of the map represent both well-developed and central topics in the research area. The themes “human”, “child”, and “female” are in this category. This result shows that the topics of humans, children, and women are well-established in the literature and are the focus of the field. In addition, the themes “social media”, “child parent relation”, and “humans” are also among the central themes, but tend to be slightly less developed.
In the “Niche Themes” area in the upper left of the map, the themes of “sharenting”, “photo sharing”, and “social networking (online)” are developed niche themes in the context of social media and online sharing. These themes represent a specific subfield and have more limited connections to the rest of the field.
In the area grouped as “Basic Themes” at the bottom right of the map, “children online” is included, indicating that issues related to children’s online behavior or digital environments are an important but developing theme.
In the “Emerging or Declining Themes” area at the bottom left of the map, the themes “attention”, “gender” and “family” are included. This indicates that these themes are either not yet sufficiently developed in the literature or that interest in these topics is declining in research.
The map shows that the themes of “children”, “human”, and “women” are fundamental and driving topics in the field, while the themes of “social media” and “online sharing” are niche areas. Children’s online behavior is among the growing and emerging core themes. Themes such as “family” and “attention” appear to be developing or declining topics.
3.4. Findings Related to Scopus Database TreeMap Analysis
Figure 4: Scopus Database TreeMap
Figure 4 shows the results of the TreeMap analysis of studies obtained from the Scopus database, systematically revealing the thematic distribution of academic studies in the field of “sharenting”. According to the analysis results, the terms “child” (9%) and “social media” (9%) have the highest frequency values. This finding indicates that the primary focus of studies in this field is children and social media platforms. Furthermore, the prominence of the terms “human” (8%) and “female” (6%) reveals that the studies emphasize individuals, particularly the female (mother) perspective.
Thematic analysis results show that the words “social network” (3%), “photo sharing” (1%), “child parent relation” (3%), “parents” (2%), “family” (1%), “female” (6%), “male” (4%), and “adolescent” (2%) stand out in the research, which is considered to be in line with the scope of the concept of ‘sharenting,’ emphasizing the impact of photo sharing on social media tools and its effect on child-family interaction, with a particular focus on adolescents. The presence of terms such as “privacy” (4%) and “identity theft” (1%) indicates that privacy and security dimensions are important in studies on the topic of “sharenting”, but that these issues are not sufficiently addressed in the research. One of the findings of the study is that it provides clues about geographical distribution. Terms such as “Spain” (1%) and “Czech Republic” (1%) suggest that research on this topic is concentrated in certain geographical areas. On the other hand, low-frequency concepts such as “legal aspect” (1%) and “mental health” (1%) indicate that more research is needed on the legal dimensions and psychological effects of “sharenting”.
4. Discussion And Conclusion
In this study, a bibliometric analysis was conducted on the keyword “sharenting” in the context of studies accessed from the WoSCC and Scopus databases. The results of bibliometric analyses may vary depending on the database used.[37] For this purpose, the study analyzed how the concept of “sharenting” was addressed in the literature and which keywords it was associated with, separately for each database. Thematic Map and TreeMap analyses conducted using the Biblimetrix software formed the framework of the study. This section presents a discussion of the findings and comparative conclusions.
When comparing the four categories according to the thematic mapping performed for both databases used in the study, it was found that in the Motor Themes area, WoSCC database focused on more demographic and communication-oriented themes such as “adolescents”, “age”, and “communication”, which are more demographic and communication-focused themes, and “experiences”, “privacy”, and “children”, which focus on children’s media experiences and privacy. These findings suggest that the concept of “sharenting” is more prominent for adolescents. Ouvrein and Verswijvel[38] concluded in their study that babies and children are shared by their parents simply because they are cute, and that the fact that they will not be recognized when they grow up reduces the negative effects of “sharenting”. In addition to this, adolescents value their peers’ opinions more than their parents’ opinions, and the fear of being criticized by their peers[39] is thought to be a topic of interest in studies conducted in the context of “sharenting” because they can express their opinions. Furthermore, the concept of privacy has emerged as a key theme in studies related to “sharenting”. This finding is supported by numerous studies. Indeed, research has shown that as parents’ popularity on social media increases, they tend to violate their children’s privacy rights more frequently.[40] Another finding related to this topic is that 67% of parents have shared at least one photo of their children on social media that could be considered inappropriate.[41] In contrast to this result, Conti et al[42]. found that 93% of parents participating in their study were unaware of the legal regulations regarding “sharenting” and the risks it could pose to their children. In addition to all this, children’s right to privacy was established in the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child in 1989. According to the Convention, children have the right to legal protection against attacks that may harm their dignity and reputation.[43] At this point, it is necessary to maintain a balance between parental authority and children’s digital autonomy in digital media, and to protect children’s rights to privacy, consent, and to be forgotten.[44]
In the analysis conducted in the Scopus database, themes such as “human”, “child”, and “female” were identified in the Motor Themes field, along with themes such as “social media”, “child parent relation”, and “humans”. Based on the advanced nature of the Motor Themes field and its focus, it was concluded that the concepts identified were strongly related to the concept of “sharenting”. The findings show that the theme of “female” is significantly related to “sharenting”. Research shows that the emphasis on mothers or women has become more prominent in recent years, as evidenced by the increasing number of posts by mothers on social networks such as Instagram.[45] Despite the fact that fathers are increasingly involved in child-rearing due to social change and transformation[46], mothers still maintain their identity as the primary caregivers for children.[47] This situation is highlighted in “sharenting” studies as a factor that increases social pressure on mothers. In particular, the fact that social media influencers involve their children in digital labor to generate income and the negative impact of such sharing on maternal mental health are significant findings in studies on this topic.[48] Another noteworthy finding in the research results is the theme of “child-parent relationship” in studies on “sharenting”. In relation to this theme, the research indicates that parents’ sharing may have negative consequences when the child grows up, as well as cause resentment or conflict in the parent-child relationship.[49] These themes that emerged in the Motor Domain for both databases are important themes that reflect the scope of the topic related to “sharenting”.
In the study, within the context of Thematic Analysis in the Niche Themes field, topics requiring specific expertise, which have gained depth in the literature but have limited connection to the general field, emerge in both analyses. Therefore, according to the data obtained from the WoSCC database, more critical themes such as “hate”, “identification”, and “source credibility” are found, while according to the mapping related to the Scopus database, themes such as “sharenting”, “photo sharing”, and “social networking (online)” that focus on social media sharing stand out. In studies on hate speech related to “sharenting”, it is emphasized that the reason for the hatred and anger towards parents sharing embarrassing content about their children is the concern that children may be exposed to peer bullying and that this situation may negatively affect their psychosocial development.[50] Along with this, the concept of “identification” is also one of the findings that stands out in the research as a topic that needs to be addressed in studies related to “sharenting”. In parallel with this topic, “identification” is quite important because children have the right to sue their parents in the future to request the removal of their identities from social media under the right to be forgotten on social media.[51] Although there is a relationship between “source credibility” and “sharenting”, there are not yet sufficient findings in research. In connection with this topic, the source credibility theory emphasizes that the characteristics of shared content are effective in determining the gender of the sharing parent through comments made by users and followers.[52] Additionally, according to the theory, the effect of source credibility on communication outputs is moderated by the gender variable.[53]
Ducoffe’s advertising value model, like the source credibility theory, is among the topics that have not yet been sufficiently addressed in influencer marketing strategies. However, mothers sharing both their private lives and their children on social media increases their credibility and thus the success of influencer-mothers.[54] For this reason, advertising to children is seen as an important topic in the field of marketing.[55] However, the concept of “sharenting” is currently being researched in the literature as a new concept in different contexts, referring to the sharing of children’s photos or videos on social media.[56] At this point, children’s privacy is considered important in the context of the subject.[57] These findings show that the lack of sufficient research on legal regulations regarding parental sharing and the conscious use of social media tools in relation to the concept of “sharenting” draws attention to the gap in the subject and sheds light on future research.
The prominence of concepts such as “sharenting”, “photo sharing”, and “social networking (online)” in the research is an important finding in terms of establishing the basis of the subject context. Although studies have focused on mothers in relation to the subject area, when mothers and fathers, who form the foundation of the family[58], are considered together, the father’s interaction with social media also becomes important. Indeed, it has been observed that when fathers have their first child, they feel lonely due to their instinct to protect the mother and baby.[59] Therefore, the three concepts identified through Scopus data, which are the main themes of research on “sharenting” and stand out in different samples, are included in the findings because they are not specific concepts. However, the limited number of studies conducted on this subject area contributes to its current significance.
In terms of basic themes, according to WoSCC database results, broad and central topics such as “media”, “internet”, and “impact” are included, but their level of development is relatively low. According to Scopus database results, the theme of “children online” represents the emerging field of research on children’s digital environments and online behavior. Based on these results, it is thought that studies related to “sharenting” will eventually focus on online behavioral risk or opportunity factors in children. With the dominance of artificial intelligence, it is predicted that by 2030, “sharenting” behavior will increase the risk of identity theft and online fraud, and that this behavior will account for two-thirds of identity fraud.[60] In parallel with this issue, it has been determined that parents’ “sharenting” behavior begins before the child is born, while the child is still in the womb, and that this situation causes the child’s digital identity to form during the prenatal period, leading to “digital kidnapping”.[61] In addition, it is thought that the digital identity formed by parents sharing their children from infancy onwards may be examined by employers or universities in the future, which could be embarrassing for children.[62] In light of this information, future studies in this field are expected to focus more on mental health and behavioral problems related to online risk factors specific to children.
According to the results of the WoSCC and Scopus databases, when Emerging or Declining Themes are examined, topics that are not yet developed in the literature or are declining in research interest are noteworthy in both databases. According to the data obtained from the WoSCC database, the inclusion of the concept of “Instagram” in this field may indicate that research on the evolution and impact of social media platforms is increasing. According to the analysis of the Scopus database, the presence of the themes “attention”, “gender”, and “family” in this category suggests that these themes are either not yet sufficiently developed or have relatively low levels of interest. Based on these findings, it is thought that these concepts are either frequently questioned or not yet sufficiently clarified in studies related to “sharenting”. These findings are consistent with Metin[63], who states that families create a public image on social media while, in line with Goffman’s[64] concept of performance teams, concealing conflicts and tensions in their private lives; social media algorithms further shape families’ online performances, guiding content production and the presentation of family dynamics in an idealized manner to gain more likes and interactions. In this context, the concepts emerging in the sharenting literature are considered critical for understanding families’ online behaviors and social media strategies. Accordingly, the yet-to-be-illuminated concepts related to sharenting are seen as crucial for comprehending families’ online behaviors and social media strategies.
Based on TreeMap analysis in the study, when WoSCC data is examined, the terms with the highest frequency values, namely “experiences”, “privacy”, “children”, and “media”, indicate that the main focus of “sharenting” studies is shaped within the framework of children’s media experiences, privacy, and media use. Other prominent concepts such as “parents”, “Facebook”, “mother”, “boundaries”, and “internet” indicate that the concept of “sharenting” is being researched in the context of family, particularly in relation to parents’ (mostly mothers’) use of social media and the internet. In the WoSCC analysis, family, technology, digital platforms, risks, and ethical concerns emerge as thematic areas, while low-frequency terms such as “race”, “culture”, “abortion”, “addiction”, and “victimization” represent research areas that are still underdeveloped or limited in the literature within the scope of “sharenting”.
According to Scopus data, the highest frequency of the concepts “child” and “social media” indicates that children and social media platforms are central to studies related to “sharenting”. The high rates of the terms “human” and “female” reveal that the studies are individual-focused and particularly concentrated on the female (mother) perspective. The thematic prominence of the concepts of “social network”, “photo sharing”, “child-parent relationship”, “parents”, “family”, “male”, and “adolescent” in the research indicates that studies related to the field of “sharenting” are examined in the context of photo sharing on social media tools, child-family relationships, and especially adolescence. Scopus data also reveals that the relationship between the concept of “sharenting” and the concepts of “privacy” and “identity theft” has been examined, indicating that privacy and security dimensions are important in this field, but that these topics have not been studied in depth in the research. Geographical terms such as “Spain” and “Czech Republic” indicate that studies are concentrated in specific regions, while “legal aspect” and “mental health” reveal significant research gaps in the legal dimensions and psychological effects of the concept of “sharenting”.
According to the research results, the TreeMap analysis of “sharenting” as a topic scope shows that concepts such as privacy, confidentiality, and digital identity theft support each other holistically. Cyberbullying is considered significant in this context. Cyberbullying is regarded as a serious issue for children, as it involves aggressive behaviors that negatively impact their well-being. Indeed, depression, anxiety disorders, low self-esteem, loneliness, academic failure, substance use, self-harming behaviors, and suicidal thoughts in children are psychological problems caused by cyberbullying.[65] Research shows that those who resort to cyberbullying are mostly individuals who have experienced victimization related to bullying. It is evident that online and offline experiences related to cyberbullying are strongly interrelated and also bring with them online risks such as doxing, hate speech, and cyberstalking for children.[66] Furthermore, Mitchell et al.[67] emphasize power imbalances related to cyberbullying, revealing that most children who experience online bullying are also exposed to bullying in face-to-face settings, and that some face-to-face bullying is later shared online.
In conclusion, it is emphasized that internet content and digital tools are not designed with children’s needs and rights in mind, and that although these tools have potential benefits, they also pose serious risks to children, which must be mitigated. In addition, as countries become more integrated with technology and technological developments accelerate, it is predicted that the need to protect children in online environments will become increasingly urgent.[68] Today, the phenomenon of “sharenting” has become an issue that both families and policymakers need to address, as it has a long-term impact on children’s mental health. This study aims to examine the impact of the concept of “sharenting”, which is becoming increasingly prevalent in the digital age, on children through bibliometric analysis. Based on the results of the research, it is considered important to pay attention to the protection of children’s rights and to ensure global intervention for the protection of personal data in order to provide a more secure life for children.
Bibliography
Åberg, Erica - Jarna, Huvila. “Hip Children, Good Mothers – Children’s Clothing as Capital Investment?”. Young Consumers 20/3 (2019), 153-166. https://doi.org/10.1108/YC-06-2018-00816
Acar, Ömer - Ahmet Ayhan Koyuncu. “A New Risk to Children: The Motherhood of Social Media”. İstanbul Nişantaşı University Journal of Social Sciences 13/1 (2025), 81-96. https://doi.org/10.52122/nisantasisbd.1622129
Adawiah, Laila Robiatul - Yeni Rachmawati. “Parenting Program to Protect Children’s Privacy: The Phenomenon of Sharenting Children on Social Media”. JPUD- Jurnal Pendidikan Usia Dini 15/1 (2021), 162-180. https://doi.org/10.21009/JPUD.151.09
American Academy of Pediatrics. “Researchers Caution About Potential Harms of Parents’ Online Posts About Children”. National Conference & Exhibition (October 2016), Access Date: 10 Ağustos 2025. https://www.aap.org/en-us/about-the-aap/aap-pressroom/pages/researchers-caution-about-potential-harms-of-parents-online-posts-about-children.aspx
Ammari, Tawfiq - Sarita, Schoenebeck. “Understanding and Supporting Fathers and Fatherhood on Social Media Sites”. Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 1905–1914. Seoul: ACM, 2015. https://doi.org/10.1145/2702123.2702205
Ammari, Tawfiq et al. “Managing Children’s Online Identities: How Parents Decide What to Disclose About Their Children Online”. In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1895-1904. 2015. https://doi.org/10.1145/2702123.2702325.
Archer, Catherine - Kai-Ti, Kao. “Mother, Baby and Facebook Makes Three: Does Social Media Provide Social Support for New Mothers?” Media International Australia 168/1 (2018), 122-139. https://doi.org/10.1177/1329878X18783016
Aria, Massimo - Corrado, Cuccurullo. “Bibliometrix: An R-Tool for Comprehensive Science Mapping Analysis”. Journal of Informetrics 11/4 (2017), 959-975. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2017.08.007
Assaker, Guy. “Age and Gender Differences in Online Travel Reviews and User-Generated-Content (UGC) Adoption: Extending the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) with Credibility Theory”. Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management 29/4 (2020), 428–449. https://doi.org/10.1080/19368623.2019.1653807
Aydin, Ebubekir Erşad - Muna, Silav. “Bibliometric Analysis of Published Studies on Cultural Heritage and Sustainable Conservation”. Çeşm-i Cihan: Tarih Kültür ve Sanat Araştırmaları Dergisi E-Dergisi 11/2 (2022), 79-92. https://doi.org/10.30804/cesmicihan.1567885
Belk, Russell W. “Possessions and the Extended Self”. Journal of Consumer Research 15/2 (1988), 139–168. https://doi.org/10.1086/209154
Biter, Burcu. “Child Rights Violations in the Age of Social Media: ‘Sharenting’”. Journal of Media Literacy Studies 4/1 (2025), 56-72. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15827572
Blum Ross, Alicia - Sonia, Livingstone. “‘Sharenting,’ Parent Blogging, and the Boundaries of the Digital Self”. Popular Communication 15/2 (2017), 110-125. https://doi.org/10.1080/15405702.2016.1223300
Boufares Tayaa, Siwar - Rym, Bouzaabia. “The Determinants of Tunisian Influencer-Mompreneurs’ Success: An Exploratory Study of a New Form of Female Web Entrepreneurship on Instagram”. Journal of Entrepreneurship in Emerging Economies 14/5 (2022), 926-949. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEEE-01-2022-0028
Boyd, Danah. “Friends, Friendsters, and Top 8: Writing Community into Being on Social Network Sites”. First Monday 11/12 (2006), 2. https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v11i12.1418
Brosch, Anna. “When the Child Is Born into the Internet: Sharenting as a Growing Trend among Parents on Facebook”. The New Educational Review 43 (2016), 225-235. https://doi.org/10.15804/tner.2016.43.1.19
Cameron, Paul. The Life Cycle: Perspective and Commentary. Oceanside, NY: Dabor Science Publications, 1977.
Charlotte, Claire - Heather, Anderson. “Mothering on Facebook: Exploring the Privacy/Openness Paradox”. Social Media + Society 3/2 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305117707187
Collins. “Definition of ‘Sharenting’”. Collins English Dictionary, 2025. Erişim 10 Ağustos 2025. https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/sharenting
Conti, Maria Giulia, et al. “Sharenting: Characteristics and Awareness of Parents Publishing Sensitive Content of Their Children on Online Platforms”. Italian Journal of Pediatrics 50/1 (2024), 135. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13052-024-01704-y
Coughlan, Sean. “‘Sharenting’ Puts Young at Risk of Online Fraud”. BBC News, 21 May 2018. Access Date August 8, 2025. https://www.bbc.com/news/education-44153754
Davidson - Wall, Nadine. “‘Mum, Seriously!’: Sharenting the New Social Trend with No Opt-Out”. In 2018 Debating Communities and Social Networks OUA Conference, April 1-11, 2018.
Dedeoglu, Bekir Bora. “Are Information Quality and Source Credibility Really Important for Shared Content on Social Media? The Moderating Role of Gender”. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management 31/1 (2019), 513-534. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCHM-10-2017-0691
Derviş, Hamid. “Bibliometric Analysis Using Bibliometrix an R Package”. Journal of Scientometric Research 8/3 (2020), 156-160. https://doi.org/10.5530/jscires.8.3.24
Donthu, Naveen, et al. “Research Constituents, Intellectual Structure, and Collaboration Patterns in Journal of International Marketing: An Analytical Retrospective”. Journal of International Marketing 29/2 (2021), 1-25. https://doi.org/10.1177/1069031X211004234
Duggan, Maeve, et al. “Parents and Social Media”. Pew Research Center, July 16, 2015. Access Date 10 August 2025. https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2015/07/16/parents-and-social-media/
Ergin, Büşra, et al. “My First Step to Know My Child ‘Pregnant School’: A Netnographic Analysis”. Pegem Journal of Education and Instruction 15/1 (2025), 93-103. https://doi.org/10.47750/pegegog.15.01.09
Erişir, Rabia Merve - Erişir, Deniz. “Children and The New Media: Example of “Sharenting” Specified to Instagram”. New Media 4 (2018), 50–64. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/download/article-file/1177473
Esfandiari, Maryam - Junxi, Yao. “Sharenting as a Double-Edged Sword: Evidence from Iran”. Information, Communication & Society 26/15 (2022), 2942-2960. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2022.2129268
Fox, Ashley K. - Mariea Grubbs, Hoy. “Smart Devices, Smart Decisions? Implications of Parents’ Sharenting for Children’s Online Privacy: An Investigation of Mothers”. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing 38/4 (2019), 414-432. https://doi.org/10.1177/0743915619858290
Goffman, Erving. Gündelik Yaşamda Benliğin Sunumu. çev. B. Cezar. İstanbul: Metis Yayıncılık, 2014.
Hess, Markus, et al. “Gender-Specific Macro- and Micro-Level Processes in the Transmission of Gender Role Orientation in Adolescence: The Role of Fathers”. European Journal of Developmental Psychology 11/2 (2014), 211-226. https://doi.org/10.1080/17405629.2013.879055
Jamaluddin, Siti Zaharah, et al. “Sharenting in Malaysia: Balancing Parental Rights and Children’s Privacy in the Digital Age”. Hasanuddin Law Review 11/2 (2025), 161-182. https://doi.org/10.20956/halrev.v11i2.6285
Kan, Murat. “The Psychological Impacts of Cyberbullying in Adolescents”. Interactive Science: Journal of Interdisciplinary Research and Studies 4 (2024), 83-124. https://doi.org/10.61749/JIRAS-12.83-124
Khandpur, Neha, et al. “Fathers’ Child Feeding Practices: A Review of the Evidence”. Appetite 78 (2014), 110–121. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2014.03.015
Latipah, Eva, et al. “Elaborating Motive and Psychological Impact of Sharenting in Millennial Parents”. Universal Journal of Educational Research 8 (2020), 4807-4817. https://doi.org/10.13189/ujer.2020.081052
Lazard, Lisa, et al. “Sharenting: Pride, Affect and the Day-to-Day Politics of Digital Mothering”. Social and Personality Psychology Compass 13/4 (2019), e12443. https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12443
Leckart, Steven. “Facebook-Free Baby”. Wall Street Journal, 12 May 2012. Access August 10, 2025. https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052702304451104577392041180138910
Lim, Sohye - Byron, Reeves. “Being in the Game: Effects of Avatar Choice and Point of View on Psychophysiological Responses during Play”. Media Psychology 12/4 (2009), 348–370. https://doi.org/10.1080/15213260903287242
Lipu, Merike - Andra, Siibak. “‘Take It Down!’: Estonian Parents’ and Pre-Teens’ Opinions and Experiences with Sharenting”. Media International Australia 170/1 (2019), 57-67. https://doi.org/10.1177/1329878X19828366
Marasli, Müge, et al. “Parents’ Shares on Social Networking Sites about Their Children: Sharenting”. The Anthropologist 24/2 (2016), 399-406.
Mary, Sophie M., et al. “Representations of Motherhood in the Media: A Systematic Literature Review”. Information, Communication & Society (2024). https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2024.2348020
Metin, Osman. “Algorithmic Family from a Digital Dramaturgy Perspective”. Afyon Kocatepe University Journal of Social Sciences 27 (Aile Özel Sayısı) (2025), 219-233. https://doi.org/10.32709/akusosbil.1729011
Miller, Blake. “The Creepiest New Corner of Instagram: Role-Playing with Baby Photos”. Fast Company, 2014. Access August 10, 2025. https://www.fastcompany.com/3036073/the-creepiest
Mitchell, Kimberly J., et al. “The Role of Technology in Peer Harassment: Does It Amplify Harm for Youth?”. Psychology of Violence 6/2 (2016), 193. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0039317
Mongeon, Philippe - Ade`le, Paul-Hus. “The Journal Coverage of Web of Science and Scopus: A Comparative Analysis”. Scientometrics 106/1 (2016), 213-228. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1765-5
Moon, Rachel Y., et al. “Mothers’ Perceptions of the Internet and Social Media as Sources of Parenting and Health Information: Qualitative Study”. Journal of Medical Internet Research 21/7 (2019), e14289. https://doi.org/10.2196/14289
Motevalli, Saeid, et al. “Parents’ Sharenting Behaviours: A Systematic Review of Motivations, Attitudes, Perceptions, and Impression Management Perspectives”. F1000Research 14 (2025), 448. https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.161540.2
New York Post. “‘Sharenting’ Can Leave Your Baby Exposed to ID Theft Risk — Before They’re Even Born: Study”. New York Post, 3 April 2024. Access August 10, 2025. https://nypost.com/2024/04/03/lifestyle/posting-ultrasounds-online-leaves-babies-exposed-to-id-theft-risk/
Nominet. “Today’s Children Will Feature in Almost 1,000 Online Photos by the Time They Reach Age Five”. 26 May 2015. Access August 10, 2025. https://nominet.uk/news/todays-children-will-feature-in-almost-1000-online-photos/?utm_source
Ouvrein, Gaëlle - Karen, Verswijvel. “Sharenting: Parental Adoration or Public Humiliation? A Focus Group Study on Adolescents’ Experiences with Sharenting against the Background of Their Own Impression Management”. Children and Youth Services Review 99 (2019), 319–327. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2019.02.011
Praveen, Sona Mariam - Dharani, M. “Navigating the Digital Sphere: A Systematic Review of the Impact of Parenting-Based Social Media Influencers on Maternal Mental Health and Child Commercialization”. Journal of Indian Association for Child and Adolescent Mental Health (2025). https://doi.org/10.1177/09731342251340521
R Core Team. R: The R Project for Statistical Computing. Vienna, Austria, 2025. Access August 10, 2025. https://www.r-project.org/
Rahill, Stephanie, et al. “A Review of the Influence of Fathers on Children’s Eating Behaviours and Dietary Intake”. Appetite 147 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2019.104540
Saygılı, Esra Gökçe - Üstüner Top, Fadime. “Examining Studies on Children Sharing on Social Media by Their Parents”. Interdisciplinary Journal of Child Rights Research 5/1 (2025), 24-41. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/download/article-file/4918060
Steinberg, Laurence. Adolescence. 4th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill Humanities, 1996.
Steinberg, Stacey B. “Sharenting: Children’s Privacy in the Age of Social Media”. Emory Law Journal 66 (2016), 839. https://scholarlycommons.law.emory.edu/elj/vol66/iss4/2
StGeorge, Jennifer M. - Fletcher, Richard J. “Fathers Online: Learning about Fatherhood through the Internet”. The Journal of Perinatal Education 20/3 (2011), 154-162. https://doi.org/10.1891/1058-1243.20.3.154
Taylor, Charles R. - Carlson, Les. “The Future of Advertising Research: New Directions and Research Needs”. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice 29/1 (2021), 51-62. https://doi.org/10.1080/10696679.2020.1860681
United Nations Children’s Fund [UNICEF]. Protecting Children from Violence and Exploitation in Relation to the Digital Environment: Policy Brief. UNICEF, 2024. Accessed August 5, 2025. https://www.unicef.org/media/164421/file/Policy%20brief_Protecting%20children%20from%20violence%20in%20the%20digital%20environment.pdf.pdf
United Nations General Assembly. Convention on the Rights of the Child. 1989. Accessed August 8 2025. https://sithi.org/medias/files/projects/sithi/law/Convention%20on%20the%20Rights%20of%20the%20Child.ENG.pdf
Verswijvel, Karen, et al. “Sharenting, Is It a Good or a Bad Thing? Understanding How Adolescents Think and Feel about Sharenting on Social Network Sites”. Children and Youth Services Review 104 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2019.104401
Walrave, Michel, et al. “The Limits of Sharenting: Exploring Parents’ and Adolescents’ Sharenting Boundaries through the Lens of Communication Privacy Management Theory”. Frontiers in Education 7 (2022), 803393. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2022.803393
[1] Alicia Blum Ross - Sonia Livingstone, “‘Sharenting,’ Parent Blogging, and the Boundaries of the Digital Self”, Popular Communication 15/2 (2017), 110-125.
[2] Müge Marasli et al., “Parents’ Shares on Social Networking Sites about Their Children: Sharenting”, The Anthropologist 24/2 (2016), 399-406.
[3] Danah Boyd, “Friends, Friendsters, and Top 8: Writing Community into Being on Social Network Sites”, First Monday 11/12 (2006), 2.
[4] Lisa Lazard et al., “Sharenting: Pride, Affect and the Day-to-Day Politics of Digital Mothering”, Social and Personality Psychology Compass 13/4 (2019), e12443.
[5] Steven Leckart, “Facebook-Free Baby”, Wall Street Journal (12 May 2012), (Access Date: 10 August 2025).
[6] Collins, “Definition of ‘Sharenting’,” (2025), (Access Date: 10 August 2025).
[7] Nominet, “Today’s Children Will Feature in Almost 1,000 Online Photos by the Time They Reach Age Five”, 26 May 2015, (Access Date: 8 August 2025).
[8] Rabia Merve Erişir - Deniz Erişir, “Children and The New Media: Example of “Sharenting”, Specified to Instagram, New Media 4 (2018), 50-64.
[9] American Academy of Pediatrics, “Researchers Caution About Potential Harms of Parents’ Online Posts About Children”, National Conference & Exhibition, October 2016, (Access Date: 10 August 2025).
[10] Anna Brosch, “When the Child Is Born into the Internet: Sharenting as a Growing Trend among Parents on Facebook”, The New Educational Review 43 (2016), 225-235.
[11] Tawfiq Ammari et al., “Managing Children’s Online Identities: How Parents Decide What to Disclose About Their Children Online”, in Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 1895-1904, 2015; Merike Lipu - Andra Siibak, “‘Take It Down!’: Estonian Parents’ and Pre-Teens’ Opinions and Experiences with Sharenting”, Media International Australia 170/1 (2019), 57-67.
[12] Markus Hess et al., “Gender-Specific Macro- and Micro-Level Processes in the Transmission of Gender Role Orientation in Adolescence: The Role of Fathers”, European Journal of Developmental Psychology 11/2 (2014), 211–226.
[13] Catherine Archer - Kai-Ti Kao, “Mother, Baby and Facebook Makes Three: Does Social Media Provide Social Support for New Mothers?”, Media International Australia 168/1 (2018), 122–139; Büşra Ergin et al., “My First Step to Know My Child ‘Pregnant School’: A Netnographic Analysis”, Pegem Journal of Education and Instruction 15/1 (2025), 93–103; Eva Latipah et al., “Elaborating Motive and Psychological Impact of Sharenting in Millennial Parents”, Universal Journal of Educational Research 8 (2020), 4807–4817.
[14] Maeve Duggan et al., “Parents and Social Media”, 16 July 2015, (Access Date: 10 August 2025).
[15] Alicia Blum Ross- Sonia Livingstone, “‘Sharenting,’ Parent Blogging, and the Boundaries of the Digital Self,” 110-125.
[16] Nadine Davidson - Wall, “Mum, Seriously!’: Sharenting the New Social Trend with No Opt-Out”, in 2018 Debating Communities and Social Networks OUA Conference, Nisan 2018, 1-11.
[17] Davidson-Wall, “Mum, Seriously!’, 1-11; Stacey B. Steinberg, “Sharenting: Children’s Privacy in the Age of Social Media”, Emory Law Journal 66 (2016), 839.
[18] B. Miller, “The Creepiest New Corner of Instagram: Role-Playing with Baby Photos”, 2014, (Access Date: 8 August 2025).
[19] Charlotte Chalklen - Heather Anderson, “Mothering on Facebook: Exploring the Privacy/Openness Paradox”, Social Media + Society 3/2 (2017), 2056305117707187; Burcu Biter, “Child Rights Violations in the Age of Social Media: “Sharenting””, Journal of Media Literacy Studies 4/1 (2025), 56-72.
[20] Sophie M. Mary et al., “Representations of Motherhood in the Media: A Systematic Literature Review”, Information, Communication & Society (2024).
[21] Saeid Motevalli et al., “Parents’ Sharenting Behaviours: A Systematic Review of Motivations, Attitudes, Perceptions, and Impression Management Perspectives”, F1000Research 14 (2025), 448.
[22] United Nations General Assembly, Convention on the Rights of the Child, 1989, (Erişim: 8 Ağustos 2025).
[23] Gaëlle Ouvrein - Karen Verswijvel, “Sharenting: Parental Adoration or Public Humiliation? A Focus Group Study on Adolescents’ Experiences with Sharenting against the Background of Their Own Impression Management”, Children and Youth Services Review 99 (2019), 319-327.
[24] Esra Gökçe Saygılı - Fatma Üstüner Top, “Examining Studies on Children Sharing on Social Media by Their Parents”, Journal of Interdisciplinary Research on Children’s Rights 5/1 (2025), 24–41.
[25] Ömer Acar - Ahmet Ayhan Koyuncu, “A New Risk To Children: The Motherhood Of Social Media”, İstanbul Nişantaşı University Journal of Social Sciences 13/1 (2025), 81–96.
[26] Russell W. Belk, “Possessions and the Extended Self”, Journal of Consumer Research 15/2 (1988), 139-168.
[27] Belk, “Possessions and the Extended Self, 139-168.
[28] Sohye Lim - Byron Reeves, “Being in the Game: Effects of Avatar Choice and Point of View on Psychophysiological Responses during Play”, Media Psychology 12/4 (2009), 348-370.
[29] Erica Åberg - Jarna Huvila, “Hip Children, Good Mothers–Children’s Clothing as Capital Investment?”, Young Consumers 20/3 (2019), 153-166.
[30] Paul Cameron, The Life Cycle: Perspective and Commentary (Oceanside, NY: Dabor Science Publications, 1977).
[31] Erving Goffman, Gündelik Yaşamda Benliğin Sunumu, çev. B. Cezar (İstanbul: Metis Yayıncılık, 2014).
[32] R Core Team, R: The R Project for Statistical Computing (Vienna, Austria: 2025), (Access Date: 5 August 2025).
[33] Massimo Aria - Corrado Cuccurullo, “Bibliometrix: An R-Tool for Comprehensive Science Mapping Analysis”, Journal of Informetrics 11/4 (2017), 959–975.
[34] Hamid Derviş, “Bibliometric Analysis Using Bibliometrix an R Package”, Journal of Scientometric Research 8/3 (2020), 156-160.
[35] Ebubekir Erşad Aydin - Muna Silav, “Bibliometric Analysis of Published Studies on Cultural Heritage and Sustainable Conservation”, Çeşm-i Cihan: Tarih Kültür ve Sanat Araştırmaları Dergisi E-Dergisi 11/2 (2022), 79-92.
[36] Naveen Donthu et al., “Research Constituents, Intellectual Structure, and Collaboration Patterns in Journal of International Marketing: An Analytical Retrospective”, Journal of International Marketing 29/2 (2021), 1-25.
[37] Philippe Mongeon - Adèle Paul-Hus, “The Journal Coverage of Web of Science and Scopus: A Comparative Analysis”, Scientometrics 106/1 (2016), 213-228.
[38] Ouvrein and Verswijvel, “Sharenting: Parental Adoration or Public Humiliation?”, 319-327.
[39] Laurence Steinberg, Adolescence, 4th ed. (New York: McGraw-Hill Humanities, 1996); Karen Verswijvel et al., “Sharenting, Is It a Good or a Bad Thing? Understanding How Adolescents Think and Feel about Sharenting on Social Network Sites”, Children and Youth Services Review 104 (2019), 104401.
[40] Stacey B. Steinberg, “Sharenting: Children’s Privacy in the Age of Social Media”, Emory Law Journal 66 (2016), 839.
[41] Anna Brosch, “When the Child Is Born into the Internet: Sharenting as a Growing Trend among Parents on Facebook”, The New Educational Review 43 (2016), 225-235.
[42] Maria Giulia Conti et al., “Sharenting: Characteristics and Awareness of Parents Publishing Sensitive Content of Their Children on Online Platforms”, Italian Journal of Pediatrics 50/1 (2024), 135.
[43] United Nations General Assembly, Convention on the Rights of the Child, 1989 (Access Date: 8 August 2025).
[44] Siti Zaharah Jamaluddin et al., “Sharenting in Malaysia: Balancing Parental Rights and Children’s Privacy in the Digital Age”, Hasanuddin Law Review 11/2 (2025), 161–182.
[45] Rachel Y. Moon et al., “Mothers’ Perceptions of the Internet and Social Media as Sources of Parenting and Health Information: Qualitative Study”, Journal of Medical Internet Research 21/7 (2019), e14289.
[46] Neha Khandpur et al., “Fathers’ Child Feeding Practices: A Review of the Evidence”, Appetite 78 (2014), 110-121.
[47] Stephanie Rahill et al., “A Review of the Influence of Fathers on Children’s Eating Behaviours and Dietary Intake”, Appetite 147 (2020), 104540.
[48] Sona Mariam Praveen - M, Dharani, “Navigating the Digital Sphere: A Systematic Review of the Impact of Parenting-Based Social Media Influencers on Maternal Mental Health and Child Commercialization”, Journal of Indian Association for Child and Adolescent Mental Health (2025), 09731342251340521.
[49] Verswijvel et al., “Sharenting, Is It a Good or a Bad Thing?,” 104403.
[50] Maryam Esfandiari - Junxi Yao, “Sharenting as a Double-Edged Sword: Evidence from Iran”, Information, Communication & Society 26/15 (2022), 2942-2960.
[51] Laila Robiatul Adawiah - Yeni Rachmawati, “Parenting Program to Protect Children’s Privacy: The Phenomenon of Sharenting Children on Social Media”, JPUD- Jurnal Pendidikan Usia Dini 15/1 (2021), 162-180.
[52] Bekir Bora Dedeoglu, “Are Information Quality and Source Credibility Really Important for Shared Content on Social Media? The Moderating Role of Gender”, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management 31/1 (2019), 513–534.
[53] Guy Assaker, “Age and Gender Differences in Online Travel Reviews and User-Generated-Content (UGC) Adoption: Extending the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) with Credibility Theory”, Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management 29/4 (2020), 428-449.
[54] Siwar Boufares Tayaa - Rym Bouzaabia, “The Determinants of Tunisian Influencer-Mompreneurs’ Success: An Exploratory Study of a New Form of Female Web Entrepreneurship on Instagram”, Journal of Entrepreneurship in Emerging Economies 14/5 (2022), 926-949.
[55] Charles R. Taylor - Les Carlson, “The Future of Advertising Research: New Directions and Research Needs”, Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice 29/1 (2021), 51-62.
[56] Alexa K. Fox - Mariea Grubbs Hoy, “Smart Devices, Smart Decisions? Implications of Parents’ Sharenting for Children’s Online Privacy: An Investigation of Mothers”, Journal of Public Policy & Marketing 38/4 (2019), 414-432.
[57] Tawfiq Ammari - Sarita Schoenebeck, “Understanding and Supporting Fathers and Fatherhood on Social Media Sites”, Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Seoul: Republic of Korea 2015), 1905-1914.
[58] Maeve Duggan et al., “Parents and Social Media”, Pew Research Center, 2015, (Access Date: 10 August 2025).
[59] Jennifer M. StGeorge - Richard J. Fletcher, “Fathers Online: Learning about Fatherhood through the Internet”, The Journal of Perinatal Education 20/3 (2011), 154-162.
[60] Sean Coughlan, “‘Sharenting’ Puts Young at Risk of Online Fraud”, BBC News, 21 May 2018, (Access Date: 08 August 2025).
[61] New York Post, “‘Sharenting’ Can Leave Your Baby Exposed to ID Theft Risk-Before They’re Even Born: Study”, 3 April 2024, (Access Date: 08 August 2025).
[62] Michel Walrave et al., “The Limits of Sharenting: Exploring Parents’ and Adolescents’ Sharenting Boundaries through the Lens of Communication Privacy Management Theory”, Frontiers in Education 7 (2022), 803393.
[63] Osman Metin, “Algorithmic Family from a Digital Dramaturgy Perspective”, Afyon Kocatepe University Journal of Social Sciences 27 (Aile Özel Sayısı) (2025), 219-233.
[64] Goffman, Gündelik Yaşamda Benliğin Sunumu, 2014.
[65] Murat Kan, “The Psychological Impacts of Cyberbullying in Adolescents”, Interactive Science: Journal of Interdisciplinary Research and Studies 4 (2024), 83–124.
[66] United Nations Children’s Fund [UNICEF], Protecting Children from Violence and Exploitation in Relation to the Digital Environment: Policy Brief (UNICEF, 2024), (Access Date: 08 August 2025).
[67] Kimberly J. Mitchell et al., “The Role of Technology in Peer Harassment: Does It Amplify Harm for Youth?”, Psychology of Violence 6/2 (2016), 193.
[68] UNICEF, Protecting Children from Violence and Exploitation in Relation to the Digital Environment: Policy Brief, 5.
