Life at age 17: initial findings from the Growing Up in Scotland study (Sweep 11)

5 Free time, social media and local area

This chapter sets out findings in relation to young people’s free time activities, use of and views on social media, and views on and use of their local area, including public transport.

5.1 Free time activities

To understand how young people spent their free time, they were asked which from a list of activities they had done in the last 12 months. They were asked not to include activities they did for work or got paid to do. As shown in Figure 5‑A, the activities mentioned the most often by young people were spending time with their friends without doing anything in particular (88.6%), gaming (79.3%), and watching live sport, going to a gig, or going to the theatre or cinema (77.8%).

Base: All young people (2356)

Young women were more likely than young men to read for enjoyment (54.9% compared with 34.0%), do arts and crafts activities (35.3% compared with 14.8%), and do voluntary or community work (34.5% compared with 21.4%). Conversely, young men were more likely than young women to spend time gaming (93.0% compared with 66.1%).

Young disabled people were less likely to have gone to a party or nightclub (50.8% compared with 68.8% of young non-disabled people). They were also less likely than young non-disabled people to have spent time with friends without doing much in particular (83.6% compared with 90.0%).

Those in less deprived areas were more likely to have done many of the activities listed than those in more deprived areas. This included reading for enjoyment (51.0% in SIMD 5 (the least deprived quintile) compared with 34.7% in SIMD 1), going to a party, pub or nightclub (72.9% in SIMD 5; 55.2% in SIMD 1); doing voluntary or community work (36.7% in SIMD 5; 20.0% in SIMD 1) and going to museums, galleries, historic places or stately homes (41.7% in SIMD 5; 25.3% in SIMD 1).

5.2 Social media and staying safe online

Young people were asked about their views on and use of social media. Social media was defined as social network sites, with Facebook and Instagram given as examples, and instant messengers, with WhatsApp, Snapchat, Skype and Facebook messenger provided as examples.

5.2.1 Social media use

Young people were asked how often they usually checked their social media or messaging apps after they had finished school, college or work. They were asked to answer based on days when they were attending school, work or training only. As shown in Figure 5‑B, 34.3% said they checked their social media or messaging at least every half hour, 31.7% checked at least every hour, while the remaining checked less often. As seen in the chart, young women reported checking their social media or messaging apps more frequently than young men – 38.3% of young women checked at least every half hour compared with 29.5% of young men.

Base: All young people (1910); young men (873); young women (1033)

Young disabled people checked their social media and messaging apps less frequently - 5.0% did not check social media or messaging apps at all compared with 0.6% of young non-disabled people.

5.2.2 Social media pros and cons

As shown in Figure 5‑C, a little under one in five young people ‘agreed’ or ‘agreed strongly’ that they felt anxious when they were not able to check social media or messaging apps regularly (18.4%) and that they cared about the number of likes, retweets or comments they get when they post on social media (17.0%). Just under three in ten (28.4%) ‘agreed’ or ‘agreed strongly’ that other people’s social media posts sometimes made them feel worse about their own life. More than nine in ten (93.1%) young people ‘agreed’ or ‘agreed strongly’ that social media helped them stay in touch with their friends.

Base: All young people (varies per item, 1917-1919)

Young women were more likely than young men to ‘agree’ or ‘agree strongly’ that they felt anxious when they were not able to check social media regularly (25.1% compared with 10.5%), that they cared about the number of likes, retweets or comments they get when they post on social media (24.2% compared with 8.5%), and that other people’s social media posts sometimes made them feel worse about their own life (41.4% compared with 12.9%).

Young disabled people were more likely than young non-disabled people to ‘agree’ or ‘agree strongly’ that they felt anxious when they were not able to check social media regularly (24.4% compared with 16.7%) and that other people’s statements sometimes made them feel worse about their own life (38.0% compared with 26.0%). Young disabled people were also slightly less positive than young non-disabled people about social media helping them stay in touch with their friends – 88.5% ‘agreed’ or ’agreed strongly’ compared with 94.3%.

5.2.3 Staying safe online

Young people were asked how much they knew about how to stay safe online. As shown in Figure 5‑D, almost all young people (97.8%) reported that they knew either ‘a great deal’ or ‘quite a lot’ about protecting themselves online. Young disabled people were a little less likely than young non-disabled people to say they knew ‘a great deal’ or ‘quite a lot’ (94.2% compared with 98.7%).

Similarly, almost all young people (94.8%) said they knew a great deal or quite a lot about protecting their information online. Young disabled people were less likely to say they knew ‘a great deal’ or ‘quite a lot’ (90.9%) than young non-disabled people (95.4%).

Base: All young people (2356)

5.3 Views and use of the local area

Young people were asked several questions about their views on and use of their local area.

5.3.1 Overall satisfaction with area lived in

Around three-quarters (77.1%) were either ‘very’ or ‘fairly’ satisfied with the area they lived in. Young disabled people were less likely to be either ‘very’ or ‘fairly’ satisfied with their local area (65.1%) than young non-disabled people (80.2%).

As shown in Figure 5‑E, there were lower levels of satisfaction among those in more deprived areas.

Base: All young people (2351); SIMD quintile 1 – 20% most deprived (422); 2 (399); 3 (384); 4 (558); SIMD quintile 5 – 20% least deprived (588)

5.3.2 Neighbourhood safety

Around three-quarters (77.9%) of young people felt either ‘very’ or ‘fairly’ safe walking in their neighbourhood after dark (Figure 5-F). Young women were more likely to feel unsafe (31.9% said they felt ‘a bit’ or ‘very’ unsafe compared with 12.0% of young men).

Base: All young people (2345); young men (1150); young women (1193)

Young disabled people were also more likely to feel unsafe: 39.0% felt ‘a bit’ or ‘very’ unsafe compared with 17.5% of young non-disabled people.

Differences by level of area deprivation were also apparent, with those in the most deprived areas more likely to feel unsafe. For example, 37.0% in SIMD 1 felt either ‘a bit’ or ‘very’ unsafe compared with 13.7% in SIMD 5.

5.3.3 Satisfaction with greenspace

When asked how satisfied they were with the availability in their local area of somewhere green and pleasant to walk or sit, a large majority of 84.4% said that they were ‘very’ or ‘fairly’ satisfied (Figure 5‑G).

Base: All young people (2351)

Young disabled people were less likely to be ‘very’ or ‘fairly’ satisfied with the available green space (77.1% compared with 85.6% of young non-disabled people). Those in less deprived areas were more satisfied with the availability of green space than those in more deprived areas – 65.9% of those in SIMD 1 were ‘very’ or ‘fairly’ satisfied compared with 95.1% of those in SIMD 5.

5.3.4 Frequency of use of local greenspace

Asked how often they had used their local greenspace in the last 12 months, most (84.6%) young people said they had used it at least once a month, with over half (55.3%) saying they used it several times a week or more.

Base: All young people (2351)

Young disabled people used their local greenspace less frequently - 45.4% used it several times a week or more, compared with 56.9% of young non-disabled people. Those in more deprived areas used their local greenspace less than those in less deprived areas, with 46.4% in SIMD 1 using it several times a week or more compared with 62.0% of those in SIMD 5.

5.3.5 Use of local greenspace

Among those who had used their local greenspace, the most commonly mentioned use was to hang out with friends (78.0%) (Figure 5-I).

Base: All young people who had used greenspace (2280)

5.3.6 Views on local greenspace

Most young people ‘agreed slightly’ or ‘agreed strongly’ that their local greenspace was a good place for young people to play or be active (83.7%) and to hang out or meet friends (81.1%) and to enjoy or learn about nature (62.2%) (Figure 5-J).

Base: All young people (varies per item 2350-2351)

Young disabled people were less likely than young non-disabled people to ‘agree slightly’ or ‘agree strongly’ that their local greenspace was a good place for young people to hang out (71.5% compared with 82.4%) and less likely to ‘agree slightly’ or ’agree strongly’ that it was a good place for young people to be active (75.2% compared with 84.9%).

For each of these three statements, those in more deprived areas were less likely to agree – 91.2% of young people in SIMD 5 (the least deprived quintile) ‘agreed slightly’ or ‘agreed strongly’ that their local greenspace was a good place to play or be active compared with 66.8% of those in SIMD 1.

5.3.7 Local facilities

Asked about facilities in their local area, 46.1% of young people thought that social and leisure activities for people like them were ‘good’ or ‘very good’ (Figure 5‑K). In relation to public transport, 68.6% thought the availability in their area was ‘good’ or ‘very good’, while 10.9% thought it was ‘poor’ or ‘very poor’.

Base: All young people (varies per item 2344-2347)

Young men were more likely than young women to rate social and leisure facilities as ‘good’ or ‘very good’ (50.2% compared with 42.0%). Young disabled people were less likely than young non-disabled people to rate social and leisure facilities as ‘good’ or ‘very good’ (39.1% compared with 48.3%).

Those in more deprived areas were generally less likely than those in less deprived areas to rate social and leisure facilities as ‘good’ or ‘very good’. For example, 40.8% in SIMD 1 (the most deprived quintile) rated facilities as ‘good’ or ‘very good’, compared with 59.4% in SIMD 5.

Young people in SIMD 3 and 4 were less likely than those in other SIMD quintiles to rate availability of public transport as ‘good’ or ’very good’ - 60.8% of those in SIMD 3 and 62.1% of those in SIMD 4 compared with 73.0%, 72.2% and 74.0% of those in SIMD 1, SIMD 2 and SIMD 5 respectively.

5.4 Getting about

Questions about transport and getting about included access to a car or other vehicle, and whether the young person had a full or provisional driving license. Two-thirds (68.6%) of young people had either a full or provisional driving license – 55.6% had a provisional license while 13.0% had a full license. Young disabled people were less likely than young non-disabled people to have a license (55.7% compared with 74.0%). Having a full or provisional license was more common among those in less deprived areas (49.6% in SIMD 1 compared with 80.5% in SIMD 5).

5.4.1 Car access

On whether they had access to a car, van, motorbike, moped or another vehicle, 78.4% said that they did (Figure 5-L). Young disabled people were less likely than young non-disabled people to have access to a vehicle (71.2% compared with 81.6%).

Young people in the most deprived areas were less likely to have access to a vehicle than those in less deprived areas (Figure 5‑L).

Base: All young people (2352); 1 - 20% most deprived (422); 2 (400); 3 (384); 4 (558); SIMD quintile 5 - 20% least deprived (588)

5.4.2 Number of cars in household

When asked specifically about the number of cars available for private use by members of the household, only 10.9% said that no cars were available for use. Having no car was more common among young disabled people (21.4%) than among young non-disabled people (7.3%). Having no car was also more common among those in more deprived areas. For example, 25.5% in SIMD 1 had no cars available for the household compared with 1.7% in SIMD 5.

Base: All young people (2351)

5.4.3 Travelling to place of work or study

Those who attended school, work or an apprenticeship or training course were asked how they usually travelled to their place of work or study. They could select one option from a list. The most common means of getting to and from work or study were by car or other vehicle (32.3%), by public transport (28.8%) or walking (28.0%).

Base: All young people who attended school, work or an apprenticeship (2137)

There were some differences by level of area deprivation. For example, 38.1% in SIMD 1 (the most deprived quintile) reported using public transport to get to work or study compared with 20.7% of those in SIMD 5.

Asked about the reasons why they used this travel method, the most commonly mentioned reasons were that it was the most convenient (59.9%) or the quickest (30.4%). Distance was also referenced, with 26.2% mentioning that it was close by and, conversely, 22.1% mentioning that it was too far to walk. One in five (20.3%) referenced that it was the cheapest method, or free, while 10.5% said it was the only method available. Small proportions mentioned other reasons such as it being good exercise or provided fresh air (7.1%), no suitable public transport being available (4.2%), or no car or transport available (3.9%).

Young people who travelled to work or study were asked how long it usually took them to get home. For 73.5% the journey time was less than 30 minutes, while 20.0% reported that it took them between half an hour and an hour. For 6.3% the commute was over an hour.