One recurring theme in my work has been the relationship between smartphones and children (refer to my two New Yorker essays on this subject or my 2023 presentation reviewing the research literature on it).
Given my interest in the topic, I was pleased to come across a significant recent study entitled, “A Consensus Statement on Potential Negative Impacts of Smartphone and Social Media Use on Adolescent Mental Health.”
To gain deeper insight into expert perspectives, the study’s lead authors, Jay Van Bavel and Valerio Capraro, gathered 120 researchers across 11 fields to assess 26 claims regarding children and smartphones. As Van Bavel mentioned in a recent appearance on Derek Thompson’s podcast, their aim was to move beyond the "non-representative shouting online" to arrive at some shared viewpoints.
The group of experts managed to pinpoint several statements that over 90% of them agreed were generally true. These included:
- Adolescent mental health has deteriorated in several Western nations over the past two decades (noting that critics argued this trend was merely an illusion based on reporting biases).
- Smartphone and social media usage correlates with attention issues and behavioral addiction.
- For girls, social media engagement may be linked to body dissatisfaction, perfectionism, mental disorders, and the risk of sexual harassment.
These consensus findings challenge those who still cling to the notion that the data on these topics is mixed at best, believing that smartphones pose no significant issues for children. The prevailing stance is clear: these devices are addictive and distracting, and particularly for young girls, they can heighten the risks of various mental health problems. This is occurring alongside a backdrop of declining mental health among adolescents.
The panel of experts displayed less certainty regarding policy solutions. They could not reach a consensus on whether age limits for social media would enhance mental health. However, closer analysis shows that a majority of experts consider this to be "probably true," with only a small fraction believing there is contradictory evidence against it. Their caution reflects the fact that such interventions have not been implemented yet, leaving us without data to confirm their effectiveness.
Here are my key takeaways from this study…
Firstly, conducting rigorous social psychology research is challenging. Aside from numerous confounding variables, designing the experiments is particularly complex. Consequently, we do not arrive at the same level of clear consensus on concerns regarding this technology as we might for, say, the assertion that human activity is contributing to climate change.
However, it is now evident that the field is no longer divided on the question of whether smartphones and social media, in general, are detrimental to children. This new study revealed that almost every significant claim related to this issue garnered at least majority support, with many accepted by over 90% of the surveyed experts. There were very few substantial claims where a large percentage of experts felt that contradictory evidence existed.
In social psychology, this may represent as definitive a conclusion as we are likely to reach. When you combine these findings with strong self-reports from children and parents criticizing these technologies and their adverse effects, it becomes clear that there is no longer any valid reason to delay action.
There has been a certain pseudo-intellectual delight in remarks like, “Well, it’s complicated…” when faced with strong assertions about smartphones, such as those made in Jon Haidt’s widely read book, The Anxious Generation. However, such a statement is a tautology. It is undeniably complicated; we are discussing social trends influenced by technology; achieving 100% certainty is impossible, and there will always be some conflicting reports.
What is essential now is the actions we deem most sensible based on our current knowledge. This new paper serves as a compelling reminder that the precautionary principle should be applied. There is little harm in preventing a 14-year-old from accessing TikTok or Snapchat, or in restricting a 10-year-old’s unlimited internet access through their smartphone, but the potential benefits are significant.
#####
For a more in-depth discussion about this study, tune into the latest episode of my podcast, or for the video version, watch here.
On a different note: I would like to bring attention to an interesting new service called DoneDaily. It provides online coaching for professional productivity, loosely based on my multi-scale planning philosophy. I’ve known the team for a long time (the founder once gave health advice on my blog), and they have done an impressive job. It’s worth a look…
A few days back, I visited Disneyland. I received an invitation to Anaheim to deliver a speech regarding my books, and my wife and ... Read more
Last month, Anthropic published a safety report concerning one of its most advanced chatbots, Claude Opus 4. The report garnered interest due to its detailed account of ...
A recurring theme in my work has been the connection between smartphones and children (for instance, refer to my two pieces in The New Yorker ... Read more