







In the era of rapid digitalization, the widespread integration of digital technology into various aspects of daily life has sparked significant interest in understanding its impact on cognitive mental processes. While the emerging data suggests that its influence may be positive or negative, the depth of evidence regarding neurobiological mechanisms remains limited. This review aims to synthesize previously published studies and develop a comprehensive framework that systematically categorizes digital technologies, the cognitive functions they impact, and developmental stages around the concept of neuroplasticity, while clearly illustrating their interconnections. Despite acknowledged limitations, through an exhaustive approach, this paper intends to offer a dynamic perspective on the effects of digital media on the human brain, before the onset of addiction.
Smartphones and Cognition: A Review of Research Exploring the Links between Mobile Technology Habits and Cognitive Functioning
While smartphones and related mobile technologies are recognized as flexible and powerful tools that, when used prudently, can augment human cognition, there is also a growing perception that habitual involvement with these devices may have a negative and lasting impact on users’ ability to think, remember, pay attention, and regulate emotion. The present review considers an intensifying, though still limited, area of research exploring the potential cognitive impacts of smartphone-related habits, and seeks to determine in which domains of functioning there is accruing evidence of a significant relationship between smartphone technology and cognitive performance, and in which domains the scientific literature is not yet mature enough to endorse any firm conclusions. We focus our review primarily on three facets of cognition that are clearly implicated in public discourse regarding the impacts of mobile technology – attention, memory, and delay of gratification – and then consider evidence regarding the broader relationships between smartphone habits and everyday cognitive functioning. Along the way, we highlight compelling findings, discuss limitations with respect to empirical methodology and interpretation, and offer suggestions for how the field might progress toward a more coherent and robust area of scientific inquiry.

Dec 2020 -- Jelle Bruineberg -- Embodied cognition and the attention crisis
Is smartphone addiction really an addiction?
Aims In light of the rise in research on technological addictions and smartphone addiction in particular, the aim of this paper was to review the relevant literature on the topic of smartphone addiction and determine whether this disorder exists or if it does not adequately satisfy the criteria for addiction. Methods We reviewed quantitative and qualitative studies on smartphone addiction and analyzed their methods and conclusions to make a determination on the suitability of the diagnosis “addiction” to excessive and problematic smartphone use. Results Although the majority of research in the field declares that smartphones are addictive or takes the existence of smartphone addiction as granted, we did not find sufficient support from the addiction perspective to confirm the existence of smartphone addiction at this time. The behaviors observed in the research could be better labeled as problematic or maladaptive smartphone use and their consequences do not meet the severity levels of those caused by addiction. Discussion and conclusions Addiction is a disorder with severe effects on physical and psychological health. A behavior may have a similar presentation as addiction in terms of excessive use, impulse control problems, and negative consequences, but that does not mean that it should be considered an addiction. We propose moving away from the addiction framework when studying technological behaviors and using other terms such as “problematic use” to describe them. We recommend that problematic technology use is to be studied in its sociocultural context with an increased focus on its compensatory functions, motivations, and gratifications.
The association between adolescent well-being and digital technology use
The widespread use of digital technologies by young people has spurred speculation that their regular use negatively impacts psychological well-being. Current empirical evidence supporting this idea is largely based on secondary analyses of large-scale social datasets. Though these datasets provide a valuable resource for highly powered investigations, their many variables and observations are often explored with an analytical flexibility that marks small effects as statistically significant, thereby leading to potential false positives and conflicting results. Here we address these methodological challenges by applying specification curve analysis (SCA) across three large-scale social datasets (total n = 355,358) to rigorously examine correlational evidence for the effects of digital technology on adolescents. The association we find between digital technology use and adolescent well-being is negative but small, explaining at most 0.4% of the variation in well-being. Taking the broader context of the data into account suggests that these effects are too small to warrant policy change.

The Cognitive Debt of Digging Through Preprints
Your Brain on MIT Media Lab

Reciprocal Relationships between Trajectories of Depressive Symptoms and Screen Media Use during Adolescence
Adolescents are constantly connected with each other and the digital landscape through a myriad of screen media devices. Unprecedented access to the wider world and hence a variety of activities, particularly since the introduction of mobile technology, has given rise to questions regarding the impact of this changing media environment on the mental health of young people. Depressive symptoms are one of the most common disabling health issues in adolescence and although research has examined associations between screen use and symptoms of depression, longitudinal investigations are rare and fewer still consider trajectories of change in symptoms. Given the plethora of devices and normalisation of their use, understanding potential longitudinal associations with mental health is crucial. A sample of 1,749 (47% female) adolescents (10–17 years) participated in six waves of data collection over two years. Symptoms of depression, time spent on screens, and on separate screen activities (social networking, gaming, web browsing, TV/passive) were self-reported. Latent growth curve modelling revealed three trajectories of depressive symptoms (low-stable, high-decreasing, and low-increasing) and there were important differences across these groups on screen use. Some small, positive associations were evident between depressive symptoms and later screen use, and between screen use and later depressive symptoms. However, a Random Intercept Cross Lagged Panel Model revealed no consistent support for a longitudinal association. The study highlights the importance of considering differential trajectories of depressive symptoms and specific forms of screen activity to understand these relationships.

Thoughts on Cyberpositionality: The Construction of Digital Communities in Digital Spaces, Damien Patrick Williams
I found Rebecca Monteleone, Martin Perez Comisso, and Elma Hajric’s “Cyberpositionality: Sociotechnical Location in the Digital Age” (2024) to be an extremely timely and important article which can…

No Sense of Place: The Impact of Electronic Media on Social Behavior
Electronic media present us with a collage of experiences from everyplace. We eat dinner at home while watching starving children thousands of miles away reach out to us for food. From our easy chairs, we stare at blindfolded hostages, and coolly
Frontiers | Cyber-mobbing, technology-facilitated abuse and online violence
This article collection will explore the pressing issues of cyber-mobbing, technology-facilitated abuse and online violence, including online abuse, stalking...
Digitalization
Abstract “Digitization” and “digitalization” are two conceptual terms that are closely associated and often used interchangeably in a broad range of literatures. This entry considers each term in detail and argues that there is analytical value in explicitly making a clear distinction between them. The entry defines digitization as the material process of converting analog streams of information into digital bits. It defines digitalization as the way many domains of social life are restructured around digital communication and media infrastructures.
#cybersafety #ageverification #privacy #minors #ai | Parry Aftab
Internet Age-Verification Causing More Risks than It’s Worth This is not a new issue. Regulators and policymakers have raised it for the last 28 years as the way the keep kids safer online. They compare it to having to flash an ID to purchase regulated content or items (porn, cigarettes, alcohol, restricted medications, age-restricted movies, amusement rides, etc.) But verification online is very different and vastly riskier than flashing an ID in real life. For one, it’s collecting personally-identifiable information about our kids. For two, it puts that information in the too-often untrustworthy digital hands of tech companies. For three, while porn, alcohol and regulated drugs may be a clear-cut case for restricting access to adults, access to the Internet is very different. Yet, regulations begun in the UK and adopted globally have begun a weighted cybersafety approach that, in my humble opinion, prefers excluding young people from digital technology over teaching the cybersafety and digital life skills. That, in my 32 years of work in the fields of cybersafety and protection of minors online, was and remains a mistake. One of my best known quotes, repeated in Congressional and state legislative testimony and in the media is: “The greatest single risk our children face online is being denied access. We have solutions for everything else.” (my testimony before the FTC) Some proponents of age-verification have opted to denying them access unless they give up confirmable personally-identifiable info, such as selfies, feeding AI with PII, and govt or school credentials. I argue that this gives social networks, game providers and digital app operators a wealth of PII to be used for profiling, marketing and collecting far too much. With their privacy at stake, too often incompetent, malicious and greedy producers and mega-tech industry players, can’t and shouldn’t be trusted with the personal info of our most vulnerable - our kids. And AI will now be tasked with collecting everything it can find about our kids to be able to “age-verify.” (It’s ability to age-verify is less reliable with youth as their data-sets are more limited.) I served on a task force appointed by 49 state attorneys general, charged to research and weigh-in on this issue. We concluded that age-verification wasn’t feasible. While this task force was formed many years ago, with the exception of a fortified AI, not much as changed. Our children’s privacy remains, or should remain, paramount. We have robust filtering and blocking technologies. The adult industry has adopted an age-gated model. And parents can restrict access using device-specific tools. And, many well-intentioned age-verification laws were adopted too quickly for thoughtful discourse. Or by governments more prone to censorship/content restrictions. I fear in our quest to protect our kids we have thrown our babies out with the bath water. #cybersafety #ageverification #privacy #minors #AI
Brainrot: Deskilling and Addiction are Overlooked AI Risks | Proceedings of the 2026 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency
As part of the Digital Library's transition to Open Access, new features for researchers are available in the Premium Edition. Click here to learn more.

Digital Freedom
Roberta Fischli & Thomas Beschorner argue that our digital future is not preprogrammed: it’s about time we start thinking about what it should look like.
Large language memories: Psychosis and antisocial media
Using the fields of memory studies and digital humanities, this article argues that there has been a shift from more collective and social memory to more personalised and individual memory. This shift, it is argued here, can be conceptualised through the psychoanalytic concept of ‘psychosis’. While the causes of the changes in our patterns of memory have been located in capitalist and neoliberal principles, the effects of the changes in our memory habits might be found in psychosis. From falling in love with machinic AI replicas to indulging in conspiracy theories to acting as if we are social media influencers or backing ourselves to win out in impossible job markets, we are inclined towards personal fantasy, often at the expense of participating in social life. But why do we do this? Why is it easier to believe a farfetched conspiracy theory or wild personal dream than it is to participate socially and collectively in the world we live in? Part of the reason, at least, is found in our increasing habitual reliance on new and emergent technologies. Often presented to us as a brand-new form of Artificial Intelligence, these generative tools are the latest update to a longer pattern in our digital world: the trend of developing ‘relationships’ with algorithms that, to larger and smaller degrees, we come to rely on for habits of cognition and recognition. By affecting our patterns of memory, these technologies produce a kind of isolation that lends itself to individual and fantastical – rather than shared and realist – thinking.

Modeling the Engagement-Disengagement Cycle of Compulsive Phone Use | Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
As part of the Digital Library's transition to Open Access, new features for researchers are available in the Premium Edition. Click here to learn more.

“The internet represents a closing of the parenthesis and a return to older models of understanding. Human consciousness in the digital age, which de-emphasizes the categorization that marked the age of print, makes us think in a way that is reminiscent of a medieval peasant.”
The Gutenberg Parenthesis
web.mit.edu