Attempt to reach expert consensus on teens and phones ends in argument

An effort to achieve scientific agreement on the potential risks posed by smartphones and social media use among young individuals has devolved into debate among researchers. This undermined consensus indicates challenges for policymakers when using existing data to determine technology regulation.

Valerio Capraro from the University of Milan-Bicocca in Italy, alongside over 100 colleagues from 11 fields, has released a “consensus statement” concerning the possible adverse impacts of smartphone use on adolescents. “We’ve observed the ongoing discussion and believed we could establish common ground between different views,” stated Capraro.

The researchers examined 26 detailed assertions regarding the effects of smartphones on adolescent mental wellness, such as the notion that intensive phone usage may trigger sleep disorders or behavioral addiction. These claims originated from Jonathan Haidt’s The Anxious Generation at New York University, a widely discussed yet controversial book on smartphones. Haidt is also named as a co-author of the consensus statement.

Each researcher individually evaluated their agreement with each assertion and the strength of the supporting data. There was substantial agreement on vital points; 99 percent agreed that adolescent mental wellness has significantly declined in the U.S., with similar trends in other Western countries. Furthermore, 98 percent concurred that substantial smartphone usage strongly correlates with sleep problems. Over 94 percent of surveyed experts agreed that young women faced distinctive challenges, including excessive comparison to peers, the pressure to look perfect, and exposure to online sexual harassment.

However, equally high proportions of experts agreed that the evidence for these claims is only correlational, not causal. Many agreed that more rigorous research, including longitudinal studies tracking smartphone users over a period, would be needed to prove causation. Overall, while more than 90 percent agreed that young people are facing difficulties, only 52 percent supported regulatory measures like age restrictions and phone bans in schools.

Despite this caveat, the researchers suggest that such limitations should not excuse inaction by policy-makers. “Acquiring high-quality causal evidence of the effectiveness of policy decisions often takes years, whereas policymakers often have to make decisions in rapidly changing environments with limited data,” they stated.

Criticism of the Consensus

Researchers who were not participants in the consensus statement have challenged its conclusions, and it has also faced criticism on social media. For example, Pete Etchells at Bath Spa University, UK, noted that only approximately 120 of the 288 invited experts across various disciplines participated. He suggests that individuals who believe smartphones negatively affect adolescents were more inclined to participate in such a survey, thus impacting the outcomes. “I’d like them to account for potential expert biases in their dataset,” he says. “I don’t think they do this.”

Concerns Over Expert Selection

Etchells, who has also authored a book on the subject, questioned the selection process for the initial 288 invited experts: “I know I wasn’t contacted about this at any point.” Sonia Livingstone at the London School of Economics also disagreed with the selected researchers. “The long list is meant to provide a sense of balance, but it mainly lists those on one side of the argument. If science is not balanced, it is nothing,” she says.

Defense of Panel Diversity

Capraro defended the panel’s diversity, stating that “thousands of people are working on these topics around the world,” and that “it’s not feasible to contact them all.”

Bias in Claims Examined

Beyond participant selection, Livingstone also disputed the examined claims. “The problem is that it’s a biased set of questions. They don’t ask, ‘is there also evidence [that] social media can improve mental health or friendships or a sense of belonging?’ There is also evidence for those,” she says. Capraro said the research sought to “represent as many viewpoints as possible” on a “very hotly debated topic”.