Plain English BEST OF: What Experts Really Think About Smartphones and Mental Health
Timestamps are as accurate as they can be but may be slightly off. We encourage you to listen to the full context.
Podcast Summary
This Plain English episode features NYU researcher Jay Van Bavel discussing his groundbreaking expert consensus study on smartphones, social media, and mental health. Van Bavel and his collaborator Valerio Capraro surveyed 229 field experts to evaluate claims from Jonathan Haidt's "The Anxious Generation" and other research. (03:00) The study found varying levels of expert consensus - from overwhelming agreement on well-established claims like "sleep deprivation reduces mental health" to more divided opinions on policy solutions like delaying smartphone use until high school. (25:00) The research revealed that experts generally agree on foundational issues but remain split on newer claims and intervention strategies, suggesting the science is still evolving in this relatively young field.
Speakers
Derek Thompson
Derek Thompson is the host of Plain English and a staff writer at The Atlantic, where he writes about economics, technology, and culture. He's the author of "Hit Makers: The Science of Popularity" and regularly appears on television as a commentator on economic and social trends.
Jay Van Bavel
Jay Van Bavel is a professor of psychology and neuroscience at New York University and runs the Center for Conflict and Cooperation. He has published over 150 papers and spent the last decade researching the role of technology, especially social media, in society and how it fosters conflict or cooperation between individuals and societies. He's a leading expert on the psychology of social media and online engagement.
Key Takeaways
Expert Consensus Exists on Foundational Claims But Not Policy Solutions
The study found that experts strongly agree on well-established psychological principles - nearly 100% consensus that sleep deprivation reduces mental health, overwhelming agreement that social isolation is harmful. (16:15) However, consensus drops significantly when discussing newer claims and policy interventions. For example, while 68% of experts believe delaying smartphone use until high school would improve mental health, this represents much less certainty than foundational claims. This pattern suggests the field has solid grounding in basic psychological principles but remains uncertain about specific technological interventions.
Social Media's Effects Depend Heavily on How It's Used
Van Bavel explains that passive social media use (doom scrolling) tends to be negative for mental health, while active, relationship-building use can be positive. (33:36) He illustrates this with his own 13-year-old daughter - when she's doom scrolling TikTok, she appears sad and isolated, but when using her phone to connect with friends for homework or social planning, it enhances her relationships. This nuanced view suggests that blanket judgments about social media miss the crucial distinction between different types of usage patterns.
Mental Health Content Goes Viral Due to Algorithmic Design
Experts overwhelmingly agreed (40-to-1 ratio) that social media increases young people's exposure to mental health disorders. (40:34) Van Bavel explains this occurs because mental health content is inherently novel and attention-grabbing in an attention economy - algorithms privilege content that's "counter normative" and interesting. This creates cascades where discussing mental health issues becomes incentivized and rewarded, potentially leading to social contagion effects, though it's unclear whether this increases actual disorders or just self-disclosure of them.
The Science Is Still Too Young for Definitive Policy Prescriptions
Unlike climate science, which reached 97% consensus after decades of research, smartphone and mental health research has only existed for about 16-17 years. (19:12) Van Bavel notes that policymakers often want to implement solutions before scientists can provide definitive evidence, creating a challenging situation where policies are being made without sufficient scientific backing. He's attempting to run randomized controlled trials on school phone bans but faces resistance from policymakers who either want no intervention or universal implementation without testing effectiveness.
Even Studying Social Media Creates Social Media-Style Polarization
Perhaps the most ironic finding was that Van Bavel's consensus paper, designed to reduce polarization in the scientific debate, actually created intense backlash on social media when published. (55:06) Critics from both extremes - those who think social media is highly harmful and those who think concerns are overblown - attacked the study's methodology and conclusions. This demonstrates how social media's design amplifies extreme voices and makes consensus-building difficult, even among academics studying the very phenomenon they're experiencing.
Statistics & Facts
- The study surveyed 229 experts in psychology and related fields to evaluate claims about smartphones and mental health. (08:01) This represents what Jonathan Haidt called "the largest ever expert survey" in this domain, providing unprecedented insight into professional consensus on these issues.
- Roughly 5.5 billion people now have social media access, and users spend about 2.5 hours daily on these platforms, which adds up to approximately 5.7 years of a person's life spent on social media. (38:07) For teenagers, usage is significantly higher - often 4-8 hours daily.
- One large-scale survey of over 27,000 individuals aged 18-24 found that mental health outcomes were associated with later age of first smartphone ownership, with effects being most pronounced in females. (49:55) However, conflicting studies show mixed results on this relationship.
