Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Matters Arising
  • Published:

Underestimating digital media harm

Nature Human Behaviour volume 4, pages 346–348 (2020)Cite this article

Subjects

Matters Arising to this article was published on 17 April 2020

The Original Article was published on 14 January 2019

arising from A. Orben & A. K. Przybylski Nature Human Behaviour https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-018-0506-1 (2019)

Orben and Przybylski1 use a new and advanced statistical technique to run tens of thousands of analyses across three large datasets. The authors conclude that the association of screen time with well-being is negative but “too small to warrant policy change.” However, Orben and Przybylski made six analytical decisions that resulted in lower effect sizes, and their conclusions are in stark contrast with the practically important differences identified in other analyses of the same datasets, especially for social media use among girls.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Fig. 1: Percentage of the MCS cohort with clinically relevant depressive symptoms as a function of social media use.
Fig. 2: Average linear r values between well-being and various factors in boys and girls from two datasets.

References

  1. Orben, A. & Przybylski, A. K. The association between adolescent well-being and digital technology use. Nat. Hum. Behav. 3, 173–182 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Kelly, Y., Zilanawala, A., Booker, C. & Sacker, A. Social media use and adolescent mental health: findings from the UK Millennium Cohort Study. EClinicalMedicine 6, 59–68 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Twenge, J. M. More time on technology, less happiness? Associations between digital media use and psychological well-being. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 28, 372–379 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Przybylski, A. K. & Weinstein, N. A large-scale test of the Goldilocks hypothesis: quantifying the relations between digital-screen use and the mental well-being of adolescents. Psychol. Sci. 28, 204–215 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. McManus, S., Gunnell, D., Cooper, C., Bebbington, P. E., Howard, L. M. & Brugha, T. Prevalence of non-suicidal self-harm and service contact in England, 2000–14: repeated cross-sectional surveys of the general population. Lancet Psychiat. 6, 573–581 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Twenge, J. M., Martin, G. N. & Spitzberg, B. H. Trends in U.S. adolescents’ media use, 1976–2016: the rise of digital media, the decline of TV, and the (near) demise of print. Psychol. Pop. Media Cult. 8, 329–345 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Cronbach, L. J. & Meehl, P. E. Construct validity in psychological tests. Psychol. Bull. 52, 281–302 (1955).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Johnston, L. D., O’Malley, P. M., Bachman, J. G., Schulenberg, J. E., & Miech, R. A. Monitoring the Future: National Survey Results on Drug Use, 1975–2016. (University of Michigan, National Institute on Drug Abuse at the National Institute of Health, 2018).

  9. Twenge, J. M., Martin, G. N. & Campbell, W. K. Decreases in psychological well-being among American adolescents after 2012 and links to screen time during the rise of smartphone technology. Emotion 18, 765–780 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Schisterman, E. F., Cole, S. R. & Platt, R. W. Overadjustment bias and unnecessary adjustment in epidemiologic studies. Epidemiology 20, 488–495 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Rohrer, J. M. Thinking clearly about correlations and causation: graphical causal models for observational data. Adv. Methods Pract. Psychol. Sci. 1, 27–42 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Ferguson, C. J. An effect size primer: a guide for clinicians and researchers. Prof. Psychol. Res. Pract. 40, 532–538 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Funder, D. C. & Ozer, D. J. Evaluating effect size in psychological research: sense and nonsense. Adv. Methods Pract. Psychol. Sci. 2, 156–168 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Rosnow, R. L. & Rosenthal, R. Effect sizes for experimenting psychologists. Can. J. Exp. Psychol. 57, 221–237 (2003).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Abelson, R. P. A variance explanation paradox: when a little is a lot. Psychol. Bull. 97, 129–133 (1985).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Twenge, J. M. Why increases in adolescent depression may be linked to the technological environment. Curr. Opin. Psychol. 32, 89–94 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, San Diego State University, San Diego, CA, USA

    Jean M. Twenge

  2. Stern School of Business, New York University, New York, NY, USA

    Jonathan Haidt

  3. Department of Psychology, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL, USA

    Thomas E. Joiner

  4. Department of Psychology, University of Georgia, Athens, GA, USA

    W. Keith Campbell

Authors
  1. Jean M. Twenge
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jonathan Haidt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Thomas E. Joiner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. W. Keith Campbell
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

J.M.T. developed the study concept, analysed the data and wrote the first draft of the manuscript. J.H., W.K.C. and T.E.J. provided crucial revisions.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jean M. Twenge.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

J.M.T., J.H., W.K.C. and T.E.J. have received speaking honoraria and consulting fees from non-profit and for-profit entities for presenting research.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Extended data

Extended Data Fig. 1

Associations between internet use and well-being indicators, boys, Millennium Cohort Study (includes demographic controls).

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Twenge, J.M., Haidt, J., Joiner, T.E. et al. Underestimating digital media harm. Nat Hum Behav 4, 346–348 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-020-0839-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-020-0839-4

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing