addiction to modern technology essay

Improve your Grades

Essay on Technology Addiction | Technology Addiction Essay for Students and Children in English

February 14, 2024 by Prasanna

Essay on Technology Addiction: Technology is something that is all around us in the digital era. Almost every device that is around us is an example of technology. Technology helps the person to work efficiently and effectively and also saves a lot of time. As technology makes work much easier and getting advanced, people are getting addicted to it. They have started trusting and relying on technologies for their professional and personal matters. In this essay, we will talk about how people are getting addicted to technology.

You can read more  Essay Writing  about articles, events, people, sports, technology many more.

Long and Short Essays on Technology Addiction for Students and Kids in English

A long essay of 450-500 words has been provided it is useful for students in classes 7, 8, 9, and 10. For the reference of students in Classes 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6, a short essay of 100-150 words has been provided.

Long Essay on Technology addiction 500 Words in English

Long Essay on Essay on Technology is helpful to students of classes 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12.

Technology is everywhere and around us. The thing that you put in your pocket while travelling, your mobile phone is the most prime example of technology. GPS navigation, computer, internet, fan, A/C, and every other device we use in our daily lives are also prime examples of technology. Without technology, life would be dull and hard. Nowadays, countries that have more advanced technologies are developing day by day.

It is observed in a survey that people can’t live without technology even a single day as they survive on cell phones. People get so addicted to technological devices that they are not able to work without them. Many companies and industries are dependent on these technologies to operate their functions and manufacture goods.

People are so addicted that they prefer to use their mobile phones to communicate rather than communicating face to face. This affects their mental health and also their relationship with friends and family. People spend lots of money on buying new technology as they have advanced and better features.

The Internet is the prime cause of addiction to mobile phones and computers. It was introduced as a medium to help people for searching for information and data but people started misusing the internet which results in addiction. People started spending hours and hours on mobile phones surfing the internet and watching online videos. Nowadays even children have to wear glasses because of weak eyesight due to continuously using mobile phones and computers.

If you sit in front of a computer for hours and hours then it will lead to many problems like weak eyesight, weight gain which increases the chance of cardiovascular diseases. If you talk too much on cell phones then because of their radiation, your eardrums can be damaged and there are also chances of brain tumours. The radiations that are released from mobile towers are very harmful to the body as they can increase the chances of cancer and other deadly diseases.

People are so dependent on technology that sometimes it becomes the reason for illness or stress in relationships. Some people misuse technology and steal data or money from people through social networking sites and other platforms. Thus, it is advised to stay connected to nature and other outdoor activities to keep yourself away from the adverse effects caused due to overuse of technological devices.

It should be kept in mind that video games, social media sites and the web are designed in such a way that they promote dependency on the internet and technology causing negative side effects to the adults and the youth. However, technology addiction can be cured by replacing the time spent online with healthy stress management, productive activities, building healthy relationships, practising creative skills and learning more through books.

Technology addiction is equivalent to addiction to drugs and it is advised to seek professional help for curing the situation. Or else the addiction could lead to dullness of the brain, anti-social behaviour, stressful relationships, effect on career and behavioural changes.

Short Essay on Technology Addiction 150 words in English

Short Essay on Technology Addiction is helpful to students of classes 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6.

The technology was invented by human beings so that they can save time and money and also save energy for all the efforts they make but as time passed, it becomes an addiction for human beings, especially teenagers. Even small children can operate the phone and watch cartoons by themselves. Yes, it is rightly said that without technology, the world wouldn’t be developed but technology has a darker side too.

One of the most popular technological devices that is used by every person in the world is the mobile phones. People are so addicted to it that they won’t be able to spend even a single day without their mobile phones. With the introduction of applications like WhatsApp, Facebook, and other social networking and messaging apps, people started using mobiles quite frequently. People need to understand that addiction to technology is not good for their health and they should work on themselves or seek professional help.

10 Lines on Technology Addiction Essay in English

• People are getting dependent and addicted to technology.
• Technology plays an important role in the development of a country.
• Without technology, survival would be very difficult.
• One of the most common technologies used by everyone is mobile phones.
• The web allows people to interact, play video games and search for information.
• People spend most of the time watching movies and communicating via mobile phones.
• Overuse of mobile phones leads to many problems like damage to the eardrum, headache, and many more.
• People are now so addicted to these technological devices that they trust machines more than humans.
• It is very important to protect yourself and your loved ones from this addiction.
• Live a healthy life and use technology only for general purposes rather than overuse it.

FAQ’s on Technology Addiction Essay

Question 1. Why is technology important?

Answer: Technology is responsible for operating online effectively and efficiently. It saves time and money.

Question 2. What problems can occur because of technology addiction?

Answer: Technology addiction can lead to problems like weak eyesight, a decrease in mental capability, and many other problems.

Question 3. Why is the prevention of technology addiction important?

Answer: It is important to prevent this situation so that people can live a healthy life and socialize with others.

• Picture Dictionary
• English Speech
• English Slogans
• English Letter Writing
• English Essay Writing
• English Textbook Answers
• Types of Certificates
• ICSE Solutions
• Selina ICSE Solutions
• ML Aggarwal Solutions
• HSSLive Plus One
• HSSLive Plus Two
• Kerala SSLC
• Distance Education

• Signs of Addiction

Technology Addiction

Creating a healthy balance.

Extreme use of technology can disrupt normal patterns of mood and socialization in teens

Technology is everywhere, and it is not going away. Teenagers stare down at their iPhones, or keep their eyes glued to a tablet or laptop, instead of observing the world around them. It's not unusual to see two adolescents seated together on a bus, texting furiously on their mobiles rather than talking to one another. The fact that teens are so dependent on technology makes sense in our world, but it may also lead to negative consequences.

What is technology addiction?

Technology addiction can be defined as frequent and obsessive technology-related behavior increasingly practiced despite negative consequences to the user of the technology. An over-dependence on tech can significantly impact students' lives. While we need technology to survive in a modern social world, a severe overreliance on technology—or an addiction to certain facets of its use—can also be socially devastating. Tech dependence can lead to teen consequences that span from mild annoyance when away from technology to feelings of isolation, extreme anxiety, and depression.

What makes technology addictive?

Technology fulfills our natural human need for stimulation, interaction, and changes in environment with great efficiency. When teenagers experience stress, be it romantic rejection or a poor grade on an exam, technology can become a quick and easy way to fill basic needs, and as such, can become addictive.

Technology impacts the pleasure systems of the brain in ways similar to substances. It provides some of the same reward that alcohol and other drugs might: it can be a boredom buster, a social lubricant, and an escape from reality.

Video and computer games, smart phones and tablets, social media and the Internet provide a variety of access points that can promote dependence on technology and negative consequences for youth:

The Internet.  The Web can be addictive as a multifunctional tool that brings us exceptionally close to an enormous amount of information at unprecedented speeds. User-friendly by design, we now have access to the Internet on our computers, through apps on our tablets, phones and watches. "FOMO," or "Fear of Missing Out," is a commonly described phenomenon for teens and young adults, in which youth increasingly feel the need to stay connected to the Internet, so they aren't the last to know of a news story or social happening.

Related to FOMO, some Facebook users, for instance, report that they use the Internet-based social media platform as a chosen method to alleviate their anxiety or depression.1 With so much accessibility to its use, the Internet is just as hard to stay away from at any given point in a day as it is easy and rewarding to use.

Video and computer games.  One hallmark of human psychology is that we want to feel competent, autonomous, and related to other people. Challenging video games allow players to feel that they are good at something. Games offer a great variety of choice to players, promoting a sense of autonomy for teens who might feel otherwise out of control.

The same goals that drive people to pursue success in the real world are often present in video games. As one amasses virtual wealth or prestige by spending time on games and advancing through levels, virtual wealth can translate into some version of actual recognition—through monetary purchasing power within an online game or a positive reputation within an online community.

Gamers find themselves linked to others who share their hobby through YouTube channels or subreddits dedicated to discussion of their game of choice with other enthusiasts. Like the Internet itself, games make themselves increasingly accessible to teens via apps on smart phones, never leaving kids' palms or pockets.

While there is room for social connection in the gaming universe, this space also provides a potential escape from reality into a digital world where players get to assume new identities more appealing or more novel than those they hold in the real life.

Smart phones, tablets, and lifestyle technologies.  These highly-mobile, flexible machines have the power to constantly connect. Smart phones and tablets, and the emergence of other smart devices from the Apple Watch to the Amazon Echo, promote addiction by removing the time lapse from tasks and activities that previously required logging into a deskbound, or at least a backpack-bound, computer source.

Social media.  Social media presents individually-relevant information in the easiest ways—centralized, personalized portals, like a Facebook newsfeed, YouTube subscription, or Snapchat followership.

Whether it's a Skype conversation with our grandmother in Alaska or a Twitter reply to the President, social media feeds our need for human connection by allowing us to share feedback with those who are far from us in time, geography, or social status. As social animals, we need human contact for emotional and psychological health. The appeal of social media is that it helps us to fill social needs without the efforts or restraints of in-person contact.

What are the risks of teen technology use?

While technology is certainly not all bad, its overuse can pose certain key risks, especially to teens.

Technology can give students a false sense of relational security as they communicate with unseen individuals around the world. The speed with which technology moves makes everything a teen might be looking for available within seconds, which encourages an unhealthy desire for instant gratification. A slow internet connection or “unplugging” can promote irritability and anxiety for a teen otherwise used to constant connection through technology.

Sleep disorders can develop as teens stay up all night to play with technology, and as a result, academic, athletic, and social performance can suffer. Weight gain and other complications of a poor diet and sedentary lifestyle, such as cardiovascular disease, may result. In-person social skills may deteriorate.

Even as healthy teens are challenged by increasing life responsibilities, hormonal changes, and the stress of new social and academic worlds like dating and applying to college, these life transitions become even harder for those wholly absorbed in technology.

Within a technology-addicted individual, the mind becomes increasingly unable to distinguish between the lived and the alternate realities that produce instant stimulation, pleasure, and reward. As such, the extreme use of technology can disrupt normal patterns of mood and socialization in teens. Dependency upon social media, gaming, or other platforms to function can become the new and unhealthy "normal."

Technology addiction and teen substance use.  Researchers have found evidence that people who overuse technology may develop similar brain chemistry and neural patterning to those who are addicted to substances. 2

Another concern is that those who are addicted to technology are actually more likely to also use substances than their peers with healthier relationships to tech, providing the insight that technology addiction may be a risk factor for alcohol and other drug addiction.

One preliminary study found that a group of teens who "hyper-texted" were 40% more likely to have used cigarettes and twice as likely to have used alcohol than students who were less frequent users of technology. This same research noted that those who spent more hours per school day than peers on social networking sites were at higher risk for depression and suicide. 3

It stands to reason then, that if we can prevent technology addiction, we may also be able to prevent other risky behavior and dangerous consequences to teens.

Technology and the brain.  Studies have shown that brain scans of young people with internet addiction disorder (IAD) are similar to those of people with substance addictions to alcohol, cocaine, and cannabis. 4

Damage to brain systems connecting emotional processing, attention, and decision-making are affected in both substance addicts and technology addicts. This discovery shows that being hooked on a tech behavior can, in some ways, be as physically damaging as an addiction to alcohol and other drug use.

When is technology a protective factor?

Of course, the advent of smarter, faster, more mobile technologies can be used positively with teens too. The following list reflects the many ways that technology, used in a healthy way, can encourage teens to explore their world and express themselves:

Learning.  In Ramsey Musallam's AP Chemistry class at Sacred Heart Cathedral Preparatory in San Francisco, California, cell phones are a natural extension of the way the teacher otherwise communicates with his students. As soon as kids walk into his classroom, Musallam sends out a text blast through Remind101, asking students a challenge question related to the day's lesson. 5

Some teachers use Facebook as a communication hub, creating a public page or smaller, closed groups for classes. Using technology like this, teachers can keep parents informed, distribute homework or permission slips, and share photos and videos from classroom activities and field trips.

Others in education and civic development have found that by piquing students' interest in social justice or commentary videos posted on YouTube, student engagement with world issues is enhanced.

Creativity and expression.  Technology can promote student creativity by prompting expression through user-friendly tools. Some studies have shown that blogging, or web journaling, enhances students' creative thinking. 6

Metacognition—the ability to be aware of, attend to, and use information about one's own cognitive processes—allows students to strengthen critical thinking across academic and artistic disciplines. Utilizing Internet-based technologies that ask students to reflect on and reiterate their learning processes provides a framework for the development of teen metacognition skills.

Now common technologies like tablets and smart phones are often much less bulky than notebooks and textbooks, allowing students to flex their imaginations, read fiction, write poetry, doodle, or take pictures through the ease of software applications found on highly-mobile devices.

Socialization.  When monitored properly by a parent or guardian, the use of social media can create safe and healthy friendship networks for teens with like interests online, through already established mutual friendships or within shared interest hubs, like a blogging community or Facebook group.

Preventing other teen risks.  Since the expansion of the Internet and mobile technologies, call-in hotlines have expanded to include Internet help sites and texting lines for teens run by knowledgeable and mature adults. These options provide a place teens can go for accurate information and timely support when they are not comfortable discussing their personal problems with an adult at home or school.

At her social advocacy organization, Nancy Lublin started receiving so many texts from students with questions about bullying that she set up a text-only crisis line.7 While online harassment is a concern, online support movements like the It Gets Better Project have sprung up to powerfully protect teens too.

Preventing Technology Addiction in Teens

Technology will only grow in its use in teens' worlds. Preventing teen addiction to technology means finding a balance within students' lives, so that teenagers do not misuse their technology as an escape from real world challenges, emotions, socialization, or identity. Adults can help children and teens have healthy relationships to technology when they:

Provide plenty of healthy highs, some of them offline.  How teenagers use technology really matters. Are teens playing video games among other recreational activities, and are they as excited about a dinner with friends as they are about "leveling up"? Or, are they turning on the Xbox so they don't have to face a life that they're not enjoying?

Balance activity and productivity with healthy stress management.  Everything in life requires energy, and often teens feel like they have too little energy to spend on too many demands. If they're are not guided by adults to discover healthy ways to replenish their stores of energy, they may default by overusing easy fixes for entertainment or stress relief that promote technology addiction.

Nurture pro-social identity development in the real world.  Adults must be proactive, creative, and excited as they help kids to discover who they really are! Once teenagers find something they are good at and want to do, they will naturally gravitate toward it. It is easier to create an Internet façade, but far more rewarding for teens to cultivate true purposes and genuine identities within their families, schools, and communities.

Consider treatment when there's a problem.  Inpatient treatment for technology addiction starts by removing a teenager from both the Internet and the surroundings that allowed a technology addiction to occur in the first place. It is a form of intensive therapy. Other treatments can include ways to help technology addicts see the offline world as more pleasurable, without fully removing the online element from their lives.

Creating a Healthy Balance

It is true that technology can fulfill many human needs, but its overuse comes with risk. Being addicted to technology is in some ways akin to an addiction to alcohol and other drugs, with many of the same effects on the developing brain.

We must do all we can to prevent any sort of addiction from occurring in our children's lives. Technology can be a protective factor if used properly, and healthy adults can play a role in student technology addiction prevention by showing young people the benefits to be gained from a healthy, balanced approach to technology use.

1. Conrad, Brent. "Why Is Facebook Addictive? Twenty-One Reasons For Facebook Addiction - TechAddiction." Video Game Addiction Treatment & Computer Addiction Help - TechAddiction. N.p., n.d. Web. 8 Feb. 2017. http://www.techaddiction.ca/why-is-facebook-addictive.html.

2. Goldstein, Rita Z., and Nora D. Volkow. (2011). "Dysfunction of the prefrontal cortex in addiction: neuroimaging findings and clinical implications: Abstract: Nature Reviews Neuroscience." Nature Publishing Group: science journals, jobs, and information. Nature Publishing Group, a division of Macmillan Publishers Limited, n.d. Web. 8 Feb. 2017. http://www.nature.com/nrn/journal/v12/n11/abs/nrn3119.html.

3. NHS. "Extreme levels of texting 'unhealthy'." NHS Choices. 10 November 2010. N.p. Web. 2 8 Feb. 2017. http://www.nhs.uk/news/2010/11November/Pages/Texting-and-teen-behaviour.aspx.

4. Lin, Fuchun, Zhou, Yan, Du, Yasong, Qin, Lindi, Zhao, Zhimin, Xu, Jianrong and Hao Lei. (2012). "Abnormal White Matter Integrity in Adolescents with Internet Addiction Disorder: A Tract-Based Spatial Statistics Study." Plos One. Web. 8 Feb. 2017. http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0030253.

5. Barseghian, Tina. "How Teachers Make Cell Phones Work in the Classroom | MindShift." KQED Public Media for Northern CA.KQED, 10 May 2012. Web. 8 Feb. 2017. https://ww2.kqed.org/mindshift/2012/05/10/how-teachers-make-cell-phones-work-in-the-classroom/.

6. Hargrove, R. "The Role of Technology in Developing Students Creative Thinking Abilities - IATED Digital Library." IATED Digital Library. N.p., n.d. Web. 2 Apr. 2013. http://library.iated.org/view/HARGROVE2009THE.

7. Lublin, Nancy. "Nancy Lublin: Texting that saves lives | Video on TED.com." TED: Ideas worth spreading. TED Conferences, LLC, n.d. Web. 2 Apr. 2013. http://www.ted.com/talks/nancy_lublin_texting_that_saves_lives.html.

Want to learn more? Select a Tag to explore a particular topic or browse articles.

Harnessing science, love and the wisdom of lived experience, we are a force of healing and hope ​​​​​​​for individuals, families and communities affected by substance use and mental health conditions..

We use our own and third-party cookies to improve your experience and to analyze the use of our website. Find out more about how we use cookies in our  Privacy Policy .

Digital addiction: how technology keeps us hooked

Associate Professor in Computing and Informatics, Bournemouth University

Senior Lecturer in Psychology, Bournemouth University

Principal Academic in Psychology, Bournemouth University

Disclosure statement

The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

Bournemouth University provides funding as a member of The Conversation UK.

View all partners

The World Health Organisation is to include “gaming disorder” , the inability to stop gaming, into the International Classification of Diseases. By doing so, the WHO is recognising the serious and growing problem of digital addiction. The problem has also been acknowledged by Google, which recently announced that it will begin focusing on “Digital Well-being” .

Although there is a growing recognition of the problem, users are still not aware of exactly how digital technology is designed to facilitate addiction. We’re part of a research team that focuses on digital addiction and here are some of the techniques and mechanisms that digital media use to keep you hooked.

Compulsive checking

Digital technologies, such as social networks, online shopping, and games, use a set of persuasive and motivational techniques to keep users returning. These include “scarcity” (a snap or status is only temporarily available, encouraging you to get online quickly); “social proof” (20,000 users retweeted an article so you should go online and read it); “personalisation” (your news feed is designed to filter and display news based on your interest); and “reciprocity” (invite more friends to get extra points, and once your friends are part of the network it becomes much more difficult for you or them to leave).

Technology is designed to utilise the basic human need to feel a sense of belonging and connection with others. So, a fear of missing out, commonly known as FoMO, is at the heart of many features of social media design.

Groups and forums in social media promote active participation. Notifications and “presence features” keep people notified of each others’ availability and activities in real-time so that some start to become compulsive checkers. This includes “two ticks” on instant messaging tools, such as Whatsapp. Users can see whether their message has been delivered and read. This creates pressure on each person to respond quickly to the other.

The concepts of reward and infotainment, material which is both entertaining and informative, are also crucial for “addictive” designs. In social networks, it is said that “no news is not good news”. So, their design strives always to provide content and prevent disappointment. The seconds of anticipation for the “pull to refresh” mechanism on smartphone apps, such as Twitter, is similar to pulling the lever of a slot machine and waiting for the win.

Most of the features mentioned above have roots in our non-tech world. Social networking sites have not created any new or fundamentally different styles of interaction between humans. Instead they have vastly amplified the speed and ease with which these interactions can occur, taking them to a higher speed, and scale.

Addiction and awareness

People using digital media do exhibit symptoms of behavioural addiction . These include salience, conflict, and mood modification when they check their online profiles regularly. Often people feel the need to engage with digital devices even if it is inappropriate or dangerous for them to do so. If disconnected or unable to interact as desired, they become preoccupied with missing opportunities to engage with their online social networks.

According to the UK’s communications regulator Ofcom, 15m UK internet users (around 34% of all internet users) have tried a “digital detox” . After being offline, 33% of participants reported feeling an increase in productivity, 27% felt a sense of liberation, and 25% enjoyed life more. But the report also highlighted that 16% of participants experienced the fear of missing out, 15% felt lost and 14% “cut-off”. These figures suggest that people want to spend less time online, but they may need help to do so.

At the moment, tools that enable people to be in control of their online experience, presence and online interaction remain very primitive. There seem to be unwritten expectations for users to adhere to social norms of cyberspace once they accept participation.

But unlike other mediums for addiction, such as alcohol, technology can play a role in making its usage more informed and conscious. It is possible to detect whether someone is using a phone or social network in an anxious, uncontrolled manner. Similar to online gambling, users should have available help if they wish. This could be a self-exclusion and lock-out scheme. Users can allow software to alert them when their usage pattern indicates risk.

The borderline between software which is legitimately immersive and software which can be seen as “exploitation-ware” remains an open question. Transparency of digital persuasion design and education about critical digital literacy could be potential solutions.

• Social media

Lecturer / Senior Lecturer in Indigenous Knowledges

Case Management Lead (Employment Compliance)

Commissioning Editor Nigeria

Professor in Physiotherapy

Postdoctoral Research Associate

Courses for Students Fall 2024  > Spring 2024  > Enrollment FAQs  >

Courses for Professionals VC for Tech  > ELPP-Silicon Valley  > ELPP-Global Online > Emergent Tech Management > Growth Marketing >

Programs For Berkeley Students  > For Global Participants  > For Professionals  > For Companies  > Collider Labs  >

Connect News & Events > Newsletter > Jobs & Opportunities >

About What We Do > People > Instructors > Advisory Board > Fellows >

<  Berkeley Engineering Site

Gadget Addiction

by Ananth Indrakanti, Milan Chutake, Stephen Prouty, Venkat Sundaranatha, Vinod Koverkathu

Introduction

Technology and gadgets are now indispensable in our daily lives. In the past few years carrying a miniature computer (a smart phone) in a pocket has become commonplace. Technology helps advance the human race forward and makes doing mundane things more efficient and repeatable. Technology has helped create the information revolution.

With technological advances, devices have evolved to be so powerful and smart that it feels like having a super-computer on one’s hands. Humans now have an insatiable appetite for information at their fingertips. When technology makes this happen, the natural tendency is for this to become an expectation. When was the last time you printed a map or wrote a snail mail letter? If you did, then you belong to the elite endangered cadre of humans who are vanishing rapidly. Welcome to the information age! Before we frame our problem, we would like to ponder briefly over how our lives have changed with gadgets, compared to pre-digital era.

Life Without Gadgets

People born before the 1980’s would very well relate to life before the information age, when people had no access to internet or personal gadgets.  Let's briefly walk down the memory lane to relive those moments — a life without gadgets.

• Children played together outdoor — they had a lot of physical activity.
• People talked to each other more often, and verbal communication face-face was at its peak.
• Chat jargon did not exist and people knew their spellings well, as they read more books.
• People enjoyed spending more time outdoors with family and friends.
• It was commonplace to get the news from newspaper or radio.
• Entertainment came from playing board games, playing sports, going to the movies, watching VHS tapes, etc.
• Writers often used either a type-writer or a word processor on their computer.
• Computers were expensive and bulky.
• Doing research was hard; frequent visits to the library or scouring through plethora of papers, books, etc. were necessary.
• Communication was slow.

Life With Gadgets

Gadgets equipped with internet have transformed our lives in several ways and brought about a paradigm shift in our dependence on technology to perform key tasks in our everyday routine. To highlight a few:

• Use Google Maps to get directions, watch YouTube videos to learn to cook, sing, draw, learn science, etc.
• Health monitoring apps on the cell phone that would remind people to walk, run, bike, check BP periodically, etc.
• Capability to share daily life or special events instantly with thousands of people and see reaction in a matter of minutes, if not seconds
• Expedited research with access to information galore
• Ability to watch videos on demand from anywhere (Netflix, Amazon, etc.)
• Ability to read e-books online on demand — no more visits to library needed
• Use of mobile phones, tablets as pacifiers for kids
• Improved speed of communication by orders of magnitude leading to faster decision-making
• Existence of mobile apps for entertainment, social interaction through digital media, paying bills, accessing bank accounts, etc. (virtually for any purpose)

While there have been advantages to this information age and gadget revolution, it has created an insatiable appetite for information. It's now an expectation that information be readily available on demand from anywhere. This is the age of instant gratification.  While technology has fostered the human race, does our current consumption pattern adversely impact our analytical and creative abilities, lead to loss of focus in communication and make us just indexers of data rather than bearers of knowledge?  Are we addicted to our gadgets? Let's find out.

You’ve temporarily misplaced your cell phone and anxiously retrace your steps to try to find it. Or perhaps you never let go of your phone — it's always in your hand, your pocket, or your bag, ready to be answered or consulted at a moment’s notice.

Dr. Veronika Konok and her collaborators [1] cite evidence that supports the idea that “healthy, well-functioning adults also report significant emotional attachment to special objects.”

A quick survey showed that most people panicked when they had misplaced their smartphones (Fig. 1).

Figure 1 : Survey results from “Lookout”

Mobile Consumption Growth Trend

In the last decade, digital consumption on mobile devices has overtaken that on desktop devices. Between 2011 and 2016, about 300% growth [2] (Fig. 2) was seen with data  consumption on mobile devices, while that on desktop devices and other connected devices stayed relatively flat.  The growth in combined number of smartphone/tablet users is expected to grow from current 2.5 billion to about 3.13 billion by 2020 (about 23%).

Social networking, listening to music, watching videos and playing games represent the bulk of what people do with their smartphones and tablets. Essentially it’s about communication and entertainment, two things that help people to cope with the level of stress in today’s world.

Figure 2:  Time spent per adult user/day with digital media

Americans tend to spend more than 11 hours/day on a screen (mobile phone/desktop/tablet, etc.), be it for personal use or work-related activity.  About half of the screen time is spent on a mobile device. Statistics [3] show that 8% of the time spent on a mobile is on a browser while the majority (92%) of the time is spent on social networking/media, music and entertainment apps. (Fig. 3)

Figure 3:  Ratio of time spent on mobile by app category

Mobile App Usage Statistics

It will have been a decade since the establishment of the mobile app ecosystem by the summer of 2018. The total number of mobile app downloads touched 197 billion in 2017 [3] . The two biggest app stores, i.e., Apple’s iOS App store and Google’s Play store, have served as effective app distribution channels for the millions of app developers in the ecosystem.

Not surprisingly, Facebook app demonstrated the highest level of penetration among 18+ years age group with a whopping 81% in 2017, while YouTube came second with 71% penetration and Facebook Messenger was not too far behind with 68% penetration. It is interesting to note that the chart is completely dominated by Facebook-owned (Facebook, FB messenger and Instagram) and Google-owned (Google search, Google Maps, Gmail, Google Play) apps, with Snapchat and Pandora being the only exceptions.  It is also intriguing that social networking and entertainment are valued the most by app users worldwide.

Figure 4: Mobile apps penetration chart

The Invisible Problem

The business model of social networking and entertainment sites/apps like Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Snapchat, etc. revolves around [4] :

• Sophisticated methods to seek attention of the maximum number of users and maximize the users’ time spent on these apps, i.e., make users interact and share their experiences, actions with the online community frequently and crave for virtual rewards (likes, comments)
• Enablement and empowerment of advertisers to target these users continually while scrolling through feeds in Facebook or browsing through videos on YouTube
• Learning from user interests (vacation preferences, activities etc.) and developing products that targets these users with AI driven personalized content, feeds and advertisements 24x7, where they start maneuvering the user behavior to their advantage.

While there is no denying that the business model is tuned to maximize users’ attention and time spent on these apps leading to gadget addiction and increased screen time, the other major problem that needs to be highlighted is that these platforms have no way to validate content being fed to users, i.e., fake news, articles generated to manipulate minds can be easily spread with these apps with no regulations or checks in place.

Let’s elaborate the point on how users that get initiated into these platforms develop the tendency to repeatedly visit them and ultimately get addicted, without any external force. How does this really work?

The Science of Addiction

Nir Eyal ’s Hooked model explains the four stages we run through as we use the platform [5] :

• Boredom acts as an internal trigger, and external notifications add to that.
• The action is dead simple: open the app or page in the browser.
• A great variability of rewards is bestowed upon us: photos, comments, likes, gossip, news, emotions, laughter. The wheel of fortune never disappoints.
• We invest more and more time and attention into interacting on the platform, which keeps us coming back.

Taken together, these elements are what have caused so many of us to spiral into addiction. The worst part is we do it to ourselves.

Effects of Gadget Addiction

While the business model of the top few app companies hinges on people spending more time with their gadgets every day, we need to recognize that the most important fallout of this induced behavior would be the rising epidemic of gadget addiction. A sense of urge to use the phone or any other gadget when bored or idle equates to addiction. Gadget addiction doesn't discriminate who is affected, it affects all age groups and people of all races. The effects range from mental, physical, emotional to even threatening our democracy.

Mental and Emotional Health

Dopamine is a neurochemical that largely controls the pleasure and reward centers of the brain. High levels of dopamine are usually associated with motivation and excitement to fulfil goals that would lead to recognized rewards and thus reinforcement of a sense of pleasure while achieving those goals. Procrastination, lack of enthusiasm and self-confidence, and boredom are linked to low levels of dopamine.

Research has shown that the brain gets “rewired” as excessive amounts of dopamine get released in the body on frequent interaction with a rewarding stimulus, i.e., using a smartphone app like Facebook [6] . Boredom triggers an interaction with the rewarding stimulus (Facebook app), which in turn results in wide variety of rewards in the form of likes, messages, photos, etc. causing high releases of dopamine in the body. Frequent cycles such as these cause the brain’s receptors to become more insensitive to dopamine, causing the body to experience less pleasure than before for the same natural reward. This leads the person down a spiral, where one has increased craving for the same reward to achieve normal levels of pleasure. If the increased craving cannot be satisfied, it would lead to anxiety, lack of motivation and depression. Gadget addiction is likened to addiction to alcohol or drugs since it results in similar negative consequences.

Studies [7] have shown that children's cognitive and emotional development can be adversely impacted by internet/gadget addiction. More screen time means more virtual interactions and rewards through social media (shares, likes) and less face time. Less face-to-face interaction with other people results in lack of empathy for fellow human beings. As social media glorify picture-perfect lives and well-toned physiques, children’s self-esteem and self-confidence are eroded. Lack of focus and more distraction during conversations is another expected negative impact.  A study on China high school students [8] demonstrated that children with moderate to severe risk of internet addiction are more than twice as likely to develop depressive symptoms than addiction-free counterparts.

Figure   5:  Dopamine level releases w.r.t time

Physical Health

Today’s children are immersed in technology right from a very young age. With more than half the schools in the US using smart devices as teaching tools in class, coupled with at-home smart device usage, the total screen exposure time of students in the age group 8-18 has exceeded ten hours a day [9] . There are obvious benefits to being exposed to technology right from a very young age, i.e., development of skills needed to be successful in technology-related areas in a future career. However, on the downside, there could be lack of development of social behavioral skills and high risk of obesity due to limited physical activity.

As one would also expect, one of the biggest health risks of excessive smart device usage is vision-related. The National Eye Institute [10] has found that the frequency of myopia (near-sightedness) has increased exponentially in Americans over the last few decades. The other effect on eyes was reduced blink rate leading to higher incidence of dry eye symptoms.  Based on these findings, the American Academy of Pediatrics [11] has revised recommendations for limiting screen time for kids at different ages.

Figure 6:  Recommended screen time for kids (American Academy of Pediatrics)

Listening to loud music through earbuds has detrimental effects on hearing ability  The National Institute of Deafness and Other Communication Disorders [12] reports that about 15% of Americans between the ages of 20-69 have a reduced capability to hear high frequency sounds due to exposure to loud sounds. Other negative effects on physical health from excessive gadget usage include lack of sleep and increased weight on the spine [13] as the head tilt increases to view the screen.

Figure 7:  The burden of starting at a smartphone

Human Behavior

Figure 8: Cognitive-behavioral therapy [14]

Cognitive-behavioral therapy depicts how emotions, thoughts and behaviors influence each other. This model has been very useful in treatment of substance abuse, addictions, gambling addiction, smoking cessation etc.With advent of social networks, our emotional dependence is on instant likes, brief instant text messages creating a virtual set of friends who may never be physically present. Opinions and judgements are made without actual human connection and in-depth in person discussions. The virtual instant digitized friend circle gives a sense of belonging and feeling of having many friends who care about us. The HOOK business model leverages this human emotional dependence feeling and transforms those feelings into behavior where one feels like constantly engaging with these social networking platforms seeking for instant gratifications. When one does not get the instant emotional support in the forms of likes, instant messages then one starts feeling anxious, lonely and moody. Lot of the younger generation seem to start losing self-esteem and self-confidence if their friends fail to like their picture or respond to their posts instantly. In a nutshell the human behavior is being digitized.

Our political discourse is shrinking to fit to our smartphone screens. The most classic example is when President Obama used Instagram to push forward his climate change agenda.

The HOOK business model has got us addicted to our gadgets to watch the next post or news on social media. Well, this hunger for information can have both positive and negative impacts on our society and democracy. Social media may not create our bad habits, but it feeds them, and for one reason alone: money. In 1920’s it was the radio that reduced people to their voices, then in 1960’s television gave people their bodies back. Today with public looking to smartphones for news and media we seem to be in the third wave of election engineering. A recent survey found that 37% of people trust the news that get from social media — that's half the share from print and magazine media.

Let's consider the positive impacts. Few years ago, touch was used to connect with people especially if you're not the outgoing type. These platforms allow us to tailor the message to the audience, do fundraising, and get feedback. The momentum for the movements to topple regimes in Libya and Tunisia [15] was powered by these platforms. The more visceral the message, the more quickly it goes viral and the longer it holds the darting public eye. Around the world, these platforms like social media are making it easier for people to have a voice in the government, to discuss issues, organize around causes, and hold leaders accountable.

The argument is not complete without the negative impacts. For example, bots are often used to amplify political messages. The financial crisis of 2007-2008 stoked public anger [16] when the wealthy left everyone behind. These culture wars have split voters by their identity rather than class. It is claimed that more than 146 million people could have potentially seen fake news in their feed during the 2016 election year. These companies have  moral responsibility to let users know that content might not be real. [17]

Don’t ask about the intentions, aspirations or responsibilities of social media companies. Just follow the money, that’s the basis of the HOOK business model.

How is society responding?

As we see the rise of ill effects of long term gadget use, rising health concerns amidst this drive to seek mindshare, finite attention of the same consumers there are groups of individuals who are now speaking up and taking a stand. These groups are investors, ex-employees of these companies and consumer groups. Starting 2018 these voices have amplified and there is a call for action and change is imminent.

Apple Investor's Open Letter

A pair of investors who hold about $2 billion in Apple stock are pushing the company to do more to protect its youngest users from the effects of digital technology [18] . In an open letter to Apple, the investors, the activist hedge fund Jana Partners and the California State Teachers’ Retirement System, voiced concerns that such technology might be hurting children and said Apple could help ease the damage even as it generates business.

Addressing the issue now could help Apple avoid an impending reckoning as unease grows over the role technology and social media play in our daily lives, the shareholders wrote. “There is a developing consensus around the world including Silicon Valley that the potential long-term consequences of new technologies need to be factored in at the outset, and no company can outsource that responsibility,” the investors wrote. The solution, they argued, is not to banish such devices from children’s hands, but to help parents help them understand how to use technology with care. The open letter highlights growing concern that Silicon Valley is damaging youth and urges new parental controls, child protection committee and release of data.

The Center for Humane Technology

A group of Silicon Valley technologists who were early employees at Facebook and Google [19] , concerned over the ill effects of social networks and smartphones, are getting together to challenge the very companies they helped build. They have come together to a union of concerned experts called the Center for Humane Technology [20] . It plans an anti-tech addiction lobbying effort and an ad campaign at 55,000 public schools in the United States. The campaign, titled The Truth About Tech, will be funded with $7 million from Common Sense and capital raised by the Center for Humane Technology.

One of the co-founders of Center for Humane Technology — Harris, a former design ethicist at Google — mentions [21] it is not enough to simply turn your phone to gray or to stop using these tools entirely. Always-on technology is now baked into the social fabric. The teen who quits Snapchat risks missing out on the primary way his peers communicate. The employee who declines to answer her boss's after-hours email risks losing career opportunities. Which is why Harris is calling on the companies themselves to redesign their products with ethics, not purely profits, in mind, and calling on Congress to write basic consumer protections into law.

How is the industry responding?

With the clamour for change, companies who have a larger part to play in this ecosystem have realised that they need to acknowledge and recognize that there is an issue and at least have controls in place to alleviate the impact and negative PR around these issues.

Based on our understanding of this ecosystem and bucketing the responses we expect the changes to come from the following groups:

Device Makers

Popular apps, standalone apps, regulations, self-awareness.

Device makers have a very large influence on this ecosystem. Availability of platform level features could make a big difference to the user experience, privacy and parental controls across apps and device interaction itself. Ever since these issues have got increased media attention has forced device makers to think of alternatives or at least options in place for concerned groups. Some of the options available natively on device are the following:

• Grayscale option
• Parental controls - purchases, time limitations, app usage limitations
• Night light - predominant on reading devices and reading apps

Shades of Gray

Tristan Harris from Center for Humane Tech proposed [22] using shades of gray is to make the glittering screen a little less stimulating. Based on a popular report, “We’re simple animals, excited by bright colors, it turns out.” Silicon Valley companies know this, and they have increasingly been turning to the field of applied neuroscience to see how exactly brains respond to color in the apps, what brings pleasure and what keeps the eye. New research shows how important color is to our understanding of priorities and emotion. Grayscale can make the display more readable for those who are color blind. Second, if your battery is running low and you know that it will be a while before you'll have the opportunity to charge it, grayscale can extend battery life. Third, some experts say that using grayscale on your iPhone might be the answer to the question of how to break phone addiction. Not so popular but turns out iOS and Android devices have controls to switch to grayscale mode. On the iPhone grayscale mode can be turned on from Accessibility controls. On Android it’s a slightly more difficult workflow to enable grayscale. First up, you'll need to enable the hidden "Developer Options" menu. Under the Hardware accelerated rendering section, choose "Monochromacy" on the popup, then your screen will immediately enter grayscale mode.

Apple: In January 2018, Apple said it would introduce new features to help parents control their children’s use of the company’s products [23] . The move came after two Apple shareholders posted an open letter pushing Apple to address what is seen as a “growing public health crisis” of smartphone addiction in young people. Now, Apple has a new page on its site that collects information about the company’s family features and parental controls in one place [24] .

The page showcases features including an Ask To Buy tool that lets parents approve or decline app purchases from their device; an app management feature that lets users automatically block in-app purchases automatically; and the option to limit adult content on kids’ devices and restrict browsing to only pre-approved websites. Apple’s Find My Friends can also help track locations and issue alerts when children leave or arrive somewhere.

Google: Google announced the launch of Family Link in March 2017 [25] , an application for parents that lets them establish a child’s first Google account, as well as utilize a series of  parental controls to manage and track screen time, daily limits, device “bedtimes,” and which apps kids can use.

While all the major mobile device providers – Apple, Google, and Amazon included – offer parental controls on their devices, Family Link is different because it’s a two-party system. Instead, it works more like the third-party parental control and monitoring software already on the market, where an app installed on a parent’s device is used to configure settings and keep an eye on kids’ digital behavior.

Parental Control devices: This is the other class of devices that can help you create a safe online environment for your kids over your home wireless network. The advantage is that any parental control settings you apply to a network will apply to all devices connected to the Wi-Fi. You don’t have to install software on each individual device, and you can filter content right at the source. The disadvantage, however, is that the parental control options are generally less flexible and only apply when the devices are used at home. Here are some of the popular parental control devices available in the market today:

• Circle with Disney [26]
• UnGlue [27]
• KoalaSafe [28]

Some of the popular apps have also taken steps to attempt to solve the “device addiction” problems. Here are some of the notable initiatives.

Facebook: In January 2018 Mark Zuckerberg announced [30] a major overhaul of Facebook’s News Feed algorithm that would prioritize “meaningful social interactions” over “relevant content” on Thursday, one week after he pledged to spend 2018 “making sure that time spent on Facebook is time well spent”. The social media platform will de-prioritize videos, photos, and posts shared by businesses and media outlets, which Zuckerberg dubbed “public content,” in favor of content produced by a user’s friends and family [31] .

Youtube: Google launched a service called YouTube Kids in February 2015 [32] , a new version of the internet’s leading destination for video aimed squarely at children. YouTube Kids limits the world of content on the service to curated, family-friendly videos, channels, and educational clips. It also includes features like timer settings to limit screen time and a search function. The search gives users access to YouTube’s main database of videos, but that YouTube Kids’ results are automatically filtered for safe content. The service also gives adults a range of parental controls, including the ability to disable search completely, limit screen time and cap the volume. Google has disabled comments on the service, but it does show some kid-friendly ads.

There are multiple independent, third party apps of varying quality. These are mostly from smaller startups with limited revenue. Some of these could be effective, but involves searching for the right app and downloading it on all devices. The illustration covers some of the apps in this space.

Figure 9:  Illustration of apps for limiting gadget usage

From our research on these topic regulations seems to have limited impact in helping reduce gadget addiction and usage. There have been multiple regulations, bans and reversals for usage of gadgets in schools.

A girls’ school is banning wearable activity trackers and smartwatches because of concerns that pupils are skipping lunch if they fail to meet their calorie and exercise targets [33] . This article also suggests that “Social media addiction is thought to affect around 5% of young people, with social media being described as more addictive than cigarettes and alcohol” - which ties in with the HOOK model.

The French government in Dec 2017 decided to ban students from using mobile phones in the country’s primary, junior and middle schools [34] . Children will be allowed to bring their phones to school, but not allowed to get them out at any time until they leave, even during breaks.

Although students have been using cell phones consistently in their daily lives for almost a decade, many public schools continue to resist allowing the devices into the classroom. Schools generally grapple with new technologies, but cell phones’ reputation as a nuisance and a distraction has been hard to dislodge. Recently, however, the acceptance of these devices has been growing. Beginning in March, New York City, the largest school district in the country with 1.1 million students, will reverse its long standing ban on cell phones in schools [35] .

Centre for Humane Tech suggests humane design and applying political pressure as two of the ways to move forward for making gadgets less addictive [36] . Regulation alone will not help drive change, regulation can help support the change.

Self-awareness is key to reducing gadget addiction. Consumer demand for change becomes a forcing function for companies — device makers and popular app makers to recognize this problem and work towards having better designed — “humane designed” technology that aids use.

Consumers do not want to use technology/products that they know are harmful, especially when it harms their kids. We should increase awareness, spread the message such that consumers recognize the difference between technology designed to extract the most attention from us, and technology whose goals are aligned with our own. Consumers need to take control of their digital lives with better tools, habits and demand to make this change.

Having a more aware set of consumers and users will force policy makers and also help push regulations and policies in the right direction. Being self-aware enables us to be mindful and enjoy life moments without being glued to our screens and spend quality time with our loved ones.

Recommendations — which of these will have more impact?

We compared gadget addiction with other addiction paradigms to see what has worked in that context so that we can use the learnings.

Other Addiction Paradigms  

Obesity: This has been a raging problem in the US, especially impacting the younger generation. Research has shown that shame campaigns like “fat = bad” has not worked. But the campaigns around positive reinforcement of healthy habits have seen resounding success.

Tobacco Addiction: In the US alone, we spend close to 240 billion dollars in treating tobacco addiction. This a growing problem. There have been several successful programs and some not so successful. The government regulation exists for tobacco manufacturers to have the Surgeon General's Warning on the ill-effects of using tobacco. While every smoker reads it they still continue to smoke, it has become an issue of passionate defiance, addiction - an emotional dependence as smokers feel it helps them cope with stress, anxiety etc. Smokers still act against their best interest. [37]

CDC has said that the campaigns against smoking is working, but need to be rolled out nationally and continuously. Their initial efforts have shown that up to 100,000 smokers quit from these campaigns — a good sign. The most common problem smokers cite is that everyone around them smoked. Moving away from these groups has also shown positive effects in quitting smoking.

Drug/Alcohol Addiction: This has become part and parcel of our typical public health landscape. We see campaigns like “Don’t drink and drive,” the fines and punishment for DUI, etc. There have been some successful campaigns that permeate our society which are commonly known as “Don’t let your friend drink and drive” and the “designated driver program.” Some of these have become the terminology that we adopted in our daily lives. Some of these campaigns do work effectively.

Based on other addiction paradigms, campaigns can work if they focus on the right habits and not focus on shaming. Governing bodies might bring in regulations for companies to address this area either through self-awareness campaigns or by regulating detection of device abuse. With that said, device makers will have the bulk share of the responsibility to integrate them into the devices. While the regulations will have an impact but the device and self-awareness campaigns will have a more pronounced effect as seen in other addiction paradigms.

Where can we expect change from?

Device makers have best reach/effectiveness. We feel device makers will enable capabilities for users to turn on device abuse and notifications. But this can only be useful if users are self-aware that they have a problem with addiction to a gadget. These two – device makers and self-awareness — are the biggest change drivers.

We expect policy and regulations to have reasonable impact, but they need to work along with users and device makers to work out a good balance. Standalone apps to reduce screen time, etc. need users to be aware to download these apps. Popular app makers have less incentive to change their freemium or advertising revenue by reducing screen time and so unless there is a strong awareness from the user base which is pushing for change, popular app makers have little incentive to change.

Figure 10: Sources of change and impact

How do we see this playing out in the future?

As we have more and more gadgets entering our daily life, we will accept, adapt and evolve to lead device interrupted life as the new norm. Right now we are seeing a big increase in the number of digital assistants. Interaction will move from keyboard to more spoken forms and gestures. Voice and gestures will be the primary interface in the future. Augmented Reality (AR) is technology that superimposes a computer-generated image on a user's view of the real world, thus providing a composite view. AR will provide contextual information just in time as we go through our daily routines.

Technology and gadgets would have become an integral part of human lifestyle, and will only continue to increase with years to come. The form factors of gadgets and how humans interact with them may change. However, fundamentally as a human society we should continue to be aware and make sure we do live a fulfilling life by not becoming addicted to machines and continue to emphasize and cherish the human connection in our lives.

Works Cited

[1] https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/fulfillment-any-age/201609/is-why-we-cant-put-down-our-phones

[2] https://www.smartinsights.com/mobile-marketing/mobile-marketing-analytics/mobile-marketing-statistics/

[3] http://www.businessofapps.com/data/app-statistics/#3

[4] http://humanetech.com/problem/

[5] https://www.nirandfar.com/2012/03/how-to-manufacture-desire.html

[6] https://www.ama.org/publications/MarketingNews/Pages/feeding-the-addiction.aspx

[7] https://www.commonsensemedia.org/sites/default/files/uploads/research/csm_2016_technology_addiction_research_brief_0.pdf

[8] https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapediatrics/fullarticle/383813

[9] https://blog.chocchildrens.org/effects-of-screen-time-on-childrens-vision/

[10] https://www.cbsnews.com/news/screen-time-digital-eye-strain/

[11] https://blog.chocchildrens.org/effects-of-screen-time-on-childrens-vision/

[12] http://www.digitalresponsibility.org/technology-and-hearing-loss

[13] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5440123/

[14] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_behavioral_therapy

[15] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/feb/25/twitter-facebook-uprisings-arab-libya

[16] https://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21730871-facebook-google-and-twitter-were-supposed-save-politics-good-information-drove-out

[17] https://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21730871-facebook-google-and-twitter-were-supposed-save-politics-good-information-drove-out

[18] https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/jan/08/apple-investors-iphone-addiction-children

[19] https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/04/technology/early-facebook-google-employees-fight-tech.html

[20] http://humanetech.com/

[21] https://www.wired.com/story/center-for-humane-technology-tech-addiction/

[22] https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/12/technology/grayscale-phone.html

[23] https://9to5mac.com/2018/01/08/improved-parental-controls-ios/

[24] https://9to5mac.com/2018/03/14/apple-parental-controls-features/

[25] https://techcrunch.com/2017/03/15/google-introduces-family-link-its-own-parental-control-software-for-android/

[26] https://meetcircle.com/

[27] https://www.unglue.com/

[28] https://koalasafe.com/

[29] https://www.asecurelife.com/best-parental-controls-for-wireless-networks/#torch

[30] https://www.facebook.com/zuck/posts/10104413015393571

[31] https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/jan/11/facebook-news-feed-algorithm-overhaul-mark-zuckerberg

[32] https://techcrunch.com/2015/02/23/hands-on-with-youtube-kids-googles-newly-launched-child-friendly-youtube-app/

[33] https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/jul/12/gloucestershire-school-clamps-down-smartphones-activity-trackers-pupils

[34] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/dec/11/france-to-ban-mobile-phones-in-schools-from-september

[35] https://www.wsj.com/articles/cellphone-ban-in-nyc-schools-to-end-1420602754

[36] http://humanetech.com/problem#the-way-forward

[37] https://www.cnn.com/2014/01/11/health/still-smoking/index.html

Could You Be Addicted to Technology?

Signs and symptoms that a problem exists..

Posted February 12, 2018 | Reviewed by Ekua Hagan

• What Is Addiction?
• Find a therapist to overcome addiction

Maybe I’m overusing technology…

Maybe you are. How exactly would you know? The digital police aren’t going to flag you when you’ve met your technology threshold.

On the other hand, constant use has become normalized. The toddler tinkering with a tablet, the teen locked away in their room tied to their computer, and to the adult buried in their phone at a social engagement are just a few examples of ordinary use.

In our present day, the increase in popularity and integration of technology in our daily lives prompts one to ponder the potential of developing an addiction to technology. At what point are we at risk for crossing the fine line from general use to problematic use?

Addiction has historically been associated with substance dependence, however, since the 1980s the concern of potentially excessive and problematic behaviors such as gambling grew in recognition, and caused experts to contemplate reclassification.

Scholars have suggested addictions specific as Facebook addiction, nevertheless, for this article please consider Griffith’s assertion of technology addiction, a behavioral addiction in which problems arise from excessive human-machine interaction. Hence the general use of the TV for binge-watching your favorite series, the use of your computer for writing reports and checking emails, and the use of your cellphone for scrolling social applications (e.g., Instagram , Twitter, Snapchat, LinkedIn could all pave the path to a potential problem.

Although absent from the present diagnostic guidelines such as the International Classification of Diseases ( ICD ) and the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders ( DSM ), scholars have recognized that while fine, there may be a line between general technology use and unhealthy use related to physical, social, and psychological problems.

Examples of problems associated with excessive technology use

• Sedentary lifestyle 1 : The more time spent on a screen is associated with less time for physical fitness. Similarly, remaining in a fixed posture could cause musculoskeletal symptoms.
• Vision 1 : The lengthy use of devices could cause visual symptoms (e.g., discomfort, eyestrain, blurred vision, headache)
• Injuries 1 : Devices are often used while carrying out other tasks (i.e, walking, driving) and may cause the user to be more susceptible to accidents.
• Infections 1,2 : Simply put, devices may have more germs than a toilet seat.
• Social development 1 : More time spent on online engagement over face-to-face interaction may hinder social skill development or cause social withdrawal.
• Sleep deprivation 1,3 : Devices may cut into one’s sleep cycle . Further, depending on the use, an individual may be wired, alert, and unable to rest.
• Psychological concerns 1,4-10 : Excessive use of technology has been associated with several mental health concerns such as poor psychological well-being, poor self‐ confidence anxiety , depression , lower emotional stability , and lower life satisfaction.

Researchers have created assessments to gauge the different domains within technology addiction. Such efforts include, but are not limited to, the Compulsive Internet Use Scale , the Mobile Phone Problematic Use Scale , the Bergen Social Media Addiction Scale , and the Multidimensional Facebook Intensity Scale .

Further, scholars remain focused on exploring the potentially problematic use of technology. Some have asserted that technology addiction is not an independent concern, but a flag for a potential underlying psychological problem 1 . Regardless of the semantics surrounding addiction, research has consistently shown that there may be problematic associations with excessive technology use.

Based on the present literature, here are some prompts to ponder if you are concerned about your technology use:

• Have you noticed an increase in how often you use your device?
• Have you felt guilty about how often you use your device?
• Do you experience an urge to use your device?
• When you are using your device, do you experience lift in your mood?
• When you are using your device, do you experience a thrill?
• When unable to use your device do you experience discomfort?
• Have you noticed times in which it seems as though time was lost while you were in the zone using your device?
• Do you use your device to brighten your mood?
• Have you tried to reduce the amount of time that you use your device?
• If so, were you successful in reducing your amount?
• Have your loved ones complained about your use?
• If yes, have you continued your usage rate regardless of their complaints?

Please keep in mind that these questions are to help you flag a potential concern. It does not substitute for a psychometrically-sound assessment or guidance from a trained mental health professional. Nevertheless, if you respond affirmatively to several of these questions, and particularly if you exhibit some of the concerns noted above, it may be helpful to consider help for your underlying concerns.

World Health Organization. (2014).Public Health Implications of Excessive Use of the Internet, Computers, Smartphones and Similar Electronic Devices Meeting report. Retrieved from http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/184264/1/9789241509367_eng.pdf…

Matthews, S. E. (2012). Why your cellphone has more germs than a toilet. Retrieved from https://todayhealth.today.com/_news/2012/08/30/13569391-why-your-cellph…

Aswathy, D., Manoj Kumar, S., P, T., & P, M. (2017). Technology addiction among treatment seekers for psychological problems: implication for screening in mental health setting. Indian Journal of Psychological Medicine , 39 (1),21-27 doi:10.4103/0253-7176.198939

Satici, S. A. (2018). Facebook addiction and subjective well-being: A study of the mediating role of shyness and loneliness. International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction , 1-15. doi:10.1007/s11469-017-9862-8

Leung, L. (2007). Leisure Boredom, Sensation Seeking, Self-Esteem, Addiction Symptoms, and Patterns of Mobile Phone Use. Conference Papers -- International Communication Association, 1.

Brailovskaia, J., & Margraf, J. (2017). Facebook Addiction Disorder (FAD) among German students—A longitudinal approach. Plos ONE, 12(12), 1-15. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0189719

Kruger, D. J., & Djerf, J. M. (2017). Bad vibrations? Cell phone dependency predicts phantom communication experiences. Computers in Human Behavior, 70, 360-364. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2017.01.017

Blachnio, A., Przepiorka, A., Senol-Durak, E., Durak, M., & Sherstyuk, L. (2017). The role of personality traits in Facebook and Internet addictions: A study on Polish, Turkish, and Ukrainian samples. Computers in Human Behavior , doi:10.1016/j.chb.2016.11.037

Wartberg, L., Petersen, K., Kammerl, R., Rosenkranz, M., & Thomasius, R. (2014). Psychometric Validation of a German Version of the Compulsive Internet Use Scale. Cyberpsychology, Behavior & Social Networking, 17 (2), 99-103. doi:10.1089/cyber.2012.0689

Błachnio, A., Przepiorka, A., & Pantic, I. (2016). Association between facebook addiction, self-esteem and life satisfaction: A cross-sectional study. Computers in Human Behavior, 55 , 701-705. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2015.10.026

Shainna Ali, Ph.D. , is a practitioner, educator, and advocate who is passionate about highlighting the essentiality of mental health in fostering happiness and fulfillment.

• Find a Therapist
• Find a Treatment Center
• Find a Psychiatrist
• Find a Support Group
• Find Online Therapy
• United States
• Brooklyn, NY
• Chicago, IL
• Houston, TX
• Los Angeles, CA
• New York, NY
• Portland, OR
• San Diego, CA
• San Francisco, CA
• Seattle, WA
• Washington, DC
• Asperger's
• Bipolar Disorder
• Chronic Pain
• Eating Disorders
• Passive Aggression
• Personality
• Goal Setting
• Positive Psychology
• Stopping Smoking
• Low Sexual Desire
• Relationships
• Child Development
• Self Tests NEW
• Therapy Center
• Diagnosis Dictionary
• Types of Therapy

When we fall prey to perfectionism, we think we’re honorably aspiring to be our very best, but often we’re really just setting ourselves up for failure, as perfection is impossible and its pursuit inevitably backfires.

• Emotional Intelligence
• Gaslighting
• Affective Forecasting
• Neuroscience

Technology addiction

About our research.

The Technology Addiction team works across disciplines and engages with stakeholders to contribute to a greater conceptual understanding of how and why people make decisions about technology use that impact mental health and may lead to behavioural addictions (e.g., online gambling and gaming). Given the dynamic nature of emerging technologies, many mental health impacts are not well understood.

Our team has expertise from a range of disciplines to consider the wide implications of technology on addictive behaviours, including understanding risky decision-making, excessive and problematic Internet use and gaming, legal and criminal issues, public health policies, psychological treatments and prevention methods.

We believe a collaborative approach is needed to address the role of technology in addictive behaviours. We aim to increase awareness of risks and encourage all stakeholders to intervene, prevent, and minimise harms.

The link between technology and addictions

Gambling and gaming disorder has been officially recognised as behavioural addictions. However, these, and other potential behavioural addictions are so new that there are no broadly accepted conceptual models or understanding of how problems are developed and maintained.

As with so many activities, technology now plays a dominant role in our daily lives, including entertainment and social pursuits. Technological products are increasingly immersive and persuasive and enable a high level of accessibility and interaction with daily life through personalized notifications. Engagement with technology, particularly at excessive levels, can lead to broad-ranging harms with significant physical, mental, social, and economic costs for individuals and communities. 

Technology is changing the nature of addictive behaviours; online activities have unique risks including losing track of time and money, disrupted sleep and eating and interaction with poor mental health. Rates of problems are higher among those who gamble online and online gaming is an increasingly concerning problem. Technology is impacting social interactions and aggression, cyber-bullying, cyberchondria, sexual behaviours, impulsive behaviours, and crime.

Risky behaviours associated with emerging technologies are increasing across the population, with particular concerns regarding youth, and have been associated with negative mental health outcomes. We therefore place special focus on youth and young adults and lifespan differences in behaviour using emerging technologies. 

Our approach

Our multi-disciplinary collaboration draws together perspectives from clinical psychology, public health, ethics, economics, business, social sciences (e.g., media and technology), law, neuroscience, psychiatry and beyond for a comprehensive understanding at both the conceptual and applied levels of the impact of technologies on addictions.

On the conceptual level, we aim to understand how dynamic technological changes are impacting addictions and mental health including identifying risk factors, environmental and social determinants, associated harms, and outcomes. We will consider the specific design mechanics and structural characteristics of technologies and how technology may encourage risky behaviours and decision-making.

We will apply this understanding to develop evidence-based frameworks that promote better decision-making and minimize harms. We will provide harm-minimising insights for prevention policy, inform guidelines for treatment interventions, and drive discourse in the public arena as technologies change over time.

We seek to increase awareness and responsibility among stakeholder groups including industry and governments of the risks to individuals and actions needed to minimize harms. We aim to be a leading voice to share our evidence-based expertise to advocate for and guide the implementation and evaluation of policies and practices for technologies that may impact the development and maintenance of addictions.

This group has extensive international collaborative relationships and we look forward to engaging with new colleagues internally and externally, particularly early career researchers and postgraduate students.

Our current projects

Our team’s research objectives are:

• To understand the influence of technology in behavioural addictions and harmful impacts for individuals and the community, particularly pertain ing to mental health, and economic outcomes;
• To apply this understanding to guide policy and strategies that minimise harmful behaviours and promote healthy decision-making; and
• To work collaboratively to increase awareness of and acceptance of responsibility among stakeholders to take actions to intervene, prevent, and minimise harms.

Development of a framework for stakeholders to reduce the risks associated with emerging technologies and gambling

Problematic risk-taking involving emerging technologies: A stakeholder framework to minimize harms

Reducing Internet Gambling Harms Using Behavioral Science: A Stakeholder Framework

Sally Gainsbury, Nicola Black, Alex Blaszczynski, Sascha Callaghan, Garner Clancey, Vladan Starcevic, Agnieszka Tymula, Thomas Swanton, Cynthia Forlini

Development and real-world trials of “intelligent” messages tailored for individuals to encourage appropriate behavioural change adoption of consumer protection tools, gambling at a sustainable level

Robert Heirene & Sally Gainsbury – funded by Responsible Wagering Australia

Identifying behavioural makers of higher and lower risk gambling among online wagering customers

Sally Gainsbury, Robert Heirene, Agnieska Tymula, Deborah Cobb-Clark, Jonathan Levy – including funding from Entain Australia and the International Center for Responsible Gaming

Understanding the impact of digital payment mechanisms on expenditure and addictive behaviours

Thomas Swanton, Sally Gainsbury, Ellen Garbarino, Sharon Collard, Daniel Gozman  – including funding from the NSW Office of Responsible Gambling and the Australian Leisure and Hospitality Group

Evaluating the impact of government mandated expenditure statements

Sally Gainsbury, Robert Heirene, Agnieska Tymula, Deborah Cobb-Clark – including funding from Entain Australia and the International Center for Responsible Gaming

Exploring loss chasing among online betting customers of differing socioeconomic groups

Emily Shaw, Agnieszka Tymula, Sally Gainsbury

Understanding use of, attitudes towards, barriers, and motivators to use deposit limits among online wagering customers

Sally Gainsbury, Elizabeth Stratton - including funding from Sportsbet, Brain and Mind Centre, International Center for Responsible Gaming

Co-design and development of an online resource to assist consumers at-risk of experiencing harms to manage their gambling

Dilushi Chandrakumar, Sibyl Lin, Sally Gainsbury, Christopher Hunt, Simone Rodda

Exploring the directionality and relationship between anxiety and gaming disorder

Seungyeon Kim, Katrina Champion, Lauren Gardner, Maree Teeson, Nicola Newton, Sally Gainsbury

Problematic online behaviors and psychopathology: A community study

Vladan Starcevic, Guy Eslick, Kirupamani Viswasam, Joel Billieux, Sally Gainsbury, Daniel King, David Berle

Lead Researchers

• Professor Sally Gainsbury
• Professor Vladan Starcevic
• Professor Agnieszka Tymula
• Professor Garner Clancey
• Dr. Louise Thornton
• Associate Professor Daniel Gozman

What challenges does technology present?

Online Casino apps and loot boxes facing new rules in Australia

Enhancing voluntary take-up of effective safer gambling tools by at-risk customers

Technology risk and gambling webinars, team summary, sally gainsbury.

• [email protected]
• Brain and Mind Centre, 94 Mallet Street, Camperdown, NSW

Related publications

• Problematic risk-taking involving emerging technologies

Related articles

University of sydney establishes centre of excellence in gambling research, gambling and betting after covid-19, gambling frequency reduced during first wave of covid-19.

A survey by the Gambling Treatment and Research Clinic into the impact of the coronavirus in Australia found a majority reduced their gambling during the first shutdown but about one in 10 increased how often they gambled.

Essay on Digital Addiction

Students are often asked to write an essay on Digital Addiction in their schools and colleges. And if you’re also looking for the same, we have created 100-word, 250-word, and 500-word essays on the topic.

Let’s take a look…

100 Words Essay on Digital Addiction

Understanding digital addiction.

Digital addiction is a modern problem where people can’t stop using digital devices like phones, computers, or video games. It’s like an uncontrollable urge to use these devices even when it’s not necessary. This addiction is becoming a big issue, especially among children and teenagers.

Causes of Digital Addiction

Many things can cause digital addiction. For example, social media platforms are designed to keep you engaged for long periods. Video games can also be addictive because they provide a sense of achievement. Even educational apps can lead to addiction if used excessively.

Effects of Digital Addiction

Digital addiction can cause many problems. It can affect your health, like causing eye strain or sleep problems. It can also affect your studies or work because you spend too much time on digital devices. Additionally, it can lead to social isolation as you may prefer digital interaction over real-life socializing.

Overcoming Digital Addiction

Overcoming digital addiction requires self-control and discipline. It’s important to set limits on the use of digital devices. Engaging in physical activities, reading books, or spending time with family can also help. If the addiction is severe, professional help may be needed.

Prevention is Better

Avoiding digital addiction is better than trying to overcome it. It’s important to use digital devices wisely. Parents and teachers can play a crucial role in educating children about the responsible use of technology. Remember, technology is a tool, not a master.

250 Words Essay on Digital Addiction

Digital addiction means spending too much time using gadgets like smartphones, computers, or tablets. It is like a habit that is tough to break. People who are addicted to digital devices find it hard to stay away from them, even when they are not needed.

Effects on Health

Digital addiction can lead to health issues. Looking at screens for long hours can hurt your eyes. It can also make you feel tired and can affect your sleep. Besides, it can lead to a lack of physical activity, which may result in weight gain and other health problems.

Impact on Social Life

People who are addicted to digital devices often spend less time with their family and friends. They may prefer to stay alone with their devices. This can make them feel lonely and can affect their social skills.

Ways to Overcome

To overcome digital addiction, it is important to limit the use of digital devices. Setting a specific time for using these devices can be helpful. It is also beneficial to spend more time doing outdoor activities and hobbies. This can distract your mind from the urge to use digital devices.

Digital addiction is a serious issue that can affect your health and social life. It is essential to recognize this problem and take steps to overcome it. By limiting the use of digital devices and engaging in other activities, you can lead a healthier and happier life.

500 Words Essay on Digital Addiction

What is digital addiction.

Digital addiction is a modern age problem where a person becomes overly attached to digital devices like smartphones, computers, tablets, or video games. This addiction can affect a person’s daily life and can interfere with their studies, work, and relationships.

Types of Digital Addiction

There are different types of digital addiction. Social media addiction is one of them where a person spends too much time on social media sites like Facebook, Instagram, or Twitter. Another type is video game addiction where a person spends most of their time playing video games. Internet addiction is also a type of digital addiction where a person cannot stop surfing the web.

Signs of Digital Addiction

There are several signs of digital addiction. If a person is spending too much time on digital devices and neglecting their daily activities, it is a clear sign. Feeling restless or upset when not using digital devices, lying about the time spent on these devices, and failing to cut down the usage are other signs of digital addiction.

Digital addiction can have serious effects on a person’s life. It can affect their physical health as they might not get enough exercise or sleep. It can also affect their mental health as it can lead to stress, anxiety, and depression. In addition, it can affect their social life as they might prefer to spend time on digital devices rather than interacting with people.

How to Overcome Digital Addiction

Overcoming digital addiction can be challenging but it is possible. One of the effective ways is to set limits on the time spent on digital devices. It is also important to take regular breaks from these devices. Engaging in other activities like reading, playing sports, or spending time with friends and family can also help.

Digital addiction is a serious issue that can affect a person’s life in many ways. It is important to recognize the signs and take steps to overcome it. Remember, digital devices are tools to help us, not control us. Let’s use them wisely and lead a balanced and healthy life.

That’s it! I hope the essay helped you.

If you’re looking for more, here are essays on other interesting topics:

• Essay on Digestive System
• Essay on Different Religions
• Essay on Diet And Nutrition

Apart from these, you can look at all the essays by clicking here .

Happy studying!

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Essays on Technology Addiction

Faq about technology addiction.

The Council's Blog

Technology misuse, abuse, & addiction among teenagers.

[The following was written by Patrick Hagler, a counselor for the Choices program at The Council on Recovery.]

It is hard to escape screens. Most likely, you are looking at one right now! Although the long-term effects of screen time are still being studied, the effects of excessive internet and smartphone use are well-documented. “Pathological” internet use has been linked to depression in teens, and it may even shrink gray matter (see article links below).

Pathological Internet Use May Cause Teen Depression

Gray Matters: Too Much Screen Time Damages the Brain

Technology is everywhere, and it is not going away. Teenagers stare down at their iPhones, or keep their eyes glued to a tablet or laptop, instead of observing the world around them. It is not unusual to see two adolescents seated together on a bus, texting furiously on their mobiles rather than talking to one another. The fact that teens are so dependent on technology seems to make sense in our world, but it may also lead to negative consequences.

Can balanced technology use be a positive thing?

Yes, of course!  Technology is a tool that, when used appropriately, can have many benefits.  Remember the days of toiling for hours in the university library scrolling through rolls and rolls of microfiche to find that one article you needed for your research paper?  I do!  Technology can be a great resource for communication, productivity, social connectivity, education, cognitive enhancement, creativity and expression, digital literacy… to name a few.  These are all very useful when used in a balanced way.  Problems can arise, however, when teens misuse or abuse these tools to replace real-world activities and face-to-face interactions, with virtual experiences.

What is technology addiction?

Technology addiction can be defined as frequent and obsessive technology-related behavior increasingly practiced despite negative consequences to the user of the technology. An over-dependence on tech can significantly impact students’ lives. While we need technology to survive in a modern social world, a severe overreliance on technology—or an addiction to certain facets of its use—can also be socially devastating. Tech dependence can lead to teen consequences that span from mild annoyance when away from technology to feelings of isolation, extreme anxiety, and depression (click video link below).

Video: 5 Crazy Ways Social Media is Changing Your Brain Right Now (3:15)

What makes technology addictive?

Technology fulfills our natural human need for stimulation, interaction, and changes in environment with great efficiency. When teenagers experience stress, be it romantic rejection or a poor grade on an exam, technology can become a quick and easy way to fill basic needs, and as such, can become addictive.

Technology impacts the pleasure systems of the brain in ways similar to substances. It provides the brain with some of the same dopamine rewards that alcohol, drugs, and other high-risk behaviors might.  It can be a boredom buster, a social lubricant, and an escape from reality.

Video and computer games, smart phones and tablets, social media and the Internet provide a variety of access points that can promote dependence on technology and negative consequences.  How ?  Through self-administering doses of dopamine with the click of a mouse!

In a recent article, former Facebook president Sean Parker admitted, “it’s exploiting a vulnerability in human psychology.” Parker has said that social media creates “a social-validation  feedback loop ” by giving people “a little  dopamine  hit every once in a while, because someone liked or commented on a photo or a post or whatever.”  He continued, “I don’t know if I really understood the consequences of what I was saying, because of the unintended consequences of a network when it grows to a billion or 2 billion people and it literally changes your relationship with society, with each other,” Parker said. “God only knows what it’s doing to our children’s brains.” (see article link below)

Former Facebook President Admits It’s ‘Exploiting a Vulnerability in Human Psychology’

In another article former Facebook Vice-President of User Growth, Chamath Palihapitiya said, “The short-term,  dopamine -driven  feedback loops  we’ve created are destroying how society works.  No civil discourse, no cooperation; misinformation, mistruth. And it’s not an American problem—this is not about Russians ads. This is a global problem.” (see article link below)

Former Facebook Exec: You Don’t Realize It But You’re Being Programmed

Smartphone addiction is correlated with neurochemical imbalances in the brain, according to a new study.  In this study, neuroradiologists used magnetic resonance spectroscopy, which is a specialized type of MRI that measures the brain’s chemical composition, to gain unique insights into the brains of people who are believed to have developed addictive patterns in their use of digital technology. (see article link below)

Study: The Neurochemistry of Smartphone Addiction

Interestingly, another study from July 2017 by researchers at Ben-Gurion University in Israel found that heavy smartphone users display changes in social cognition, impaired attention, and reduced right prefrontal cortex excitability.  Researchers found that smartphone-addicted  teenagers had significantly higher scores in  depression , anxiety,  insomnia  severity, and impulsivity. (see article link below)

Answering the missed call: Initial exploration of cognitive and Electrophysiological Changes Associated with Smartphone Use and Abuse

What is FOMO?

The Web can be addictive as a multifunctional tool that brings us exceptionally close to an enormous amount of information at unprecedented speeds. User-friendly by design, we now have access to the Internet on our computers, through apps on our tablets, phones and watches. “FOMO,” or “Fear of Missing Out,” is a commonly described phenomenon for teens and young adults, in which youth increasingly feel the need to stay connected to the Internet, so they are not the last to know of a news story or social happening.  Related to FOMO, some Facebook users, for instance, report that they use the Internet-based social media platform as a chosen method to alleviate their anxiety or depression. 1  Given so much accessibility to its use, the Internet is just as hard to stay away from at any given point in a day as it is easy and rewarding to use .  Have you ever noticed a compulsion to repeatedly check your mobile email even if there is nothing urgent pending (yes, it happens to us too!)

What about playing video games?

One hallmark of human psychology is that we want to feel competent, autonomous, and related to other people. Challenging video games allow players to feel that they are good at something. Games offer a great variety of choice to players, promoting a sense of autonomy for teens who might feel otherwise out of control.

The same goals that drive people to pursue success in the real world are often present in video games. As one amasses virtual wealth or prestige by spending time on games and advancing through levels, virtual wealth can translate into some version of actual recognition—through monetary purchasing power within an online game or a positive reputation within an online community.

Gamers find themselves linked to others who share their hobby through YouTube channels or blogs dedicated to discussion of their game of choice with other enthusiasts. Like the Internet itself, games make themselves increasingly accessible to teens via apps on smart phones, never leaving kids’ palms or pockets.

While there is room for social connection in the gaming universe, this space also provides a potential escape from reality into a digital world where players get to assume new identities more appealing or more novel than those they hold in the real life.  So what’s the problem ? A problem arises when the virtual world becomes more exciting than the real world… a slippery-slope indeed.

In the  beta draft of its forthcoming 11th International Classification of Diseases , the World Health Organization includes “gaming disorder” in its list of mental health conditions. The WHO defines the disorder as a “persistent or recurrent” behavior pattern of “sufficient severity to result in significant impairment in personal, family, social, educational, occupational or other important areas of functioning.” (see article link below)

Video Gaming Disorder is Now a Mental Health Condition

Can technology abuse increase my son’s susceptibility to substance use?

Yes. Researchers have found evidence that people who overuse technology may develop similar brain chemistry and neural patterning to those who are addicted to substances. 2 A concern is that those who are addicted to technology are actually more likely to also use substances than their peers with healthier relationships to tech, providing the insight that technology addiction may be a risk factor for alcohol and other drug addiction.

One preliminary study found that a group of teens who “hyper-texted” were 40% more likely to have used cigarettes and twice as likely to have used alcohol than students who were less frequent users of technology. This same research noted that those who spent more hours per school day than peers on social networking sites were at higher risk for depression and suicide. 3

It stands to reason then, that if we can prevent technology addiction, we may also be able to prevent other risky behavior and dangerous consequences to teens.  Studies have shown that brain scans of young people with internet addiction disorder (IAD) are similar to those of people with substance addictions to alcohol, cocaine, and cannabis. 4

Damage to brain systems connecting emotional processing, attention, and decision-making are affected in both substance addicts and technology addicts. This discovery shows that being hooked on a tech behavior can, in some ways, be as physically damaging as an addiction to alcohol and other drug use.

What can I do to help prevent technology addiction?

Balance .   Preventing teen addiction to technology means finding a balance within students’ lives, so that teenagers do not misuse their technology as an escape from real world challenges, emotions, socialization, or identity. Online activities should be balanced with real-world experiences and interactions.

Provide healthy off-line highs . How teenagers use technology really matters. Are teens playing video games among other recreational activities?  Are they as excited about spending time with friends as they are about “leveling up”? Or, are they turning on the Xbox so they don’t have to face a life that they are not enjoying?

Model healthy stress management skills . Believe it or not, our kids watch us.  They model their own behaviors by watching how we behave. Balance activity and productivity with healthy stress management. Life requires energy. Often teens feel like they have too little energy to spend on too many demands. If they are not guided by adults to discover healthy ways to replenish their stores of energy, they may default by overusing easy fixes for entertainment or stress relief that promote technology addiction.

Nurture pro-social identity development in the real world .  Adults must be proactive, creative, and excited as they help kids to discover who they really are! Once teenagers find something they are good at and want to do, they will naturally gravitate toward it. It is easier to create an Internet façade, but far more rewarding for teens to cultivate true purposes and genuine identities within their families, schools, and communities.

No devices in the bedroom . No cell phones, no iPads, nothing with Internet access. The devices are to be used only in a public space in the home, such as the kitchen, rec room, or family room. This rule is essential if only to give teens a chance to get some uninterrupted sleep.  Chronic sleep deprivation can create symptoms that mimic ADD or ADHD.  Lock up that phone and computer at night! (see article link below)

How Insomnia Looks a Lot Like ADHD

Some students have reported to me that they do not sleep well because their phones vibrate (real or imagined) frequently during the night, which wakes them up.  (see video link below)

Video: What is Phantom Vibration Syndrome (1:32)?

Manage gaming time .  Gaming is a privilege, not an entitlement.  Consider implementing a gaming structure which provides NO gaming during the school week.  Your son can earn gaming privileges on the weekend, based on meeting or exceeding expectations during the week.  Weekend gaming privileges can be earned in hourly increments.  Perhaps start with one hour of gaming time, with additional gaming time earned.

If you would like to read more about these and other issues that contribute to a growing trend of under-motivated boys in today’s society, I recommend two books by Dr. Leonard Sax:

Boys Adrift: The Five Factors Driving the Growing Epidemic of Unmotivated Boys and Underachieving Young Men

The Collapse of Parenting : How We Hurt Our Kids When We Treat Them Like Grown-Ups

If you or someone you know who compulsively uses technology and needs help, call The Council on Recovery at 713-914-0556 today to schedule an assessment. Or contact us here . Telehealth options are available throughout COVID-19.

• Conrad, Brent. “Why Is Facebook Addictive? Twenty-One Reasons For Facebook Addiction – TechAddiction.” Video Game Addiction Treatment & Computer Addiction Help – TechAddiction. N.p., n.d. Web. 8 Feb. 2017. http://www.techaddiction.ca/why-is-facebook-addictive.html .
• Goldstein, Rita Z., and Nora D. Volkow. (2011). “Dysfunction of the prefrontal cortex in addiction: neuroimaging findings and clinical implications: Abstract: Nature Reviews Neuroscience.” Nature Publishing Group: science journals, jobs, and information. Nature Publishing Group, a division of Macmillan Publishers Limited, n.d. Web. 8 Feb. 2017. http://www.nature.com/nrn/journal/v12/n11/abs/nrn3119.html .
• NHS. “Extreme levels of texting ‘unhealthy’.” NHS Choices. 10 November 2010. N.p. Web. 2 8 Feb. 2017. http://www.nhs.uk/news/2010/11November/Pages/Texting-and-teen-behaviour.aspx .
• Lin, Fuchun, Zhou, Yan, Du, Yasong, Qin, Lindi, Zhao, Zhimin, Xu, Jianrong and Hao Lei. (2012). “Abnormal White Matter Integrity in Adolescents with Internet Addiction Disorder: A Tract-Based Spatial Statistics Study.” Plos One. Web. 8 Feb. 2017. http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0030253 .

Stay Connected Email Sign Up

• Name * First Last
• Council e-Newsletter
• Community Workshops & Events
• CEU Workshops for Professionals
• Council Fundraising Events
• Recovery Community Activities
• Volunteer Opportunities

Job Announcement Request Form

• Job Title *
• Department *
• Cost Center *
• Reports to * First Last
• Sent by * First Last
• Date Available * MM slash DD slash YYYY
• Internal Posting Only
• Paylocity/Indeed
• Sam Houston
• LPC (fee involved, needs approval)
• Career and Recovery (Entry level positions, trade field, technical, etc.)
• Copy & paste text from job announcement below *
• Screener Questions *

An official website of the United States government

Official websites use .gov A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS A lock ( Lock Locked padlock icon ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

• Publications
• Account settings
• Advanced Search
• Journal List

Technology and addiction: What drugs can teach us about digital media

Ido hartogsohn.

• Author information
• Article notes
• Copyright and License information

Ido Hartogsohn, Program in Science, Technology and Society, Bar Ilan University, Ramat Gan, Israel. Email: [email protected]

Issue date 2023 Aug.

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 License ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ ) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access page ( https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage ).

Comparisons between digital media and narcotic drugs have become increasingly common in the vigorous discussion on smartphone addiction and technology addiction. Commentators have used evocative terms such as “digital heroin,” “electronic cocaine,” and “virtual drugs” when discussing users’ growing dependence on their devices. This article looks at the spreading discourse comparing digital media with drugs from a set of interdisciplinary perspectives including media studies, political economy, critical theory, science and technology studies, and addiction studies. It engages several key questions: To what extent can heavy smartphone use be considered an addiction, and how is it similar or different from drug addiction? How do the analogies between media and drugs fit within prevalent imaginaries of information technologies, and within the greater cultural themes and preoccupations of late capitalism? And finally, what can drugs teach us about the possible escape routes from our society's current predicament?

Keywords: consumer society, drugs, media addiction, psychedelics, set and setting, smartphone addiction, sociotechnical imaginaries

If technology is a drug – and it does feel like a drug – then what, precisely, are the side effects? (Charlie Brooker, creator of Black Mirror TV series)

Over the past decade smartphone use has become an issue of increasing social concern. Countless media articles have been dedicated to the subject of this growing social malady ( Carr, 2017 ; Lewis, 2017 ; Twenge, 2017b ). Several observers have produced grim accounts lamenting the habit-inducing nature of today's digital gadgets, while others turned their efforts to writing practical manuals on “how to build habit-forming products” ( Alter, 2017 ; Clement & Miles, 2017 ; Eyal, 2014 ; Kardaras, 2017 ; Twenge, 2017a ). Meanwhile, thousands of scientific papers have been published in an attempt to clarify this new form of dependence, often openly referred to as an addiction: What are its symptoms? How should it be diagnosed? And which are its most deleterious effects? 1

The literature on the addictive nature of smartphone technology makes several key claims. First, it claims to identify a neurochemical similarity between the brain mechanisms involved in so-called smartphone addictions and those involved in other types of addiction such as gambling or sex. Popular and scholarly accounts implicate the brain's reward system in smartphone dependency. Repeatedly checking one's phone for incoming messages and “likes,” or constantly refreshing one's newsfeed leads to the cerebral release of “feelgood neurotransmitter” dopamine, laying the grounds for the development of addiction. Second, the constant and unpredictable nature of digital stimulations makes digital appliances exceedingly addictive ( Alter, 2017 ; Carr, 2010 ; Lucking, 2015 ; Veissière & Stendel, 2018 ). The superior conditioning power of variable, unpredictable rewards over consistent forms of reward has been observed in B. F. Skinner's classic mid-twentieth-century behavioral psychology research on conditioning ( Skinner, 1953 , 1990 ). Thus, addiction to smartphones is compounded by the fact that the nature of rewards (e.g., the number and content of notifications received) are variable and unknown ( Veissière & Stendel, 2018 ). Third, such recurring media-induced behaviors, repeated dozens or hundreds of times a day, are claimed to cause alterations to brain function including abnormal cue reactivity signatures similar to those of other addictive disorders, among other findings of aberrant neural action in diverse parts of the brain, which correlate with heavy smartphone use ( Hadar et al., 2015 ; Horvath et al., 2020 ; Schmitgen et al., 2020 ). Finally, screen addiction is correlated by researchers with rising levels of depression, anxiety, attention deficit disorder, and other psychopathological conditions ( Demirci et al., 2015 ; Elhai et al., 2016 , 2017 ; Hadar et al., 2017 ; Roberts et al., 2015 ; Twenge, 2017a ).

With such disturbing claims and incriminating evidence, it is hardly surprising that an increasingly alarmist discussion has developed around the topic of smartphone use ( Becker, 2016 ; Gonzalez, 2018 ). One recurring feature of this conversation is a repeated analogy between smartphone addiction and drug addiction. In recent years, smartphones and digital media have repeatedly been referred to as “electronic heroin” ( Phillips, 2017 ; Williams, 2014 ), “electronic cocaine” ( Harsh, 2017 ), “digital cocaine” ( Huddleston, 2016 ), “virtual drug” ( Kardaras, 2017 ), “digital pharmakeia,”( Kardaras, 2017 ), and a host of other pharmacologically derived names ( Harsh, 2017 ; Huddleston, 2016 ; Kardaras, 2017 ; Phillips, 2017 ; Williams, 2014 ).

At this point, it is important to note that the use of the term addiction to refer to smartphone dependencies raises several inherent problems. First, the concept of addiction can be questioned and interrogated. What and who, one might inquire, is an addict? Who defines an addict? What makes a substance addictive? And could certain socially accepted behaviors be considered addiction? These valid questions have been discussed elsewhere, and are beyond the scope of this article (for discussions of addiction as a concept, see Alexander & Schweighofer, 1988 ; Goodman, 1990 ; Sussman & Sussman, 2011 ).

This article draws on the diagnostic criteria presented in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (5th ed.; DSM- 5; American Psychiatric Association, 2013 ) section on addictive disorders and substance use. Addiction in this model is defined as taking a substance for a longer period or larger quantities than intended, unsuccessful attempts to decrease use, and significant time spent using. The DSM framework also describes recurrent use that obstructs obligations at work, school or home; recurrent use in situations in which it is physically hazardous; and continual use despite knowledge of a psychological problem induced or exacerbated by the addiction ( American Psychiatric Association, 2013 ).

Another critical question targets the object of addiction that could be framed as either the smartphone itself, specific apps used on the smartphone, or the attention mobilized through the device. In effect, one might speak of three aspects involved in addictive smartphone use: a gadget addiction, an app addiction, and an attention addiction, which do not preclude one another, but rather reflect and reinforce each other at differing ratios. Smartphones therefore serve as rather ambiguously delimited objects of addiction. On this view, uncritically embracing hyperbolic expressions that compare media with drugs is likely inaccurate and naïve. Digital media are in many ways distinct from pharmacological substances.

And yet, the growing use of pharmacologically inspired metaphors to describe contemporary digital life does merit our attention. This article investigates the applicability of the term addiction to cases of heavy and compulsive smartphone use, as well as the use of drug analogies to discuss smartphone effects. We approach the subject by engaging with diverse types of literature and theories that are not commonly brought in conjunction, including media theory, addiction studies, science and technology studies, neuroscience, and psychedelic therapy. A comprehensive investigation of the comparisons and links drawn between media and drugs can only be achieved by mutually considering existing knowledge on both. The current paper thus aligns itself with past attempts to explore the interactions of—rather than similarities between—media and drugs ( MacDougall, 2012a ).

This article explores a series of questions inherent to the smartphone-drug discussion. 2 First, to what extent can heavy smartphone use be considered an addiction, and in what ways is it similar or different from drug addiction? Second, how does the smartphone addiction analogy fit within prevalent imaginaries of information and communication technologies? Third, how does the addiction analogy fit within the larger cultural themes and preoccupations of late capitalism including enhanced forms of individualism, atomism, consumerism, and commodification arising within the context of increased reliance on information and communication technologies, and digital forms of labor and consumption? ( Kumar, 2009 ). Finally, based on social science perspectives on addiction and on insights gleaned from the field of psychedelic therapy, our paper explores possible escape routes from this current societal predicament.

The digital addiction metaphor

Over the past years, popular and scholarly discourse around the topic of “smartphone addiction” (more generally referred to as “tech addiction”) has boomed. Over 10,000 scientific papers using the phrase “smartphone addiction” have been published since 2017. 3 This growing interest has so far not been translated into any medically recognized diagnosis. While the DSM-5, the latest edition of the psychiatric community's authoritative diagnostic manual, includes a new potential diagnosis dedicated to “Internet gaming disorder,” the editors were reluctant to add an “Internet addiction” diagnosis ( Petry & O’Brien, 2013 ; Pies, 2009 ). This decision runs counter to a growing number of voices who argue the existence of underlying biopsychosocial processes common to both behavioral addictions and Substance Use Disorders (SUD; Karim & Chaudhri, 2012 ; Leeman & Potenza, 2013 ; Orford, 2001 ). Behavioral addictions are defined as nonsubstance-related behaviors, that include short-term rewards causing persistent behaviors despite knowledge of adverse consequences ( Grant et al., 2010 ). Commonly discussed behavioral addictions include addiction to gambling, shopping, exercise, food, and porn. A growing number of studies find that behavioral addictions involve the same neurotransmitter pathways as SUDs (for comprehensive reviews of such articles, see Karim & Chaudhri, 2012 ; Leeman & Potenza, 2013 ). Additionally, nonsubstance addictions share the same types of behavioral patterns with SUDs, including “craving, impaired control over behavior, tolerance, withdrawal and high rates of relapse” ( Karim & Chaudhri, 2012 , p. 14). Both nonsubstance addictions and SUDs share the same genetic prognosticators ( Leeman & Potenza, 2013 ), and are helped by the same types of therapy and medication ( Karim & Chaudhri, 2012 ).

Indeed, any brief examination of the DSM-5's diagnostic criteria for substance use disorders indicates strong similarities between the markers of substance abuse as currently defined by the DSM, and behaviors common to heavy smartphone users. DSM-5 defines substance addiction as a condition recognizable by the prevalence of two or more characteristics including: “craving or strong desire to use the substance,” “the substance is often taken in larger amounts or over a longer period than was intended,” “persistent desire or unsuccessful efforts to cut down or control use of substance,” “recurrent use of the substance resulting in a failure to fulfill major obligations at work, school or home,” “recurrent use of the substance in situations in which it is physically hazardous” ( American Psychiatric Association, 2013 ; quotes are based on the DSM's template descriptions of SUDs including alcohol, cannabis, phencyclidine, inhalants, and others; see pp. 490–491, 509–510, 520, 533–534). Such characteristics correspond closely with smartphone-user reports of strong urges to use smartphones and difficulties cutting down on use ( Alter, 2017 ; Mod, 2018 ), that users often find themselves spending longer periods than intended on their devices, that heavy use correlates with lower school and work performance ( Hawi & Samaha, 2016 ). Finally, the reference to physically hazardous situations caused by addictions might correspond to reports of 56% of parents admitting to texting while driving according to a survey on parent–teen dynamics around smartphone use ( Common Sense Media, 2016 ). Indeed, most surveys show over half the American population consider themselves addicted to their phones ( Common Sense Media, 2016 ; Roberts et al., 2014 ; Sellgren, 2016 ; Wheelwright, 2021 ).

These rates of smartphone addiction raise further concerns, as evidenced in a growing number of studies establishing links between heavy smartphone use and a host of mental-health conditions including depression, anxiety, attention deficit disorder, as well as reduced quality of sleep and impulse control ( Demirci et al., 2015 ; see, for instance, Elhai et al., 2017 ; Hormes et al., 2014 ; Przybylski & Weinstein, 2013 ; Ward et al., 2017 ). Despite the growing prevalence of the concept “smartphone addiction,” some observers have argued that discussions about smartphone addiction tend towards alarmism, hysteria, and even moral panic. Much of the new research on tech-addiction, it is argued, suffers from lack of systematization and is fraught with weak statistical correlations. Tech-addiction science, critics say, is much like nutritional science: due to its highly complex and multi-variant dependent nature, it can offer little certainty ( Becker, 2016 ; Gonzalez, 2018 ).

Others have argued that the very term “addiction” is misleading ( MacDougal, 2012b ). “Talking about addiction subverts our best thinking because it suggests that if there are problems, there is only one solution,” argues MIT professor Sherry Turkle (2011 ). “To combat addiction, you have to discard the addicting substance. But we are not going to ‘get rid’ of the Internet … The idea of addiction, with its one solution that we know we won't take, makes us feel hopeless” (pp. 293–294). Rather than using the term “addiction” with its substance abuse connotations, Turkle prefers to think of media consumption in terms of diet. It is impossible to completely stop consuming media in the same way that it would be impossible to stop consuming food, and yet one might work towards a healthier, more nutritional diet.

Turkle's argument might be challenged on several counts. First, addiction is not necessarily limited to avoidable substances. Rather, the definition might include routine activities that cannot easily be eliminated such as shopping, work, sex, and physical exercise. Most prominently, food addiction is itself a recognized pathology (see, for instance, Ifland et al., 2009 ). Addiction to an essential, unavoidable activity or object is thus arguably still an addiction. Furthermore, Turkle's assertion that the addiction concept leaves only one option—that of complete renunciation—might also be disputed by the literature on addiction, which finds many different shades of addiction in the realms of compulsive behaviors ( Alexander, 2010 ).

A second pertinent objection to the notion of tech-addiction is raised in an article by Veissière and Stendel (2018 ), which links smartphone addiction with archaic evolutionary mechanisms such as the need to monitor and be monitored by others. Smartphone use, the authors argue, is motivated by the natural need to connect and is therefore social rather than anti-social. On these authors’ views, there is nothing inherently addictive about smartphones. Rather, smartphones provide a “potentially unhealthy platform for another healthy impulse” (p. 2).

This is an important observation. Indeed, it sometimes appears impossible to distinguish between the crave for tech and the crave for connection. Our main objection here is, first, that human relationships too can become addictive, so that the social nature of smartphone use does not negate its addictive potential. Second, the facilitation of immediate, 24/7 communication channels changes the addictive potential of social relationships. Third, a variety of carefully arranged addiction-enhancing mechanisms (e.g., scrolling, bottomless newsfeeds and notifications) are part of the smartphone complex and further enhance its addictive potential.

While the human need to engage in sociality is itself mostly healthy, heavy smartphone use, by contrast, has been linked with growing psychological dispositions towards insecurity and an insatiable craving for attention and validation ( Twenge, 2017a ). To summarize, while the smartphone services a natural human need for sociality, it also magnifies that need and creates new and intense manufactured needs . If we compare sociality to coca leaves—a natural stimulant safely integrated into the life texture of countless cultures—then smartphone sociality can be likened to cocaine—a more concentrated synthesized version with a remarkably higher potential for addiction. Similarly, while consuming food is a necessary and natural part of human existence, current research suggests that processed food containing refined sweeteners, carbohydrates, fat, and salt can be considered addictive substances ( Ifland et al., 2009 ).

Jaron Lanier points to the financial incentive system behind social media as the most likely culprit for addiction. In Ten Arguments for Deleting Your Social Media Accounts Right Now , Lanier (2018 ) argues that users are falling under the “stealthy control” (p. 2) of nefarious corporations and their clients. Lanier's first argument, “you are losing your free will,” discusses the collapse of the boundary between healthy socialization and unhealthy dependency on social media. Sean Parker, the first president of Facebook, is cited, arguing that

we need to sort of give you a little dopamine hit every once in a while, because someone liked or commented on a photo or a post or whatever. … It's a social-validation feedback loop … exactly the kind of thing that a hacker like myself would come up with, because you’re exploiting a vulnerability in human psychology. (cited in Lanier, 2018 , p. 8)

According to Lanier, these purposefully addictive installments merge with our social lives to create “zombie” users that are gradually devoid of free will, as users get driven from one manipulative cue to the next.

Describing our tech dependencies in terms of addiction might feel uncomfortable, but rather than denying the addictive potential of smartphones wholesale, a more productive approach might lend an ear to the cultural resonances and theoretical implications of such a perspective. If we think of addiction in broader terms, as a spectrum of excessive appetites lurking in the background of human existence ( Orford, 2001 ), we might find that rather than rejecting the doctor's diagnosis, embracing it can lead to new and productive theoretical avenues.

Pharmakomediatic imaginaries

In Turkle’s (2011 ) argument, one of the defining characteristics of smartphone addiction is that unlike drug abusers, gamblers, or porn addicts (who are theoretically able to cede their habit), it is, in most cases, not practical for digital media users to relinquish it and return to a pristine pre-digital state. Renouncing smartphone use is rendered virtually impossible by a mixture of social and professional obligations in a digital world where workers are expected to regularly check their inboxes and social communication is largely conducted through social media. Classic models of recovery and rehabilitation call for complete abnegation of one's habit in the spirit of 12-step programs. For smartphone abusers, this is not a sensible option. While recreational drug use is an “opt-in” technology, smartphone use is an “opt-out” technology because it is inescapable and ubiquitous.

Smartphones act as flexible and versatile substitutes for countless other nearly-defunct devices likes cameras, music players, maps, calendars and watches. Users are thus repeatedly impelled to return to their device, and upon their return, they habitually lose themselves in its plethoric abundance of stimulations and possibilities. As a centripetal hub of psychosocial activity, the smartphone functions as a hyper-networked extension of the human mind, to which one habitually and instinctually turns ( McLuhan, 2003 ). Tellingly, addiction to smartphones often manifests as an inadvertent, evasive, yet ineluctable psychosomatic habit of periodically reaching for one's phone, even without any obvious reason.

Our culture's growing fascination with the notion of tech-addiction indicates a seismic shift in our understanding of technology. It is at this point that we wish to propose that our postindustrial culture's reception and adaptation of digital technologies has, since the mid-20th century, been informed by two major types of media-related imaginaries: the narcotic imaginary of media which regards it as insidious and addictive, and the cyberdelic imaginary of media which regards it as liberating and empowering (for discussions of imaginaries and their role in sociotechnical development, see B. Anderson, 1983/2006 ; Jasanoff & Kim, 2015 ). By turning to narcotic metaphors (“electronic cocaine,” “digital heroin”) early 21st century culture has, in fact, gone full circle and returned to earlier views concerning the psychoactive nature of information technology.

McLuhan’s (1964) “Notes on Burroughs” essay provides an early example for a position which views electronic technology as inherently narcotic. “When the full consequences of each new technology are manifested in new psychic and social forms, then the anti-Utopias appear,” writes McLuhan (1964, p. 517) . Drawing on Burroughs’ accounts of apomorphine addiction in Naked Lunch (1959/2013), McLuhan’s, (1964 , 518) ninth note suggests that one possible escape route from technology's arresting power is to regard “our entire gadgetry as Junk […] applying the same formula that works for junk ‘ apomorphine ,’ extended to all technology.”

McLuhan's argument is that our human bodies and minds are incapable of keeping up or handling the new intensities of electronic technologies. The only alternative therefore is a media detox (here McLuhan quotes Burroughs): “Shut the whole thing right off —Silence—When you answer the machine you provide it with more recordings to be played back to your ‘enemies’ […] Don't answer the machine—Shut it off” ( Burroughs, 1959/2013 , quoted in McLuhan, 1964 , p. 518).

McLuhan's sober assessment of the narcotic nature of electronic gadgetry was forsaken in the next 40 years, as digital media increasingly came to be understood not as a narcotic, but rather as a mind-expanding psychedelic. Fred Turner’s (2006 ) From Counterculture to Cyberculture documents the shift that occurred from the late 1960s to the late 1990s as computers, once regarded as centralized agents of nefarious control and manipulation, increasingly came to be seen as forces of decentralization, personal empowerment, and even liberation. Ironically, it was McLuhan again who challenged the new governing metaphor when he argued, as early as 1968, “the computer is the LSD of the business world” ( McLuhan et al., 1968 , p. 83). By 1972, Stewart Brand, countercultural entrepreneur and co-organizer of famed 1960s Acid Tests , was calling attention to the mind-expanding potential of digital computers. In a prominent Rolling Stone story, Brand (1972 ) called computers the best news “since psychedelics.” A culture celebrating the psychedelic potential of cyber technologies emerged under the banner “cyberdelia,” and would reach a growing popularity in the 1980s and 1990s, often through such outlets as the psychedelically minded cyberculture magazine Mondo 2000 ( Dery, 1996 ). As this culture grew, the conflation of digital virtual realities and psychopharmacological ones became increasingly common. By the 1990s, even ex-1960s LSD-evangelist Timothy Leary was arguing that “the PC is the LSD of the 1990s,” and was calling upon the public to “turn on, boot up, jack in” (a paraphrase of his earlier 1960s slogan “turn on, tune in, drop out”; Leary, 2014 ). 4

The early 2000s collapse of the Internet sector NASDAQ index (dot com bubble) ( Wheale & Amin, 2003 ) and the growing domination of the web by a small number of multinational corporations dealt a fatal blow to the utopian cyberdelic vision. Searching for new sources of revenue, Internet companies were forced to rethink their business models. They turned their eyes towards massive online surveillance schemes that sought to maximize user engagement and effectively manipulate user attention and actions ( Zuboff, 2019 ). It took several more years, the invention of social media, and the emergence of Internet-connected touchscreen-enabled phones, to revive the narcotic imaginary in full.

Interestingly, the revived idea of electronic media as narcotics fits within the greater sociocultural themes of late capitalism. Historian David Courtwright (2019 ) calls ours “the age of addiction.” Like many others, Courtwright argues that addiction is a key component of consumerist capitalism, where consumers are encouraged to set their desires loose, and where dependence on regular consumption of products is the lifeline of so many economic sectors from fashion and lifestyle products to electronic gadgetry.

Unlike Max Weber's characterization of capitalism as based on an ascetic protestant work ethic sanctifying the accumulation of wealth ( Weber, 2001 ), contemporary theories of capitalism speak of a late capitalism in which attention is shifted from production to lavish consumption ( Baudrillard, 2016 ). As commented by cultural and financial theorist Ole Bjerg (2008 ), “Consumption and enjoyment are no longer vices but rather virtues, and we are constantly bombarded by demands for us to buy, consume and enjoy” (p. 6). Drug addiction, Bjerg claims, is actually “a radical way of fulfilling the imperatives of enjoyment constantly thrown at us by the contemporary ideology of consumption” (p. 1).

According to Burroughs (1959/2013 ), everyone is a junky of some sort in the capitalist system, which is permeated with the “algebra of need”: a consumer system where junk functions as “the mold of monopoly and possession” (p. 200). As Burroughs explains, opiate addicts exist at the bottom of “the pyramid of junk, one level eating the level below right up to the top or tops since there are many junk pyramids feeding on peoples of the world and all built on the basic principles of monopoly” (p. 200).

Alongside such literary and cultural theory perspectives about capitalism and addiction, social scientists have also explored the linkage between capitalism and addiction. Chief among these is psychologist and addiction expert Bruce Alexander. In his Globalization of Addiction , Alexander (2010 ) follows historical data and argues that addiction is strongly driven by dislocation—a sustained absence of psychosocial integration. Alexander defines psychosocial integration as a sense of meaning and identity, derived from stable social relationships and roles. While it is possible to endure the absence of psychosocial integration for some time, Alexander argues that “severe, prolonged dislocation eventually leads to unbearable despair, shame, emotional anguish, boredom and bewilderment” (p. 59). Historical data, Alexander argues, demonstrate that addiction can disappear almost completely from a society for extended periods but become endemic in times of crisis. One example is the case of the Indigenous communities of the Americas, who—dislocated from their land, language, and culture—became susceptible to alcoholism and other forms of addiction.

Psychosocial dislocation can happen to any individual in any society, but it is much more frequent in societies experiencing crisis. Importantly, argues Alexander (2010 ), free-market society is the first society in history in which dislocation is endemic even in times of ostensible prosperity. By subjecting its citizens to increasing pressures of individualism, competition and rapid change, free market society undermines traditional sources of psychosocial integration.

Balancing the medium and the setting

To what degree then, is smartphone addiction an outcome of the technological medium and to what degree is it dependent on social construction? Here Alexander presents us with a diametrically opposed perspective to that of Marshall McLuhan. McLuhan's famous aphorism “the medium is the message” points to the inherent addictive properties of smartphone technology. Certain technologies present a higher potential for addiction in the same way that some types of drugs and foods (e.g., foods rich in sugar or fat) are more addictive than others ( Volkow & Wise, 2005 ). This view is challenged by Alexander et al.'s (1980) description of addiction as a product of sociocultural conditioning, best exemplified by his famous Rat Park experiment, which serves to demonstrate that it is not only the medium but also the context that determines the message.

Alexander et al.'s (1980) classic Rat Park experiment overturned the findings of 1960s research that demonstrated the addictive properties of drugs by observing the behavior of laboratory animals that were left in small cages where they could self-administer morphine. Alexander argued that life in small, solitary conditions made drugs increasingly attractive. He therefore built an alternative experimental design where lab animals had regular access to social contact, mating opportunities, exercise toys, as well as dark and secluded nesting spots (“Rat Park”). Extraordinarily, in his design, rats did not develop addictions or experience drug overdoses. The study, which was later replicated using cocaine and methamphetamine ( Chauvet et al., 2012 ; Stairs et al., 2006 ; Whitaker et al., 2013 ), stands as a prime example for the crucial role of contextual factors in addiction. Brought outside of the lab, and into the field of drug sociology, it might give us hints on the prevalence of addiction in urban slums, ghettos and prisons, where humans are subjected to poor conditions of dislocation, arguably not unlike those experienced by animals in standard lab experiments.

Evidence of this type provides much needed nuance on McLuhan's insistence that the medium is the message. A simplistic view of drugs might consider them to be exemplary illustrations of the medium (i.e., the substance) being the message. Individuals under the influence of drugs arguably become a corporeal manifestation of a corresponding drug state. Their words and actions might be construed as only secondary products of a psychopharmacological medium that has interfaced with their brains to evoke specific thoughts and emotions (e.g., self-confidence with cocaine, concentration with Ritalin, affection with MDMA). Nevertheless, the Rat Park example, and other studies on the essential importance of context in psychopharmacology, point to the fact that drug effects are rarely as certain as one assumes.

One location where the idea regarding the crucial role of context in shaping drug effects has been developed to the fullest is in the field of psychedelic drug research. A key insight that recurs throughout the literature on psychedelics is that the effects of drugs are crucially dependent on what researchers call “set and setting”: psychological, social, and cultural variables such as intention, expectation, social, or physical environment. The same drug and dose might elicit a wide range of reactions, all depending on context ( Carhart-Harris et al., 2018 ; Hartogsohn, 2017 ). The concept of set and setting closely relates to the concept of harm reduction—the use of diverse strategies (offering medical/psychological support, providing safehouses, etc.) to reduce the harms of drug use (and other risky behaviors) rather than attempting to fully eradicate the behavior itself ( Collins et al., 2012 ; Lenton & Single, 1998 ).

We propose that introducing drug-related concepts such as set and setting and harm reduction, into our discussions of media, and media-related ideas (the medium is the message) into our thinking about drugs gives rise to fruitful perspectives on both subjects. Most fundamentally, it forces us to confront the chasm between those approaches which stress the formative power of new technologies (such as drugs) to change the ratio of our senses, and those that point to the context-dependent nature of technology's effects.

On the one hand, the material reality of digital technology—its features of constant availability, facile reproduction and multiple networked uses—seems to point to a very real addictive potential inherent to the technology, leading us back to McLuhan’s (1964 ) warning that “the power of the image to beget image, and of technology to reproduce itself via human intervention, is utterly in excess of our power to control the psychic and social consequences” (p. 518). Alexander's Rat Park, on the other hand, might lead us to study the ways in which smartphone addiction is not a function of medium but of environmental conditions.

Smartphones also point us back to the tensions between narcotic versus psychedelic imaginations of digital technologies, and their relevance for shaping new forms of engagement with technology. In recent years, literature in the field of Science, Technology and Society (STS) has extended Benedict Anderson’s (1983/2006 ) concept of imagined communities, later developed into the concept of social imaginaries ( Taylor, 2004 ), to include “sociotechnical imaginaries,” defined as “collectively held, institutionally stabilized, and publicly performed visions of desirable futures, animated by shared understandings of forms of social life and social order attainable through, and supportive of, advances in science and technology” ( Jasanoff & Kim, 2015 , p. 4). According to STS scholar Sheila Jasanoff , such shared imaginaries of the desirable (or undesirable) meaning of technology serve to shape its development and acceptance into society.

Both the cyberdelic and narcotic-media imaginaries could be seen as a part of the sociocultural context that participated in the coproduction of digital technology and novel social norms (for an account of coproduction as an analytic concept, see Jasanoff, 2004 ). The cyberdelic imaginary of digital technology might be thought of as a product of a period characterized by lofty ideals of mind-expansion, individual empowerment, and virtual communities based on idealistic models of gift economy, inspired by former hippies such as Stewart Brand and Howard Rheingold ( Turner, 2006 ). The narcotic-media imaginary, on the other hand, fits well in a time when the web is controlled by a few powerful global corporations, and an attention economy designed to hook media consumers into binge watching and endless scrolling ( Hari, 2016 ). 5

Transcending digital narcoticism

So what, finally, is the take-away from this discussion? Recent years have seen the emergence of new genres of technology-related writing that include both the confessions of media addicts as well as recovery guides aimed to inspire and empower media addicts to change their lives ( Mod, 2018 ; Pellicane & Chapman, 2017 ; Price, 2018 ; Zahariades, 2016 ). A variety of digital detox and digital rehab programs have sprouted, which aim to help addicts regain control of their digital habits ( Colin, 2013 ; Koo et al., 2011 ; Madrigal, 2013 ). Additionally, a series of smartphone apps with such names as “Phoneaddict Free” and “Addiction Meter” have become available, intended to help users control and curb their use of digital media. Tellingly, even the resistance to digital media is often incorporated within the medium: digital applications meant to curb digital use; social media rants against social media; erudite papers excoriating digital culture and published on digital platforms. Historian of drug economy David Courtwright (2002 ) notes that drug rehabilitation is an integral part of the drug economy. Digital media detox culture, it seems, is no exception.

In this sense, we argue, the inability of users to escape the virtual parameters of their digitalized existence reflects a broader issue discussed by many critics of late capitalism: the impressive ability of capitalism to assimilate and absorb all types of criticisms, to the point it appears to be an all-encompassing system without any viable alternative in sight. As Fredric Jameson (1996 ) famously wrote: “It seems to be easier for us today to imagine the thoroughgoing deterioration of the earth and of nature than the breakdown of late capitalism” (p. xii). From Che Guevara images to punk music and no logo books—capitalism will turn anything into additional commodities to be sold, so it seems as if the capitalist framework cannot be escaped.

The rat park analogy is again instructive in this regard. As digital realities become the dominant and paramount environment for learning, socializing, work, and entertainment in the 21st century, users increasingly and naturally turn to their smartphones for help with their addictions. Digital technologies thus become not just the drug supplied in the rat park, but the rat park itself—the setting in which rehabilitation is attempted—symbolizing the inability of escaping the digital framework. Attempting to escape the throes of dislocation through digital remedies, users thus risk a return to the very source of that dislocation, potentially reinforcing and exacerbating its consequences.

Let us be clear: digital technology is not a drug in the common sense of the word, and the dependencies it creates should be distinguished from those created by narcotic drugs. Yet, despite these differences, certain striking similarities do stand out, and might offer valuable perspectives for a society in search of answers and solutions to its growing social-digital malaise.

Research on psychoactive drugs has shown their effects to be deeply dependent on cultural context ( Hartogsohn, 2017 ). Technology may be similar in this regard. When using polemic terms such as “digital heroin” and “electronic cocaine” it is perhaps worthy to note that both coca leaves (containing the active agent cocaine) and opium (containing the active agent morphine) have been used by traditional societies for centuries in socially accepted ways, producing little in terms of addictions and abuse, and sometimes assisting the performance of positive social roles ( Schultes et al., 1992 ; Weil, 1986 ). Today, ritual uses of certain psychedelics, such as those of peyote and ayahuasca religions, are invoked by scholars as examples for socially constructive ways of approaching psychoactive substances while minimizing risk and maximizing the potential for personal and social benefits ( Blainey, 2015 ; Labate et al., 2017 ).

A balance needs to be struck between McLuhan's insight of the medium being the message, and the insight that the effects of technology are highly context dependent, drawn from drug theory, and STS literature. On the one hand, digital media might indeed be inherently biased towards addiction. Many users, for instance, develop a dependent relationship with their email inbox, a technology developed in the early 1970s, without any intention of fostering addiction ( Turel & Serenko, 2010 ). This seems to imply that digital technology, through its affordances of ubiquity and immediacy naturally tends toward addiction. On the other hand, such affordances are modulated and enhanced by economic incentives as well as by a culture of connectivity that values productivity and constant availability.

The lessons of set and setting in drug use suggest that the effects of digital media might be more flexible than we habitually assume. Digital existence does not necessarily lead to narcotic pathologies. However, to enable a new modus operandi in our relationship with media, earlier more fruitful imaginaries of technology need to be reclaimed. To transcend the narcotic imaginary that dominates the current discourse about technology, we must reimagine technology and reinstate its mind-expanding potential. To this end, we might turn to a variety of sources and alternative visions of technology that are not based on commodified, repetitive, habit-forming activities, but on communal, creative, and empowering uses. Some prominent examples include online user communities, the blogosphere, the free software movement, collaborative production projects such as Wikipedia and decentralized user-owned social networks ( Newport, 2019 ). Other sources of inspiration might include speculative writing and fiction ranging the gamut from Feminist Sci-Fi to Afrofuturism. 1 (For scholarly analyses of feminist sci-fi and its political potential for imagining other futures see the work of Donna Haraway. In particular her recent Staying with the Trouble: Haraway, 2016 ) (For an analysis of afrofuturism and its visions of alternative social models see Barber et al., 2017 ) (For a comprehensive collection of essays which explore the social and political implications of speculative literature see O’Sullivan et al., 2017 )

A more conscious, mindful, and constructive relationship with technology can be cultivated on both the individual level and the collective level. Mindless habits of digital consumption can be challenged by developing a more mindful approach to technology: by changing one's mindset in the use of technology, and by recalibrating the parameters of our everyday digital existence (e.g., turning off one's notification updates, or placing one's phone outside the room). Though they might sound banal, user experiences and research data show such measures can be surprisingly effective ( Alter, 2017 , Chapters 10–12; Ward et al., 2017 ; Yoon et al., 2014 ).

Importantly, individual solutions will have limited value and efficacy if they continue to run counter to the collective cultural setting. And herein lies the rub. Can media be reimagined? Does a different type of digital media with distinct non-narcotic effects exist? The answer is: they might , but such relationships with media cannot be based on the perverse incentives and dispositions of surveillance capitalism with its emphasis on repetitive mindless consumption. The capitalist model of technology, based on maximal engagement and compulsive behavior aimed to generate capital gains for a thin layer of global corporations cannot but lead to mindless, disempowering, narcotic models of technology use. More poignantly still, technology's narcotic spell will continue to wreak havoc on human minds, as long as boredom, anxiety, and isolation continue to exist as the default mental states of the individuals in the free market society ( Weareplanc, 2014 ).

The cyberdelic, mind-expanding imaginary of the network has been prevalent since its early days, but it has repeatedly been thwarted and subverted to serve the causes of libertarianism and neoliberalism ( Barbrook & Cameron, 1996 ). Assuming we will remain bound to the capitalist framework in the foreseeable future, we are left with the fundamental question: Can we somehow combine the contrasting visions of Leary and Burroughs, and “turn on” while at the same time “shut off”? Can a mind-expanding vision of technology exist within capitalism and its purposely addictive gadgetry? And how might it be cultivated in an age where the dominion of capital seems to unprecedentedly expand itself across all walks of life?

The challenge is daunting and will become increasingly acute in the foreseeable future. Yet not all is lost—the shape of media to come is yet to be decided, and in an era when awareness of digital pathologies as well as of a crisis in the neoliberal order is growing, a new type of conversation can emerge alongside with new horizons for action. Digital media is not necessarily narcotic, nor is it necessarily psychedelic. It can be both, depending on set and on setting of use. It is, perhaps, time to revisit the cyberdelic imaginary of digital media, not in its naïve and antiquated form which simplemindedly perceived technologies as tools for liberation, but by invoking the concept of set and setting and its lessons for a more beneficial integration of digital technologies in society and everyday life.

Ido Hartogsohn , PhD, is an assistant professor at the Graduate Program in Science, Technology and Society Studies at Bar Ilan University. His research focuses on sociocultural contexts shaping responses to psychedelics and other psychoactive drugs, as well as on the ethical, cultural and philosophical dimensions of new media technologies. His book American Trip: Set, Setting and the Psychedelic Experience in the 20th Century (2020) was published by MIT Press.

Amir Vudka , PhD, is a lecturer and researcher at the Department of Media Studies at the University of Amsterdam. Dr. Vudka teaches and researches film and new media, particularly media aesthetics, cultural analysis, genre cinema, film philosophy and media archaeology. His published works focus on popular film culture, philosophy and theology of technology, media pathologies, and spectral media. Additionally, he is a film curator at various institutions and cultural venues in the Netherlands and the artistic director of the Sounds of Silence festival for silent film and contemporary music.

An August 15, 2021, Google Scholar search of the term “smartphone addiction” yields 10,400 results since 2017.

The smartphone, it is important to note, should be considered here as a symptomatic, ephemeral, and perhaps secondary, yet more easily delineated, stand-in for a more general phenomenon that permeates digital existence and digital networks in their various forms, transcending the incidental, contemporary form of the smartphone itself.

Of course history is rarely as clear-cut as its descriptions and this historical account of cyberdelic movement should be qualified by the existence of other less hopeful varieties which existed on the fringes of the cyberdelic imagination, linking it to other more sinister cyberpunk visions. The writings of Phillip K. Dick and William Gibson come to mind.

As stated earlier, history is never as neat as the models used to describe it, and this model, too, only serves to offer general contours of the broad cultural trends. The cyberdelic imaginary continues to exist, even as the narcotic imagination currently reigns supreme.

For scholarly analyses of feminist sci-fi and its political potential for imagining other futures, see the work of Donna Haraway. In particular her recent Staying with the Trouble ( Haraway, 2016 ). For an analysis of Afrofuturism and its visions of alternative social models, see R. Anderson and Jones (2017 ). For a comprehensive collection of essays which explore the social and political implications of speculative literature, see O’Sullivan et al. (2017 ).

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding: This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

ORCID iD: Ido Hartogsohn https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7906-3682

• Alexander B. K. (2010). Free market society undermines psychosocial integration. In The globalization of addiction: A study in poverty of the spirit (pp. 99–128). Oxford University Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Alexander B. K., Hadaway P., Coambs R. (1980). Rat park chronicle. British Columbia Medical Journal, 22(2), 32–45. [ Google Scholar ]
• Alexander B. K., Schweighofer A. R. (1988). Defining” addiction”. Canadian Psychology/Psychologie Canadienne, 29(2), 151–162. 10.1037/h0084530 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Alter A. (2017). Irresistible: The rise of addictive technology and the business of keeping us hooked. Penguin Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (5th ed.). 10.1176/appi.books.9780890425596 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Anderson B. (2006). Imagined communities: Reflections on the origin and spread of nationalism. Verso Books. (Original work published 1983) [ Google Scholar ]
• Anderson, R., & Jones, C. E. (Eds.). (2017). Afrofuturism 2.0: The rise of Astro-Blackness . Lexington Books. [ Google Scholar ]
• Barbrook R., Cameron A. (1996). The Californian ideology. Science as Culture, 6(1), 44–72. 10.1080/09505439609526455 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Baudrillard J. (2016). The consumer society: Myths and structures. SAGE. [ Google Scholar ]
• Becker R. (2016, August 30). Why calling screen time “digital heroin” is digital garbage. The Verge . https://www.theverge.com/2016/8/30/12715848/new-york-post-Internet-texting-addiction-irresponsible-hysteria
• Bjerg O. (2008). Drug addiction and capitalism: Too close to the body. Body & Society . 10.1177/1357034X08090695 [ DOI ]
• Blainey M. G. (2015). Forbidden therapies: Santo Daime, ayahuasca, and the prohibition of entheogens in Western society. Journal of Religion and Health, 54(1), 287–302. 10.1007/s10943-014-9826-2 [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Brand S. (1972, December 7). Spacewar: Fanatic life and symbolic death among the computer bums. Rolling Stone , 50–58.
• Burroughs W. S. (2013). Naked lunch (J. Grauerholz & B. Miles, Eds.; Reprint ed.). Grove Press. (Original work published 1959) [ Google Scholar ]
• Carhart-Harris R. L., Roseman L., Haijen E., Erritzoe D., Watts R., Branchi I., Kaelen M. (2018). Psychedelics and the essential importance of context. Journal of Psychopharmacology, 32(7), 725–731. 10.1177/0269881118754710 [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Carr N. (2010). The shallows: What the Internet is doing to our brains. W.W. Norton. [ Google Scholar ]
• Carr N. (2017, October 6). How smartphones hijack our minds. Wall Street Journal , 6. https://www.wsj.com/articles/how-smartphones-hijack-our-minds-1507307811
• Chauvet C., Goldberg S. R., Jaber M., Solinas M. (2012). Effects of environmental enrichment on the incubation of cocaine craving. Neuropharmacology, 63(4), 635–641. 10.1016/j.neuropharm.2012.05.014 [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Clement J., Miles M. (2017). Screen schooled: Two veteran teachers expose how technology overuse is making our kids dumber. Chicago Review Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Colin C. (2013, June 20). Into the woods and away from technology. The New Yorker . https://www.newyorker.com/tech/elements/into-the-woods-and-away-from-technology
• Collins S. E., Clifasefi S. L., Logan D. E., Samples L. S., Somers J. M., Marlatt G. A. (2012). Current status, historical highlights, and basic principles of harm reduction. In G. A. Marlatt, M. E. Larimer, & K. Witkiewitz (Eds.), Harm reduction: Pragmatic strategies for managing high-risk behaviors (2nd ed., pp. 3–35). The Guilford Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Common Sense Media. (2016). Dealing with devices: The parent-teen dynamic . https://www.commonsensemedia.org/technology-addiction-concern-controversy-and-finding-balance-infographic
• Courtwright D. T. (2002). Forces of habit: Drugs and the making of the modern world. Harvard University Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Courtwright D. T. (2019). The age of addiction: How bad habits became big business. Harvard University Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Demirci K., Akgönül M., Akpinar A. (2015). Relationship of smartphone use severity with sleep quality, depression, and anxiety in university students. Journal of Behavioral Addictions, 4(2), 85–92. 10.1556/2006.4.2015.010 [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Dery M. (1996). Escape velocity: Cyberculture at the end of the century. Grove Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Elhai J. D., Dvorak R. D., Levine J. C., Hall B. J. (2017). Problematic smartphone use: A conceptual overview and systematic review of relations with anxiety and depression psychopathology. Journal of Affective Disorders, 207, 251–259. 10.1016/j.jad.2016.08.030 [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Elhai J. D., Levine J. C., Dvorak R. D., Hall B. J. (2016). Fear of missing out, need for touch, anxiety and depression are related to problematic smartphone use. Computers in Human Behavior, 63, 509–516. 10.1016/j.chb.2016.05.079 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Eyal N. (with Hoover, R.). (2014). Hooked: How to build habit-forming products . Portfolio. [ Google Scholar ]
• Gonzalez R. (2018). It’s time for a serious talk about the science of tech “addiction”. WIRED . https://www.wired.com/story/its-time-for-a-serious-talk-about-the-science-of-tech-addiction/
• Goodman A. (1990). Addiction: Definition and implications. British Journal of Addiction, 85(11), 1403–1408. 10.1111/j.1360-0443.1990.tb01620.x [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Grant J. E., Potenza M. N., Weinstein A., Gorelick D. A. (2010). Introduction to behavioral addictions. The American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse, 36(5), 233–241. 10.3109/00952990.2010.491884 [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hadar A. A., Eliraz D., Lazarovits A., Alyagon U., Zangen A. (2015). Using longitudinal exposure to causally link smartphone usage to changes in behavior, cognition and right prefrontal neural activity. Brain Stimulation: Basic, Translational, and Clinical Research in Neuromodulation, 8(2), 318. 10.1016/j.brs.2015.01.032 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hadar A., Hadas I., Lazarovits A., Alyagon U., Eliraz D., Zangen A. (2017). Answering the missed call: Initial exploration of cognitive and electrophysiological changes associated with smartphone use and abuse. PLOS ONE, 12(7), Article e0180094. 10.1371/journal.pone.0180094 [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Haraway D. J. (2016). Staying with the trouble: Making kin in the Chthulucene. Duke University Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Hari J. (2016). Chasing the scream: The first and last days of the war on drugs. Bloomsbury USA. [ Google Scholar ]
• Harsh A. (2017, April 22). Are digital devices the modern cocaine infecting our kids’ lives—literally? Huffington Post . https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/are-digital-devices-the-modern-cocaine-infecting-our_us_58fad72de4b0f02c3870ea56
• Hartogsohn I. (2017). Constructing drug effects: A history of set and setting. Drug Science, Policy and Law, 3, 1–17. 10.1177/2050324516683325 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hawi N. S., Samaha M. (2016). To excel or not to excel: Strong evidence on the adverse effect of smartphone addiction on academic performance. Computers & Education, 98, 81–89. 10.1016/j.compedu.2016.03.007 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hormes J. M., Kearns B., Timko C. A. (2014). Craving Facebook? Behavioral addiction to online social networking and its association with emotion regulation deficits. Addiction, 109(12), 2079–2088. 10.1111/add.12713 [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Horvath J., Mundinger C., Schmitgen M. M., Wolf N. D., Sambataro F., Hirjak D., Kubera K. M., Koenig J., Christian Wolf R. (2020). Structural and functional correlates of smartphone addiction. Addictive Behaviors, 105, Article 106334. 10.1016/j.addbeh.2020.106334 [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Huddleston B. (2016). Digital cocaine: A journey toward iBalance .
• Ifland J. R., Preuss H. G., Marcus M. T., Rourke K. M., Taylor W. C., Burau K., Jacobs W. S., Kadish W., Manso G. (2009). Refined food addiction: A classic substance use disorder. Medical Hypotheses, 72(5), 518–526. 10.1016/j.mehy.2008.11.035 [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Jameson F. (1996). The seeds of time. Columbia University Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Jasanoff S. (Ed.). (2004). States of knowledge: The co-production of science and the social order. Routledge. [ Google Scholar ]
• Jasanoff S., & Kim S.-H. (Eds.). (2015). Dreamscapes of modernity: Sociotechnical imaginaries and the fabrication of power. University Of Chicago Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Kardaras N. (2017). Glow kids: How screen addiction is hijacking our kids - and how to break the trance (Reprint ed.). St. Martin’s Griffin. [ Google Scholar ]
• Karim R., Chaudhri P. (2012). Behavioral addictions: An overview. Journal of Psychoactive Drugs, 44(1), 5–17. 10.1080/02791072.2012.662859 [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Koo C., Wati Y., Lee C. C., Oh H. Y. (2011). Internet-addicted kids and South Korean government efforts: Boot-camp case. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 14(6), 391–394. 10.1089/cyber.2009.0331 [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kumar K. (2009). From post-industrial to post-modern society: New theories of the contemporary world. John Wiley & Sons. [ Google Scholar ]
• Labate B. C., Cavnar C., & Gearin A. K. (Eds.). (2017). The world ayahuasca diaspora: Reinventions and controversies. Routledge. [ Google Scholar ]
• Lanier J. (2018). Ten arguments for deleting your social media accounts right now. Random House. [ Google Scholar ]
• Leary T. (2014). Chaos and cyber culture (20th anniversary ed.). Ronin Publishing. [ Google Scholar ]
• Leeman R. F., Potenza M. N. (2013). A targeted review of the neurobiology and genetics of behavioural addictions: An emerging area of research. The Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 58(5), 260–273. 10.1177/070674371305800503 [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lenton S., Single E. (1998). The definition of harm reduction. Drug and Alcohol Review, 17(2), 213–219. 10.1080/09595239800187011 [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lewis P. (2017, October 6). “Our minds can be hijacked”: The tech insiders who fear a smartphone dystopia. The Guardian . http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/oct/05/smartphone-addiction-silicon-valley-dystopia
• Lucking T. (2015). Technogenic flourishing: A mixed methods inquiry into the impact of variable rewards on Facebook users’ well-being. California Institute of Integral Studies. [ Google Scholar ]
• MacDougall R. C. (Ed.). (2012a). Drugs & media: New perspectives on communication, consumption, and consciousness. Continuum. [ Google Scholar ]
• MacDougall R. C. (2012b). Prologue. In R. C. MacDougall (Ed.), Drugs & media: New perspectives on communication, consumption, and consciousness (pp. vii–xxi). Continuum. [ Google Scholar ]
• Madrigal A. C. (2013, July 9). “Camp Grounded,” “digital detox,” and the age of techno-anxiety. The Atlantic . https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2013/07/camp-grounded-digital-detox-and-the-age-of-techno-anxiety/277600/
• McLuhan M. (1964). Notes on Burroughs. The Nation, 517–519. [ Google Scholar ]
• McLuhan M. (2003). Understanding media: The extensions of man (Critical ed.). Gingko Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• McLuhan M., Fiore Q., Agel J. (1968). War and peace in the global village. Bantam Books. [ Google Scholar ]
• Mod C. (2018, January 13). How I got my attention back. WIRED . https://www.wired.com/2017/01/how-i-got-my-attention-back/
• Newport C. (2019, May 18). Can “indie” social media save us? The New Yorker . https://www.newyorker.com/tech/annals-of-technology/can-indie-social-media-save-us
• Orford J. (2001). Addiction as excessive appetite. Addiction, 96(1), 15–31. 10.1046/j.1360-0443.2001.961152.x [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• O’Sullivan S., Gunkell H., & Hameed A. (Eds.). (2017). Futures and fictions: Essays and conversations that explore alternative narratives and image worlds that might be pitched against the impasses of our neo-liberal present. Repeater. [ Google Scholar ]
• Pellicane A., Chapman G. (2017). Calm, cool, and connected: 5 digital habits for a more balanced life. Moody. [ Google Scholar ]
• Petry N. M., O’Brien C. P. (2013). Internet gaming disorder and the DSM-5. Addiction, 108(7), 1186–1187. 10.1111/add.12162 [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Phillips T. (2017, August 28). “Electronic heroin”: China’s boot camps get tough on internet addicts. The Guardian . http://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/aug/28/electronic-heroin-china-boot-camps-Internet-addicts
• Pies R. (2009). Should DSM-V designate “internet addiction” a mental disorder? Psychiatry (Edgmont ) , 6(2), 31–37. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Price C. (2018). How to break up with your phone: The 30-day plan to take back your life. Ten Speed Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Przybylski A. K., Weinstein N. (2013). Can you connect with me now? How the presence of mobile communication technology influences face-to-face conversation quality. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 30(3), 237–246. 10.1177/0265407512453827 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Roberts J. A., Petnji Yaya L. H., Manolis C. (2014). The invisible addiction: Cell-phone activities and addiction among male and female college students. Journal of Behavioral Addictions, 3(4), 254–265. 10.1556/JBA.3.2014.015 [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Roberts J. A., Pullig C., Manolis C. (2015). I need my smartphone: A hierarchical model of personality and cell-phone addiction. Personality and Individual Differences, 79, 13–19. 10.1016/j.paid.2015.01.049 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Schmitgen M. M., Horvath J., Mundinger C., Wolf N. D., Sambataro F., Hirjak D., Kubera K. M., Koenig J., Wolf R. C. (2020). Neural correlates of cue reactivity in individuals with smartphone addiction. Addictive Behaviors, 108, Article 106422. 10.1016/j.addbeh.2020.106422 [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Schultes R. E., Hofmann A., Rätsch C. (1992). Plants of the gods: Their sacred, healing and hallucinogenic powers. Healing Arts Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Sellgren K. (2016, October 6). Teens “checking mobiles late at night”. BBC News . http://www.bbc.com/news/education-37562259
• Skinner B. F. (1953). Science and human behavior. Simon and Schuster. [ Google Scholar ]
• Skinner B. F. (1990). The behavior of organisms: An experimental analysis. BF Skinner Foundation. [ Google Scholar ]
• Stairs D. J., Klein E. D., Bardo M. T. (2006). Effects of environmental enrichment on extinction and reinstatement of amphetamine self-administration and sucrose-maintained responding. Behavioural Pharmacology, 17(7), 597–604. 10.1097/01.fbp.0000236271.72300.0e [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Sussman S., Sussman A. N. (2011). Considering the definition of addiction. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 8(10), 4025–4038. 10.3390/ijerph8104025 [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Taylor C. (2004). Modern social imaginaries. Duke University Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Turel O., Serenko A. (2010). Is mobile email addiction overlooked? Communications of the ACM, 53(5), 41–43. 10.1145/1735223.1735237 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Turkle S. (2011). Alone together: Why we expect more from technology and less from each other. Basic Books. [ Google Scholar ]
• Turner F. (2006). From counterculture to cyberculture: Stewart Brand, the whole earth network, and the rise of digital utopianism. University Of Chicago Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Twenge J. M. (2017a). IGen: Why today’s super-connected kids are growing up less rebellious, more tolerant, less happy–and completely unprepared for adulthood–and what that means for the rest of us. Simon & Schuster. [ Google Scholar ]
• Twenge J. M. (2017b, September). Have smartphones destroyed a generation? The Atlantic . https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2017/09/has-the-smartphone-destroyed-a-generation/534198/
• Veissière S. P. L., Stendel M. (2018). Hypernatural monitoring: A social rehearsal account of smartphone addiction. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 1–18. 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00141 [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Volkow N. D., Wise R. A. (2005, April 26). How can drug addiction help us understand obesity? [Comments and opinion]. Nature Neuroscience, 8, 555–560. 10.1038/nn1452 [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ward A. F., Duke K., Gneezy A., Bos M. W. (2017). Brain drain: The mere presence of one’s own smartphone reduces available cognitive capacity. Journal of the Association for Consumer Research, 2(2), 140–154. 10.1086/691462 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Weareplanc. (2014, April 4). We are all very anxious. https://www.weareplanc.org/blog/we-are-all-very-anxious/
• Weber M. (2001). The Protestant ethic and the spirit of capitalism. Roxbury. [ Google Scholar ]
• Weil A. T. (1986). The natural mind: An investigation of drugs and the higher consciousness (Rev. ed.). Houghton Mifflin. [ Google Scholar ]
• Wheale P. R., Amin L. H. (2003). Bursting the com “bubble’: A case study in investor behaviour. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 15(1), 117–136. 10.1080/0953732032000046097 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Wheelwright T. (2021, April 21). Cell phone behavior survey: Are people addicted to their phones? Reviews.Org . https://www.reviews.org/mobile/cell-phone-addiction/
• Whitaker L. R., Degoulet M., Morikawa H. (2013). Social deprivation enhances VTA synaptic plasticity and drug-induced contextual learning. Neuron, 77(2), 335–345. 10.1016/j.neuron.2012.11.022 [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Williams S. (2014, August 25). “Electronic heroin” spawns Chinese internet addiction camps. VOA . https://www.voanews.com/a/electronic-heroin-spawns-chinese-Internet-addiction-camps/2427495.html
• Yoon S., Lee S., Lee J., Lee K. (2014). Understanding notification stress of smartphone messenger app. Proceedings of the Extended Abstracts of the 32nd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 1735–1740). https://doi.acm.org/10.1145/2559206.2581167 [ Google Scholar ]
• Zahariades D. (2016). Digital detox: Unplug to reclaim your life. Amazon. [ Google Scholar ]
• Zuboff S. (2019). The age of surveillance capitalism: The fight for a human future at the new frontier of power. PublicAffairs. [ Google Scholar ]
• View on publisher site
• PDF (379.3 KB)
• Collections

Similar articles

Cited by other articles, links to ncbi databases.

• Download .nbib .nbib
• Format: AMA APA MLA NLM

Add to Collections