essay on smartphone in our life

How My Smartphone Transformed My Life

What my research has taught me about improving digital well-being..

Posted February 12, 2022 | Reviewed by Gary Drevitch

• Smartphones can have subtle costs to our well-being when they interfere with in-person social interactions.
• Smartphones can also make us happier, so there's no need to feel guilt or to ditch your smartphone for a flip phone.
• Research has begun to show how we can use our smartphones to further maximize our well-being.

It’s been 10 years since I made a decision that would forever change my life. This decision has altered the way I communicate with others, the way I spend my free time, and what I research. Though I did not know it at the time, my life would change profoundly when I decided to purchase my first smartphone.

It wasn’t long after I acquired my first iPhone that I began to notice that my ability to concentrate on my work diminished. As more and more friends and colleagues ditched their flip phones for these handheld computers, I also began to notice that smartphones distracted people far beyond the work setting. Smartphones competed for our attention when we spent time even with the closest people in our lives. A year after my purchase, I was dancing at a festival when the topic of my Ph.D. dissertation appeared to me with remarkable clarity: I was going to research whether smartphones impact well-being by interfering with our in-person social interactions.

Even since my dance-floor epiphany, my collaborators and I have conducted a slew of experiments showing that smartphones do indeed interfere with people’s ability to reap the benefits of in-person social interactions. We have shown, for example, that friends randomly assigned to have their phones on the table while eating at a café enjoyed the experience less than those sharing a meal with their phones put away. In another study, parents asked to be on their phones while enjoying a science museum with their children found the experience less meaningful than parents asked to limit their phone use. We recently summarized these and other studies in a paper published in Current Directions in Psychological Science.

Based on the body of my published work, you could be forgiven if you thought I believe that smartphones are ruining our lives. Indeed, I have even had friends tell me that they are more self-conscious when they use their phones around me. Rest assured: I neither hate my phone nor do I judge other people’s phone use.

First, as researchers often say, “Research is me-search.” In other words, researchers often study topics that are directly relevant to their own behavior and problems. Indeed, I only study the effects of smartphones because I am as guilty as anybody for using my phone—quite a bit.

Second, I deliberately set out to study whether phones interfere with social interactions. Thus, it is not surprising that most of what I have found documents precisely those negative effects. Still, even though the majority of my research shows the costs of smartphone use, our findings are inconsistent with the thesis that smartphones are ruining our lives. In the café study, for example, all participants enjoyed their meal; people with their phones on the table simply enjoyed the meal slightly less. So, no, phones are not ruining your dinner—unless, of course, you are glued to your phone the entire time, but people typically use their phones in short bursts during social interactions.

I do admit, however, that my research has influenced the way I use my smartphone. You will likely not find me with my phone next to my dinner plate or checking my notifications when somebody is talking to me. I typically have my smartphone on silent, so that I have more control over my attention. And I batch my notifications , so that I can attend to them a few times a day rather than as they come in. But I am not going back to my flip phone anytime soon, either. In fact, I would argue that my smartphone has had a net positive effect on my well-being.

With my smartphone faithfully in my pocket wherever I go, I can save time when ordering my morning coffee, finding the best restaurant, or doing my banking. In fact, in one study, we showed that people were in a better mood when trying to get somewhere with their phones versus without them. But my smartphone has positively impacted my life in far more profound ways. Without my smartphone, I would not have met my husband. Sharing my life with him has been a robust source of happiness .

Our smartphones have transformed our lives in a multitude of ways. I have made it my mission to document the subtle costs of these devices, not because I think smartphones are bad for us, but precisely the opposite: With so much information, entertainment, and connection only a swipe away, smartphones should be making us happier. My goal for this page, therefore, is to share the latest research on phones, so that we can all reap the benefits of these amazing devices while minimizing their costs.

Dwyer, R. J., Kushlev, K., & Dunn, E. W. (2018). Smartphone use undermines enjoyment of face-to-face social interactions. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 78, 233–239. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2017.10.007

Fitz, N., Kushlev, K., Jagannathan, R., Lewis, T., Paliwal, D., & Ariely, D. (2019). Batching smartphone notifications can improve well-being. Computers in Human Behavior, 101(January), 84–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.07.016

Kushlev, K., & Dunn, E. W. (2019). Smartphones distract parents from cultivating feelings of connection when spending time with their children. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 36(6), 1619–1639. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407518769387

Kushlev, K., Dwyer, R., & Dunn, E. W. (2019). The social price of constant connectivity: Smartphones impose subtle costs on well-being. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 28(4), 347–352. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721419847200

Kushlev, K., Proulx, J. D. E., & Dunn, E. W. (2017). Digitally connected, socially disconnected: The effects of relying on technology rather than other people. Computers in Human Behavior, 76, 68–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.07.001

Kostadin Kushlev, Ph.D., is an Assistant Professor at Georgetown University in Washington, DC. Dr. Kushlev studies a broad range of questions related to well-being, from its predictors to its consequences.

• 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

At any moment, someone’s aggravating behavior or our own bad luck can set us off on an emotional spiral that threatens to derail our entire day. Here’s how we can face our triggers with less reactivity so that we can get on with our lives.

• Emotional Intelligence
• Gaslighting
• Affective Forecasting
• Neuroscience

Your smartphone has become your home, anthropologists say

You are a snail and your smartphone is your shell – it has become your home. Image:  Unsplash/freestocks

.chakra .wef-1c7l3mo{-webkit-transition:all 0.15s ease-out;transition:all 0.15s ease-out;cursor:pointer;-webkit-text-decoration:none;text-decoration:none;outline:none;color:inherit;}.chakra .wef-1c7l3mo:hover,.chakra .wef-1c7l3mo[data-hover]{-webkit-text-decoration:underline;text-decoration:underline;}.chakra .wef-1c7l3mo:focus,.chakra .wef-1c7l3mo[data-focus]{box-shadow:0 0 0 3px rgba(168,203,251,0.5);} Sean Fleming

.chakra .wef-9dduvl{margin-top:16px;margin-bottom:16px;line-height:1.388;font-size:1.25rem;}@media screen and (min-width:56.5rem){.chakra .wef-9dduvl{font-size:1.125rem;}} Explore and monitor how .chakra .wef-15eoq1r{margin-top:16px;margin-bottom:16px;line-height:1.388;font-size:1.25rem;color:#F7DB5E;}@media screen and (min-width:56.5rem){.chakra .wef-15eoq1r{font-size:1.125rem;}} Digital Communications is affecting economies, industries and global issues

.chakra .wef-1nk5u5d{margin-top:16px;margin-bottom:16px;line-height:1.388;color:#2846F8;font-size:1.25rem;}@media screen and (min-width:56.5rem){.chakra .wef-1nk5u5d{font-size:1.125rem;}} Get involved with our crowdsourced digital platform to deliver impact at scale

Stay up to date:, digital communications.

• A new report from University College London looks at how people interact with and rely on their smartphones.
• For The Global Smartphone, researchers spent 16 months living in communities in Africa, Asia, Europe and South America to investigate how smartphones are used.
• The smartphone has become 'a place within which we live', rather than a device that we use, they say.

You are a snail and your smartphone is your shell – it has become your home.

As bizarre as that might sound, it’s the view of a team of anthropologists who spent more than a year examining the relationship people have with their smartphones.

In the report The Global Smartphone, the team of researchers from University College London document how people of all ages interact with and rely on their smartphones for a wide range of everyday support.

Among their observations was that the smartphone – now one of the most ubiquitous technology devices of all time with billions of users worldwide – isn’t often used to make phone calls. Not when compared to the range of other uses people put them to.

Our smartphones are instead best understood as places “within which we now live,” the report’s authors say. “We are always ‘at home’ in our smartphone.”

All of which leads them to this conclusion: “We have become human snails carrying our home in our pockets.”

Have you read?

Our love affair with smartphones has grown deeper than you think, these are the countries where most adults still don’t have a smartphone, how to save the planet, one mobile device at a time.

The death of proximity

The researchers each spent 16 months living in communities in Africa, Asia, Europe and South America and looking at how smartphones are used.

Their report is filled with anecdotes about the people they studied, including Sato san, a 90-year-old flower arranger from Japan. From her home in Kyoto, Sato san organizes the students she teaches, maintains a blog, orders food, checks bus timetables and more – all from her smartphone, which is described as “central to her work and life.”

With the ability to take the device everywhere comes the idea that no one is ever far from the things that matter most to them.

It’s a phenomenon that can lead to common misunderstandings. The report gives an example of someone in a restaurant neglecting their companion by looking at their smartphone. “What has happened is that the individual has, in effect, gone home,” it says. “They can use this portal to zone out from the place where they are sitting, to return to a home in which they can carry out many familiar activities, from finding entertainment to organising their schedule or messaging friends or relatives through text and visual media.”

The psychology of interacting with a smartphone echoes the way in which many people relate to their homes, too, according to the report. There are different apps for different purposes, in much the same way that the rooms in a house each meet a different need.

The report’s authors do acknowledge that it can be disconcerting to find yourself sitting next to someone who has, in many respects, left and gone home – even though they are still with you physically.

No place like home

It can be helpful when thinking about the concept of the smartphone-as-home to consider the nature of home and how it has changed in recent decades.

In many fast-growing, developing economies there has been a wave of rapid urbanization. Millions of people in China have left behind the rural communities they were born into and relocated to cities. Millions more people across many parts of the world that are conflict-bound or subject to some of the worst effects of the climate crisis have left their homeland behind completely in search of a new life.

“For Sicilians living in Milan,” the report says, “the smartphone helps them to accept that Milan is the place where they reside, because they can simultaneously also remain in ‘their land’ (mia terra) of Sicily, the site of their memories and dreams.”

This ability to stay in touch with friends, family and old social networks can help people stay rooted in a sense of home via their smartphone, even if they are thousands of kilometres away.

That could be of particular benefit to older people, the report suggests. In its Global Report on Ageism , the UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs writes: “Among older people, ageism is associated with poorer physical and mental health, increased social isolation and loneliness, greater financial insecurity, decreased quality of life and premature death.” Smartphones have the potential to act as a portal through which socially isolated people can maintain contact with the outside world, with friends and family, too. In The Global Smartphone, this is illustrated by the example of a Japanese woman in her sixties, who told the researchers: “I think when we are elderly, it doesn’t mean that we have friends right next to us. So the smartphone might feel more precious to us (as we age) because it allows us to stay sociable.”

Don't miss any update on this topic

Create a free account and access your personalized content collection with our latest publications and analyses.

License and Republishing

World Economic Forum articles may be republished in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International Public License, and in accordance with our Terms of Use.

The views expressed in this article are those of the author alone and not the World Economic Forum.

Related topics:

The agenda .chakra .wef-n7bacu{margin-top:16px;margin-bottom:16px;line-height:1.388;font-weight:400;} weekly.

A weekly update of the most important issues driving the global agenda

.chakra .wef-1dtnjt5{display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-align-items:center;-webkit-box-align:center;-ms-flex-align:center;align-items:center;-webkit-flex-wrap:wrap;-ms-flex-wrap:wrap;flex-wrap:wrap;} More on Emerging Technologies .chakra .wef-17xejub{-webkit-flex:1;-ms-flex:1;flex:1;justify-self:stretch;-webkit-align-self:stretch;-ms-flex-item-align:stretch;align-self:stretch;} .chakra .wef-nr1rr4{display:-webkit-inline-box;display:-webkit-inline-flex;display:-ms-inline-flexbox;display:inline-flex;white-space:normal;vertical-align:middle;text-transform:uppercase;font-size:0.75rem;border-radius:0.25rem;font-weight:700;-webkit-align-items:center;-webkit-box-align:center;-ms-flex-align:center;align-items:center;line-height:1.2;-webkit-letter-spacing:1.25px;-moz-letter-spacing:1.25px;-ms-letter-spacing:1.25px;letter-spacing:1.25px;background:none;padding:0px;color:#B3B3B3;-webkit-box-decoration-break:clone;box-decoration-break:clone;-webkit-box-decoration-break:clone;}@media screen and (min-width:37.5rem){.chakra .wef-nr1rr4{font-size:0.875rem;}}@media screen and (min-width:56.5rem){.chakra .wef-nr1rr4{font-size:1rem;}} See all

How venture capital is investing in AI in the top five global economies — and shaping the AI ecosystem

Piyush Gupta, Chirag Chopra and Ankit Kasare

May 24, 2024

What can we expect of next-generation generative AI models?

Andrea Willige

May 22, 2024

Solar storms hit tech equipment, and other technology news you need to know

Sebastian Buckup

May 17, 2024

Generative AI is trained on just a few of the world’s 7,000 languages. Here’s why that’s a problem – and what’s being done about it

Madeleine North

Critical minerals demand has doubled in the past five years – here are some solutions to the supply crunch

Emma Charlton

May 16, 2024

6 ways satellites are helping to monitor our changing planet from space

Students wait in front of the Academy of Art in San Francisco.

• VALLEY OF THE BOOM

Smartphones revolutionize our lives—but at what cost?

The computer in our hands can do astonishing things, but new studies show just how dramatically they’re distracting us.

Not long ago, as happens almost every day, I got a Skype call on my smartphone from my dad, who lives in Kolkata, India. My dad is 79 and doesn’t get out very much, having become increasingly housebound. On this day, I was traveling by train from Denmark to Sweden. Speaking to him, I held my phone up against the window, its camera lens facing out. We both took in the view of the Swedish countryside as the train pulled out from Malmo and sped toward Lund. For a brief while, it felt like we were traveling together.

For that moment of connection, and many others like it, my phone deserves my gratitude. But the same device has become a source of relentless distraction in my life, intruding upon my attention with frightening regularity and diminishing my in-person interactions with family and friends. On a visit to Kolkata to see my dad, I found myself reaching for my phone every few minutes in the middle of our conversation to scan my Facebook feed and see if a photo I’d recently posted had garnered any fresh likes. (It had! And comments, too!)

Over the past decade, smartphones have revolutionized our lives in ways that go well beyond how we communicate. Besides calling, texting, and emailing, more than two billion people around the world now use these devices to navigate, to book cab rides, to compare product reviews and prices, to follow the news, to watch movies, to listen to music, to play video games, to memorialize vacations, and, not least of all, to participate in social media.

It’s incontrovertible that smartphone technology has yielded many benefits for society, such as allowing millions of people who lack access to banks to conduct financial transactions, for instance, or enabling rescue workers in a disaster zone to pinpoint precisely where their help is needed most urgently. There are apps available for smartphone users to monitor how much they’re walking during the day and how well they’re sleeping at night. New applications of the technology emerge seemingly daily: Your smartphone can now help you stay on top of your children’s dental hygiene by tracking how long they’re brushing their teeth with their Bluetooth-enabled toothbrushes. (My wife and I decided that this was a bit much.)

These benefits, however, seem to have come at a high cost to our mental and social lives. The constant connectivity and access to information that smartphones offer have made the devices something of a drug for hundreds of millions of users. Scientists are just beginning to research this phenomenon, but their studies suggest that we are becomingly increasingly distracted, spending less time in the real world and being drawn more deeply into the virtual world.

The power they hold over us is glaringly evident in our everyday habits and behaviors. Remembering directions is a thing of the past—we habitually rely on our phones to get anywhere, even to destinations we’ve visited numerous times before. The most compulsive users among us keep our phones within clutching distance at all times, reaching for them even when we wake up in the middle of the night. At airports, on college campuses, at the mall, at the stoplight—at almost any public place you can think of—the most common sight of our time is that of people with bowed heads, looking intently at their phones. If you see someone in a café sipping coffee and staring out the window, it’s less likely that they’re enjoying a quiet moment and more likely that their device has simply run out of charge.

For Hungry Minds

Our use of smartphones has effectively changed the geography of our minds, creating a distractive off-ramp for every thought we might have on our own. “What I’ve seen in the last six to eight years is a massive paradigm shift—much of the attentional resource that we devoted to our personal ecosystem has been shifted to what’s virtual,” says Larry Rosen, an emeritus professor of psychology at California State University in Dominguez Hills and co-author of The Distracted Mind: Ancient Brains in a Hi-Tech World. “That means you are not attending to what’s in front of you. We see this in parenting—you are not focusing on your kids. You’re not even focusing on what you’re watching on television because you’re second-screening. It’s affecting every aspect of our lives, and sadly, I don’t think the pendulum has swung as far as it will go.”

Researchers have begun documenting the impact of smartphones on our ability to focus. In one study, Adrian Ward, a psychologist at the University of Texas at Austin, and his colleagues gave 800 participants two challenging mental tasks—solving a math problem while memorizing a random sequence of letters and selecting an image out of a few options to complete a visual pattern. Some participants were asked to leave their smartphones in another room while others were allowed to keep their smartphones in their pockets. Still other participants kept their smartphones on a desk in front of them. Although the phones played no role in the tasks, how accessible the phones were had an effect on how well the participants were able to perform them. Those who had left their phones in another room fared the best. Those with the phones placed in front of them did the worst. But even those who had tucked their phones in their pockets were found to have diminished cognitive capacity.

Researchers worry that addiction to smartphones could dull the ability of young users to read and comprehend texts, which in turn could have adverse impacts on their critical thinking. These concerns are based on the results of studies such as one conducted by psychologist Anne Mangen and her colleagues at the University of Stavanger in Norway. They divided 72 students in the 10th grade into two groups, asking one group to read two texts on paper and the other to read the same texts as PDFs on a screen. The print readers did much better on a reading comprehension test than the digital readers.

You May Also Like

Gambling is everywhere now. When does that become a problem?

How is your location data really tracked? You’d be surprised.

The unexpected health benefits of Ozempic and Mounjaro

Another study, conducted at the University of British Columbia, lends support to what many of us have concluded from first-hand experience: Smartphone use can adversely affect social interactions in the real world. The researchers, led by Ryan Dwyer, a doctoral student in psychology, asked more than 300 participants to have a meal at a restaurant with friends or family, instructing some to keep their phones on the table and others to put their phones away. Those who had their phones in front of them reported feeling more distracted during the conversation and enjoyed the meal less than the others.

“When people had access to their phones, they were also more bored, which is not what we were expecting,” Dwyer says. Having your phone on the table while dining, he adds, is “probably not going to ruin your meal, but it could chip away at your enjoyment.” The toll exacted by this phenomenon on close family relationships is easy to extrapolate.

The reason why it’s become so hard for us to set aside our phones, even at mealtimes, isn’t hard to understand. “It’s well known that if you want to keep a person dialed into something, give them a reward at variable times,” explains Ethan Kross, a psychologist at the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor. “Turns out, that’s exactly what email or social media does—you don’t know when you’ll get another like or receive your next email, and so we keep checking.”

Our compulsivity seems to be getting worse, according to a study by Rosen and his colleagues in which they’ve been keeping track of smartphone use by high school students and young adults. Using apps that count the number of times a phone gets unlocked, the researchers found that participants had gone from unlocking their phones about 56 times a day in 2016 to 73 times a day in 2018. “That’s a huge increase,” Rosen says.

Some of the blame lies with notifications, which can be turned off. Another factor is “the anxieties that are in your head,” Rosen says, and these too can be addressed with efforts like mindfulness and meditation. A third and more insidious factor, according to Rosen, is the way technology companies have “carefully orchestrated their apps and their websites to get your eyeballs there, to keep them there and to keep them coming back.”

Responding to these criticisms, phone makers have developed apps to help users monitor their phone screen time. But it’s unclear if apps like Apple’s Screen Time and Google Android’s Digital Well Being will help users curtail the time they spend on their phones. In a study of high school seniors, Rosen and his team found that the study participants did check screen time monitoring apps occasionally and did learn that they’d been spending more time on their phones than they’d thought. But they determined that about half of them made no changes to their behavior. (The researchers are following up to find out what changes the others made.)

Rosen admits to being hooked himself. As a news junkie, he’s constantly opening up Apple News on his phone. “Most of the time, there’s nothing new, but every once in a while, a new story shows up, giving me a positive reinforcement to do it more often,” he says.

Learning to live with the technology without surrendering to it may be one of the biggest challenges we face in the digital era. “We are playing catch-up,” says Kross, who describes the experiential universe opened up by smartphones as a new ecosystem that we’re still adapting to. “There are helpful or harmful ways of navigating the offline world, and the same is true of the digital world.”

Related Topics

• MOBILE PHONES
• INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS

How ultra-processed food harms the body and brain

Here's what happens to your body when you quit smoking

What can your DNA say about your risk of opioid addiction?

Alcohol is killing more women than ever before

It’s harder than ever to identify a manipulated photo. Here’s where to start.

• Paid Content
• Environment
• Photography
• Perpetual Planet

History & Culture

• History & Culture
• History Magazine
• Mind, Body, Wonder
• World Heritage
• Terms of Use
• Privacy Policy
• Your US State Privacy Rights
• Children's Online Privacy Policy
• Interest-Based Ads
• About Nielsen Measurement
• Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information
• Nat Geo Home
• Attend a Live Event
• Book a Trip
• Inspire Your Kids
• Shop Nat Geo
• Visit the D.C. Museum
• Learn About Our Impact
• Support Our Mission
• Advertise With Us
• Customer Service
• Renew Subscription
• Manage Your Subscription
• Work at Nat Geo
• Sign Up for Our Newsletters
• Contribute to Protect the Planet

Copyright © 1996-2015 National Geographic Society Copyright © 2015-2024 National Geographic Partners, LLC. All rights reserved

Essay on Smartphone

Students are often asked to write an essay on Smartphone 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 Smartphone

Introduction.

Smartphones are handheld devices that combine the functions of a mobile phone and a computer. They are an essential part of modern life.

Smartphones have many features like calling, texting, internet browsing, and camera. They also have apps for education, entertainment, and social media.

Smartphones make communication easy. They help us in learning, provide entertainment, and keep us updated with the world.

Disadvantages

However, excessive use of smartphones can lead to addiction, poor eyesight, and can distract students from studies.

Smartphones are useful tools. But they should be used wisely to avoid negative effects.

250 Words Essay on Smartphone

Smartphones, the ubiquitous devices that have transformed our lives, are more than just communication tools. They are complex, multi-functional devices that have revolutionized the way we interact with the world.

The Evolution of Smartphones

The genesis of smartphones can be traced back to the early 1990s, but it was the launch of Apple’s iPhone in 2007 that truly marked the dawn of the smartphone era. Since then, technological advancements have led to the creation of devices that are increasingly powerful, versatile, and user-friendly.

Functionality and Applications

Today, smartphones serve many purposes. They are used for communication, entertainment, education, shopping, and even health monitoring. With the rise of mobile applications, smartphones have become a platform for innovation, enabling developers to create solutions that cater to diverse needs.

Impact on Society

The impact of smartphones on society is profound. They have facilitated instant communication, provided access to vast amounts of information, and democratized technology. However, they have also raised concerns about privacy, mental health, and social interaction.

Future Perspectives

The future of smartphones is exciting. With advancements in artificial intelligence, virtual reality, and 5G technology, smartphones are poised to become even more integral to our lives. However, it is crucial to address the challenges they pose to ensure their benefits are maximized.

In conclusion, smartphones are transformative devices that have reshaped our world. As we navigate the future, it is essential to harness their potential responsibly and innovatively.

500 Words Essay on Smartphone

Introduction to the smartphone era.

The advent of smartphones has significantly revolutionized the way we communicate, interact, and perceive the world. As multifunctional devices, smartphones have become indispensable tools that facilitate not only communication but also education, entertainment, and business operations.

The journey of smartphones began with IBM’s Simon Personal Communicator in 1992, which was the first device to combine telephony with computing abilities. However, the real transformation occurred with the launch of Apple’s iPhone in 2007. This event marked the onset of the era of touch-screen, app-based smartphones. Today, smartphones are equipped with advanced features like high-resolution cameras, GPS, and a multitude of apps catering to diverse needs.

Impact on Communication and Information

Smartphones have redefined communication, making it instant and borderless. With apps like WhatsApp, FaceTime, and Skype, we can connect with anyone around the globe within seconds. Furthermore, smartphones have democratized information. Internet connectivity has made vast amounts of data accessible at our fingertips, enabling us to stay updated and informed.

The Role of Smartphones in Education

Smartphones have also found a significant place in the realm of education. They serve as portable knowledge hubs, with numerous educational apps and e-books available. During the COVID-19 pandemic, smartphones played a crucial role in facilitating remote learning, thus ensuring the continuity of education.

Smartphones and Entertainment

Entertainment has been another domain profoundly impacted by smartphones. With apps like Netflix, Spotify, and YouTube, smartphones have become personalized entertainment centers. They also host a myriad of games, catering to different age groups and interests.

Smartphones in Business

In the business world, smartphones have enabled the growth of e-commerce and digital marketing. They also facilitate remote work, making businesses more flexible and resilient. Furthermore, smartphones have given rise to app-based businesses, creating new economic opportunities.

The Dark Side of Smartphones

Despite their benefits, smartphones have a darker side. Overdependence can lead to addiction, impacting mental health and social relationships. Additionally, smartphones pose privacy risks, as they collect vast amounts of personal data, which can be misused.

Conclusion: The Future of Smartphones

As we move forward, the role of smartphones in our lives is likely to grow. With advancements in technologies like Artificial Intelligence and Augmented Reality, the future smartphones will become even more integrated into our daily lives. However, it is crucial to balance the benefits of smartphones with their potential risks, to ensure they serve as tools for empowerment rather than sources of harm.

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

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

• Essay on Impact of Smartphone
• Essay on Advantage of Smartphone
• Essay on Travelling as a Part of Education

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.

• CBSE Class 10th
• CBSE Class 12th
• UP Board 10th
• UP Board 12th
• Bihar Board 10th
• Bihar Board 12th
• Top Schools in India
• Top Schools in Delhi
• Top Schools in Mumbai
• Top Schools in Chennai
• Top Schools in Hyderabad
• Top Schools in Kolkata
• Top Schools in Pune
• Top Schools in Bangalore

Products & Resources

• JEE Main Knockout April
• Free Sample Papers
• Free Ebooks
• NCERT Notes
• NCERT Syllabus
• NCERT Books
• RD Sharma Solutions
• Navodaya Vidyalaya Admission 2024-25
• NCERT Solutions
• NCERT Solutions for Class 12
• NCERT Solutions for Class 11
• NCERT solutions for Class 10
• NCERT solutions for Class 9
• NCERT solutions for Class 8
• NCERT Solutions for Class 7
• JEE Main 2024
• MHT CET 2024
• JEE Advanced 2024
• BITSAT 2024
• View All Engineering Exams
• Colleges Accepting B.Tech Applications
• Top Engineering Colleges in India
• Engineering Colleges in India
• Engineering Colleges in Tamil Nadu
• Engineering Colleges Accepting JEE Main
• Top IITs in India
• Top NITs in India
• Top IIITs in India
• JEE Main College Predictor
• JEE Main Rank Predictor
• MHT CET College Predictor
• AP EAMCET College Predictor
• GATE College Predictor
• KCET College Predictor
• JEE Advanced College Predictor
• View All College Predictors
• JEE Main Question Paper
• JEE Main Cutoff
• JEE Main Advanced Admit Card
• JEE Advanced Admit Card 2024
• Download E-Books and Sample Papers
• Compare Colleges
• B.Tech College Applications
• KCET Result
• MAH MBA CET Exam
• View All Management Exams

Colleges & Courses

• MBA College Admissions
• MBA Colleges in India
• Top IIMs Colleges in India
• Top Online MBA Colleges in India
• MBA Colleges Accepting XAT Score
• BBA Colleges in India
• XAT College Predictor 2024
• SNAP College Predictor
• NMAT College Predictor
• MAT College Predictor 2024
• CMAT College Predictor 2024
• CAT Percentile Predictor 2023
• CAT 2023 College Predictor
• CMAT 2024 Answer Key
• TS ICET 2024 Hall Ticket
• CMAT Result 2024
• MAH MBA CET Cutoff 2024
• Download Helpful Ebooks
• List of Popular Branches
• QnA - Get answers to your doubts
• IIM Fees Structure
• AIIMS Nursing
• Top Medical Colleges in India
• Top Medical Colleges in India accepting NEET Score
• Medical Colleges accepting NEET
• List of Medical Colleges in India
• List of AIIMS Colleges In India
• Medical Colleges in Maharashtra
• Medical Colleges in India Accepting NEET PG
• NEET College Predictor
• NEET PG College Predictor
• NEET MDS College Predictor
• NEET Rank Predictor
• DNB PDCET College Predictor
• NEET Result 2024
• NEET Asnwer Key 2024
• NEET Cut off
• NEET Online Preparation
• Download Helpful E-books
• Colleges Accepting Admissions
• Top Law Colleges in India
• Law College Accepting CLAT Score
• List of Law Colleges in India
• Top Law Colleges in Delhi
• Top NLUs Colleges in India
• Top Law Colleges in Chandigarh
• Top Law Collages in Lucknow

Predictors & E-Books

• CLAT College Predictor
• MHCET Law ( 5 Year L.L.B) College Predictor
• AILET College Predictor
• Sample Papers
• Compare Law Collages
• Careers360 Youtube Channel
• CLAT Syllabus 2025
• CLAT Previous Year Question Paper
• NID DAT Exam
• Pearl Academy Exam

Predictors & Articles

• NIFT College Predictor
• UCEED College Predictor
• NID DAT College Predictor
• NID DAT Syllabus 2025
• NID DAT 2025
• Design Colleges in India
• Top NIFT Colleges in India
• Fashion Design Colleges in India
• Top Interior Design Colleges in India
• Top Graphic Designing Colleges in India
• Fashion Design Colleges in Delhi
• Fashion Design Colleges in Mumbai
• Top Interior Design Colleges in Bangalore
• NIFT Result 2024
• NIFT Fees Structure
• NIFT Syllabus 2025
• Free Design E-books
• List of Branches
• Careers360 Youtube channel
• IPU CET BJMC
• JMI Mass Communication Entrance Exam
• IIMC Entrance Exam
• Media & Journalism colleges in Delhi
• Media & Journalism colleges in Bangalore
• Media & Journalism colleges in Mumbai
• List of Media & Journalism Colleges in India
• CA Intermediate
• CA Foundation
• CS Executive
• CS Professional
• Difference between CA and CS
• Difference between CA and CMA
• CA Full form
• CMA Full form
• CS Full form
• CA Salary In India

Top Courses & Careers

• Bachelor of Commerce (B.Com)
• Master of Commerce (M.Com)
• Company Secretary
• Cost Accountant
• Charted Accountant
• Credit Manager
• Financial Advisor
• Top Commerce Colleges in India
• Top Government Commerce Colleges in India
• Top Private Commerce Colleges in India
• Top M.Com Colleges in Mumbai
• Top B.Com Colleges in India
• IT Colleges in Tamil Nadu
• IT Colleges in Uttar Pradesh
• MCA Colleges in India
• BCA Colleges in India

Quick Links

• Information Technology Courses
• Programming Courses
• Web Development Courses
• Data Analytics Courses
• Big Data Analytics Courses
• RUHS Pharmacy Admission Test
• Top Pharmacy Colleges in India
• Pharmacy Colleges in Pune
• Pharmacy Colleges in Mumbai
• Colleges Accepting GPAT Score
• Pharmacy Colleges in Lucknow
• List of Pharmacy Colleges in Nagpur
• GPAT Result
• GPAT 2024 Admit Card
• GPAT Question Papers
• NCHMCT JEE 2024
• Mah BHMCT CET
• Top Hotel Management Colleges in Delhi
• Top Hotel Management Colleges in Hyderabad
• Top Hotel Management Colleges in Mumbai
• Top Hotel Management Colleges in Tamil Nadu
• Top Hotel Management Colleges in Maharashtra
• B.Sc Hotel Management
• Hotel Management
• Diploma in Hotel Management and Catering Technology

Diploma Colleges

• Top Diploma Colleges in Maharashtra
• UPSC IAS 2024
• SSC CGL 2024
• IBPS RRB 2024
• Previous Year Sample Papers
• Free Competition E-books
• Sarkari Result
• QnA- Get your doubts answered
• UPSC Previous Year Sample Papers
• CTET Previous Year Sample Papers
• SBI Clerk Previous Year Sample Papers
• NDA Previous Year Sample Papers

Upcoming Events

• NDA Application Form 2024
• UPSC IAS Application Form 2024
• CDS Application Form 2024
• CTET Admit card 2024
• HP TET Result 2023
• SSC GD Constable Admit Card 2024
• UPTET Notification 2024
• SBI Clerk Result 2024

Other Exams

• SSC CHSL 2024
• UP PCS 2024
• UGC NET 2024
• RRB NTPC 2024
• IBPS PO 2024
• IBPS Clerk 2024
• IBPS SO 2024
• Top University in USA
• Top University in Canada
• Top University in Ireland
• Top Universities in UK
• Top Universities in Australia
• Best MBA Colleges in Abroad
• Business Management Studies Colleges

Top Countries

• Study in USA
• Study in UK
• Study in Canada
• Study in Australia
• Study in Ireland
• Study in Germany
• Study in China
• Study in Europe

Student Visas

• Student Visa Canada
• Student Visa UK
• Student Visa USA
• Student Visa Australia
• Student Visa Germany
• Student Visa New Zealand
• Student Visa Ireland
• CUET PG 2024
• IGNOU B.Ed Admission 2024
• DU Admission 2024
• UP B.Ed JEE 2024
• LPU NEST 2024
• IIT JAM 2024
• IGNOU Online Admission 2024
• Universities in India
• Top Universities in India 2024
• Top Colleges in India
• Top Universities in Uttar Pradesh 2024
• Top Universities in Bihar
• Top Universities in Madhya Pradesh 2024
• Top Universities in Tamil Nadu 2024
• Central Universities in India
• CUET DU Cut off 2024
• IGNOU Date Sheet
• CUET Mock Test 2024
• CUET Admit card 2024
• CUET Result 2024
• CUET Participating Universities 2024
• CUET Previous Year Question Paper
• CUET Syllabus 2024 for Science Students
• E-Books and Sample Papers
• CUET Exam Pattern 2024
• CUET Exam Date 2024
• CUET Cut Off 2024
• CUET Exam Analysis 2024
• IGNOU Exam Form 2024
• CUET PG Counselling 2024
• CUET Answer Key 2024

Engineering Preparation

• Knockout JEE Main 2024
• Test Series JEE Main 2024
• JEE Main 2024 Rank Booster

Medical Preparation

• Knockout NEET 2024
• Test Series NEET 2024
• Rank Booster NEET 2024

Online Courses

• JEE Main One Month Course
• NEET One Month Course
• IBSAT Free Mock Tests
• IIT JEE Foundation Course
• Knockout BITSAT 2024
• Career Guidance Tool

Top Streams

• IT & Software Certification Courses
• Engineering and Architecture Certification Courses
• Programming And Development Certification Courses
• Business and Management Certification Courses
• Marketing Certification Courses
• Health and Fitness Certification Courses
• Design Certification Courses

Specializations

• Digital Marketing Certification Courses
• Cyber Security Certification Courses
• Artificial Intelligence Certification Courses
• Business Analytics Certification Courses
• Data Science Certification Courses
• Cloud Computing Certification Courses
• Machine Learning Certification Courses
• View All Certification Courses
• UG Degree Courses
• PG Degree Courses
• Short Term Courses
• Free Courses
• Online Degrees and Diplomas
• Compare Courses

Top Providers

• Coursera Courses
• Udemy Courses
• Edx Courses
• Swayam Courses
• upGrad Courses
• Simplilearn Courses
• Great Learning Courses

Smartphone Essay

A smartphone is a mobile gadget that makes it possible to combine cellular and mobile computing capabilities into a single device. People love to use smartphones because, compared to feature phones, smartphones offer more powerful hardware and robust mobile operating systems. Here are a few sample essays on ‘smartphones’.

100 Words Essay On Smartphone

Modern technological developments have made living simpler. Today, we can quickly call or video chat with anyone by moving our fingers when using a mobile phone. Mobile phones can be used for many different things today, including voice calling, video chatting, text messaging, multimedia messaging, internet browsing, email, video games, and photography. They come in a variety of sizes and shapes and with a variety of technical specifications. Thus, it is referred to as a "Smart Phone." Today you can see everyone's home with at least one smartphone. Even in rural areas where the rate of development isn't as high as that of a city, nearly every person can be seen using a smartphone.

200 Words Essay On Smartphone

With the help of mobile smartphones, life has become increasingly simple. When using a landline phone, calling someone was extremely difficult, expensive, and time-consuming while waiting for the call to connect to your loved ones.

However, a smartphone puts your loved ones within reach with a single click. No matter how far they are from you, whether they are living domestically or abroad, you may always talk to them whenever you want. You can call them via voice or even use the best smartphone technology, video calls. Through the video call feature on your smartphone, you can video chat with family members you can't see every day, but it's always excellent to see them every day.

Smartphones are now utilised for various things, including calling, video calling, texting, sending emails, playing games, and even taking good photos or selfies using the front and primary cameras.

Advantages Of Smartphone

Keeps us connected

Day-to-Day Communicating

Entertainment for All

Managing Office Work

Mobile Banking

Disadvantages Of Smartphones

Wasting Time

Making Us Non- communicable

Money Wastage

Loss of Privacy

Depending on how a user utilises a mobile phone, it could have both beneficial and harmful effects. We should use our mobile devices cautiously and follow best practices to live better, hassle-free lives rather than utilising them carelessly and turning them into life-threatening viruses.

500 Words Essay On Smartphone

In many aspects, smartphones are beneficial in our daily lives. The use of cell phones is essential to everyday life. The smartphone is an excellent improvement to our life. Our work has been made simpler and more convenient due to it. It has numerous uses, including a phone, camera, music player, and alarm clock. We can maintain contact with our friends and family members thanks to it.

Understanding The Smartphone

A smartphone is a mobile gadget that makes it possible to combine cellular and mobile computing capabilities into a single device. In addition, compared to feature phones, smartphones offer more powerful hardware and robust mobile operating systems. Smartphones' robust operating systems enable online browsing, software, and multimedia features. They also support standard phone features like voice calls and text messaging.

Importance Of Smartphones In Our Life

A smartphone is a mobile phone that provides more sophisticated networking and computational capabilities than a typical mobile phone. A touchscreen interface, an internet connection, and an operating system that can execute downloaded programmes are all standard features of a smartphone.

The Simon Personal Communicator, built in 1992, was the original smartphone. It incorporated functions from many devices, including a cell phone, pager, fax machine, and contact book. However, cell phones did not take off until the 2000s.

The ability to always be online is one of the key factors contributing to cell phones' immense popularity. This enables us to keep up with current events, check our email and social media accounts, and even conduct online shopping. We can communicate with our friends and family via smartphones. We can reach them whenever we want by phone, text, or video-chat.

Smartphone Use By Students

Students can benefit from smartphones. They can use them to look up material swiftly, take class notes, and maintain organisation. Nevertheless, there are several drawbacks to using a smartphone in class. A student may not be paying attention to the lecture and miss vital information if they are continually using their phone.

While some schools have outlawed cell phone use in the classroom, others have welcomed it and have even developed apps that can be used for learning. The best course of action for each school's children is up to them.

The excessive use of cell phones has some drawbacks. For instance, if we are always staring at our phones, we risk missing out on what is happening worldwide. We could also develop a phone addiction and use them excessively. This may result in issues like anxiousness and lack of sleep.

My Life Experiences

In my home, there are five smartphones, one for my father, one for my mother, one for my sister, one for my brother, and one for myself. We all use smartphones for personal work. Smartphones help us in many ways, depending on how we use them. A smartphone can affect us in both ways, negatively and positively, depending on how we use it. My father always told us to use mobile phones with a limit. We all have phone-free zones in our house where we are not allowed to use any devices and we spend that time bonding with each other or reading books.

Overall, smartphones have a lot of benefits and uses that make our life easier. However, to use them wisely, we should be aware of any potential drawbacks.

Applications for Admissions are open.

Aakash iACST Scholarship Test 2024

Get up to 90% scholarship on NEET, JEE & Foundation courses

ALLEN Digital Scholarship Admission Test (ADSAT)

Register FREE for ALLEN Digital Scholarship Admission Test (ADSAT)

JEE Main Important Physics formulas

As per latest 2024 syllabus. Physics formulas, equations, & laws of class 11 & 12th chapters

PW JEE Coaching

Enrol in PW Vidyapeeth center for JEE coaching

PW NEET Coaching

Enrol in PW Vidyapeeth center for NEET coaching

JEE Main Important Chemistry formulas

As per latest 2024 syllabus. Chemistry formulas, equations, & laws of class 11 & 12th chapters

Download Careers360 App's

Regular exam updates, QnA, Predictors, College Applications & E-books now on your Mobile

Certifications

We Appeared in

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Front Psychol

Smartphones and Cognition: A Review of Research Exploring the Links between Mobile Technology Habits and Cognitive Functioning

While smartphones and related mobile technologies are recognized as flexible and powerful tools that, when used prudently, can augment human cognition, there is also a growing perception that habitual involvement with these devices may have a negative and lasting impact on users’ ability to think, remember, pay attention, and regulate emotion. The present review considers an intensifying, though still limited, area of research exploring the potential cognitive impacts of smartphone-related habits, and seeks to determine in which domains of functioning there is accruing evidence of a significant relationship between smartphone technology and cognitive performance, and in which domains the scientific literature is not yet mature enough to endorse any firm conclusions. We focus our review primarily on three facets of cognition that are clearly implicated in public discourse regarding the impacts of mobile technology – attention, memory, and delay of gratification – and then consider evidence regarding the broader relationships between smartphone habits and everyday cognitive functioning. Along the way, we highlight compelling findings, discuss limitations with respect to empirical methodology and interpretation, and offer suggestions for how the field might progress toward a more coherent and robust area of scientific inquiry.

Introduction

As portable media devices, such as smartphones, have become an increasingly pervasive part of our lives, they have also become increasingly capable of supplementing, or even supplanting, various mental functions. With the capacity to be used as phonebooks, appointment calendars, internet portals, tip calculators, maps, gaming devices, and much more, smartphones seem capable of performing an almost limitless range of cognitive activities for us, and of satisfying many of our affective urges. However, sensationalist articles with titles such as, “Are Smartphones Making Us Dumber?” ( Ellison, 2012 ) and, “Is Your Smartphone Making You Fat and Lazy?” ( Morin, 2013 ) encourage the conclusion that reliance on smartphones and related technologies is not aiding mental functioning, but rather, is having a negative impact on our ability to think, remember, pay attention, and regulate emotion. Some have even made the claim that modern connectedness is “rewiring our brains” to constantly crave instant gratification, and that this threat to our society is “almost as important as climate change” ( Greenfield, 2013 ). Are these simply examples of an older generation once again thinking its “progeny yet more corrupt?” (Horace, 20BC) or is there some evidential legitimacy to these fears?

For all the media attention that this subject garners, the supporting scientific literature is still in its nascent stages. The present paper aims to consolidate and integrate some of the key empirical evidence that has emerged regarding the association between smartphone technology and cognitive and affective functioning. We examine the extant corpus of studies in terms of the specific claims put forth by the researchers who conducted them, and where relevant, offer a consideration of factors that might qualify or limit the generalizability of the findings. As we proceed, we evaluate the domains in which there is reason to be concerned about the growing presence of smart technology in our culture, domains in which smartphone technology may enhance cognitive skills, and domains in which the scientific literature is not mature enough to substantiate such claims. In this discussion, we examine evidence relating to both the acute consequences of media technology use on the performance of ongoing cognitive tasks, as well as the more lasting relationships that may exist between technology usage habits and cognitive abilities. As a snapshot of the current literature related to this topic, we also hope this paper can serve as a resource for those conducting further research in this area.

Challenges and Limitations in Scope

The 21st century has already provided us with a vast array of technological advances that markedly shape the ways by which we interact with the world. In this paper we could not hope to investigate every type of emerging technology, nor would we endeavor to review every psychological implication of the technologies in question. For instance, much has already been written about the impact of violent television and video games on children ( Hartmann et al., 2014 ), and this is one of many topics that fall outside of the scope of the present review. Likewise, this review will not venture into the growing body of research exploring problematic usage of mobile phones and the addiction-like symptoms of overuse ( Bianchi and Phillips, 2005 ; Billieux et al., 2008 ; Kwon et al., 2013 ; Lee et al., 2014 ). Nor will it consider studies exploring the possible effects of radio frequency electromagnetic fields emitted from cellular devices on the human brain and its functioning ( Zubko et al., 2016 ). There is also a growing body of work exploring how technology-related habits may be affecting the development of individuals’ social competencies and emotion reading, and this is yet another topic that has been tackled elsewhere ( Brown, 2014 ; Misra et al., 2014 ; Uhls et al., 2014 ; George and Odgers, 2015 ; Mills, 2016 ) and to which we give little consideration.

To give the present review some focus, we begin with the premise that smartphones are an especially impactful technological development, due to their flexibility of function, portability, and increasing proliferation. Accordingly, we limit the scope of our examination to work that is directly relevant to smartphone-related impacts. Moreover, rather than concentrating on “problem” behavior related to smartphone technology (see e.g., Bianchi and Phillips, 2005 ; Hadlington, 2015 ), we mainly explore evidence regarding the consequences of typical everyday smartphone use. Finally, while a wide array of mental functions might be influenced by smartphone habits, we home in on the impacts in the three domains that are most widely discussed in the lay media and that have garnered some consideration in empirical work: attention, memory, and delay of gratification (reward processing). We then give brief consideration to some emerging work exploring links between smartphone habits, executive functioning, and academic performance.

Some representative studies exploring the relationship between smartphone (and related) habits and cognitive functioning are summarized in Table ​ Table1 1 . Researchers interested in this area of study are faced with many difficulties when developing an empirical approach, and these challenges necessarily pervade our attempt to review the extant literature. To begin, smartphones have become so ubiquitous that it is nearly impossible to employ true experimental methods with random assignment into different technology exposure/access groups. Even when it is possible to find technology-naïve participants, contrasting them with experienced technology users is likely to be a confounded approach, due to disparities in SES, age, resources, and social expectations among groups who differ in their habits. As a result, much of the literature consists of quasi-experimental and correlational studies, from which strong inferences regarding causality cannot be drawn. The few truly experimental studies that have been performed on this topic typically investigate only momentary effects of smartphone use or deprivation on cognition, rather than long-term impacts.

Representative publications exploring associations between technology usage and cognitive domains.

The majority of studies in this field also employ self-report questionnaires that provide only a narrow window into the relevant behaviors, and that may in some cases provide unreliable indices of the target behavior ( Baumgartner et al., 2016 ). Indeed, the limited evidence we have regarding the compatibility between subjective and objective usage measures indicates that self-report estimates of usage are likely to be of limited reliability, and only modestly correlated (if at all) with actual usage ( Andrews et al., 2015 ). Further, because the landscape of technology usage opportunities is ever-evolving, many of the questionnaires that researchers develop turn out to have a limited “half life,” sometimes becoming dated (or obsolete) before they can be applied more broadly across research labs, or used to establish meaningful longitudinal trends in key behaviors ( Roberts et al., 2005 ; Rideout et al., 2010 ). Relatedly, the fact that smartphones are a relatively recent development precludes the existence of any broadly generalizable longitudinal evidence. Thus, even when connections between technology and cognition are established, we do not know the extent to which these impacts are lasting. Another crucial challenge is that it can be difficult to assess technology usage habits without intruding on participants’ natural behavior. Attempts to assess smartphone-related habits (questionnaires, diaries, etc.) can draw the participants’ attention to their patterns of use, which could alter their naturalistic behaviors and affect the way in which participants approach laboratory tasks that are meant to assess the cognitive impacts of such habits. In spite of these many challenges, some foundational research has been conducted, and some intriguing patterns are beginning to emerge. In the following sections, we discuss recent research in the areas of attention, memory and knowledge, delay of gratification, and conclude with a consideration of studies investigating more general effects on academic performance and other domains.

Mobile Technology Use and Attention

A concern that pre-dates smartphone technology is the rising incidence in the diagnosis of attentional difficulties, most specifically ADHD, in children and adolescents (e.g., Visser et al., 2014 ). Considered together with the rise in the prevalence of multimedia devices, this correlation may be perceived by the public to be evidence of a causative relationship. Opportunities and motives to interact with digital media technologies are especially compelling for today’s adolescents, for whom many social interactions take place online. Such trends have spurred the fear that regular engagement with these devices can lead to diminished attentional capacity – producing shorter attention spans and “scatter-brained” tendencies among those who are most invested with the devices (e.g., Egan, 2016 ). One specific manifestation of this concern is that the current generation of children and adolescents are developing increasingly shorter attention spans due to their increased contact with smartphone technology, and use onset at younger ages ( Nikken and Schols, 2015 ).

Here we consider the empirical research concerning the potential impacts of smartphone-related technologies on divided attention and focused attention. Focused attention refers to the capacity to attend to only one source of information while ignoring other incoming stimuli. Focused attention also encompasses sustained attention – the ability to maintain a directed attentional focus over an extended period of time. Conversely, divided attention typically refers to the ability to perform two or more functions simultaneously, otherwise known as multitasking.

Perhaps the most recognizable, and obvious, impact of smartphone technology in our everyday lives is the way in which it can acutely interfere with, or interrupt, ongoing mental and physical tasks. It may be useful to think of smartphone-related interruptions as coming in two forms: endogenous or exogenous. Endogenous interruptions occur when the user’s own thoughts drift toward a smartphone-related activity, and thereby evince an otherwise unsolicited drive to begin interacting with the device. These endogenously driven drifts of attention might arise from a desire for more immediate gratification when ongoing goal-directed activities are not perceived as rewarding ( Melcher, 2013 ), a point to which we return below. Once attention has been shifted to the smartphone for one purpose (e.g., by virtue of a specific notification source), users often then engage in a chain of subsequent task-unrelated acts on the smartphone, thereby extending the period of disruption. Studies exploring these ‘within-phone’ interruptions have found that task completion in one app can be delayed by up to 400% by an unintended interruption from another app ( Leiva et al., 2012 ). And, some evidence suggests that the more “rich” (e.g., including a visual image rather than just text) the information encountered during an interruption, the more detrimental the distraction is likely to be with respect to primary task completion ( Levy et al., 2016 ).

Exogenous interruptions occur when some environmental cue captures the user’s attention. This often involves an alert coming directly from the smartphone itself, but can also involve some other external event that triggers subsequent smartphone use, such as noticing someone else interacting with his or her phone, or being reminded during a live conversation (either explicitly or implicitly) about an activity that can be accomplished on one’s smartphone (email, information search, etc.). Importantly, smartphones are capable of interfering with focused attention even when the user attempts to ignore them. In one recently published study, for instance, researchers demonstrated that exposure to smartphone notifications significantly decreased performance on a concurrent attention-based task, even when the participant did not take the time to view the notification ( Stothart et al., 2015 ). Simply hearing the sound or feeling the vibration that signified the alert was enough to distract the participants and decrease their ability to focus attention on the primary task. The researchers posited that that the notifications prompted task-irrelevant thoughts, which manifested themselves in poorer performance on the primary task.

Further evidence suggests that even the mere awareness of the physical presence of a cell phone may impact cognitive performance. Thornton et al. (2014) conducted a study in which participants were asked to complete two neuropsychological tasks designed to measure executive function and attention, a digit cancelation task and a trail-making task. Each task involved two levels of difficulty. At the start of the experiment, the experimenter “accidentally” left either her cell phone or a notebook on the participant’s desk. Participants in the cell phone condition performed significantly worse on the more difficult parts of the digit cancelation and trail-making task than participants in the notebook condition, but performance on the easier parts of the tasks was similar. The researchers replicated these findings in a follow-up study for which half of the participants were asked to place their own cell phones on their desks. The researchers concluded that the mere presence of a phone is sufficiently distracting to affect cognitive functioning, but only during demanding tasks.

Deleterious effects of smartphones on attention are particularly concerning in situations where attention is crucial for safety, such as in the case of distracted driving. A substantial body of work over the past 12 years has considered the effects of texting on driving abilities using driving simulators or closed tracks. Caird et al. (2014) performed a meta-analysis on this literature and concluded that the act of writing text messages impacts nearly every studied measure of dangerous driving. They reported that texting consistently led to decreased attention to the road, slower response time to hazards, greater lateral variance across the lane, and more crashes. Reading text messages without responding resulted in similar findings, albeit with smaller effect sizes. These findings are particularly troubling given that 31% of adults surveyed in 2011, and 42% of teen drivers surveyed in 2015, reported that they had read or sent text messages while driving in the past 30 days ( Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2011 , 2016 ).

Research investigating the direct impacts that interruptions can have on performance is complemented by research on “resumption errors” – errors that arise in task performance that is resumed following an interruption or task-switch ( Monk, 2004 ; Cades et al., 2007 ; Brumby et al., 2013 ). The tendency to commit resumption errors increases steeply when the interruption duration exceeds 15 s ( Monk et al., 2008 ). Smartphone interruptions frequently exceed this 15 s threshold ( Leiva et al., 2012 ), and therefore may be especially deleterious to the resumption of ongoing tasks.

The acute and short-term consequences of having one’s attention distracted away from ongoing tasks is an obvious locus of concern in relation to smartphone habits, but there is also growing fear that the increasingly regular interactions we have with smartphones might also have a more lasting impact on the basic capacity for focused and sustained attention. At this point, very limited empirical evidence lends backing to this concern. Given the lack of longitudinal research in this domain, the best data available are derived from correlational studies. However, findings from those studies are somewhat mixed with respect to the claim that smartphone usage is linked to a diminished attentional capacity beyond the time in which an individual is actively engaged with the device.

One study intimating that smartphone habits diminish sustained attentional abilities was conducted by Lee et al. (2015) . The specific focus of their work was on the connection between an individual’s degree of “addiction” to a smartphone and the ability to achieve “flow.” A flow state relates to sustained attention in that it is “a state of concentration so focused that it amounts to absolute absorption in an activity” ( Csikszentmihalyi et al., 2014 ). Lee et al. (2015) investigated whether one’s specific pattern of smartphone usage could have long-term effects on the ability to achieve a state of flow. The researchers administered three questionnaires to a large sample of university students, measuring level of smartphone addiction, tendency for self-regulated learning, and capacity for learning flow. The results showed that the individuals who scored highest on the smartphone addiction scale scored significantly lower on the self-regulated learning and learning flow scales. The authors suggest that the smartphone addiction causes a reduced ability to achieve flow and to be self-regulated learners. Of course, it is equally possible that individuals who are able to be self-regulated learners and more easily achieve flow are also more capable of controlling their impulses with respect to smartphone usage, and thus scored lower on the smartphone addiction questionnaire, or that smartphone use and learning flow exert bidirectional influences on one another. Given the correlational nature of the data, we cannot infer any directionality for the relationship, but the data at least hint that excessive smartphone usage could have a negative impact on the ability to maintain the form of sustained focused attention assessed by the flow index.

Prior research on the relationship between smartphone technology and cognitive abilities has also explored a form of media-related divided attention, “media multitasking,” which involves the simultaneous use of more than one media technology, often via a smartphone. Despite the obvious link to work on divided attention, studies exploring media-multitasking are generally not focused on the acute impacts of media engagement on concurrent cognitive activities (e.g., how being on one’s smartphones might affect attentiveness to work activities). Rather, media-multitasking studies mostly explore the associations that exist between one’s basic cognitive skills and one’s tendency to engage in simultaneous media-related habits. In a seminal experiment on this behavior, Ophir et al. (2009) developed and validated the Media Multitasking Index (MMI), a rating determined by responses to a self-report questionnaire (the Media Use Questionnaire) that expressly assesses an individual’s media multitasking habits. They then used computer-based behavioral tasks to measure participants’ attentional functioning. The data revealed that those who reported engaging in more media multitasking were also less able to filter environmental distractions (task stimuli that were inessential to the primary task). Additionally, frequent media multitaskers exhibited higher switch-costs in a task-switching paradigm, indicating that they were less able to suppress the activation of task set representations that were no longer relevant to performance ( Monsell, 2003 ). These data suggest that frequent multitasking of this sort may be associated with a tendency toward allowing bottom-up (environmental) inputs to capture attention (and conversely, a stronger tendency toward exploratory information gathering). Some subsequent studies have replicated and extended aspects of this influential paper. For instance, using a shorter form of the Media Use Questionnaire, Moisala et al. (2016) showed that everyday media multitasking is associated with poorer control over attention. Specifically, the participants who had higher MMI scores made significantly more errors on a task measuring their ability to ignore distractors that interfered with task completion. Moreover, Cain and Mitroff (2011) found that the link between distractibility and media multitasking habits was associated specifically with individual differences in the scope of attention [and not differences in working memory; see also Yap and Lim (2013) for related results].

Brain imaging studies exploring potential neural correlates of habitual media multitasking behavior have demonstrated that the associated attentional deficit may be directly manifest in the functioning of the brain’s attentional control circuitry. For instance, concurrent with the behavioral deficit they observed in performance of a focused attention task, Moisala et al. (2016) showed that individuals with higher MMI scores also exhibited relatively increased activity in right prefrontal areas. The authors interpreted this result as evidence that increased daily multitasking leads individuals to experience greater difficulty in recruiting cognitive control resources. Relatedly, Loh and Kanai (2015) found reduced gray matter in the anterior cingulate cortex of frequent media multitaskers, indicating that this habit may have a direct impact on the structural properties of an important locus of attentional control in the brain (though it should be noted that other functions have also been ascribed to this region; Shenhav et al., 2016 ).

While these behavioral and neuroimaging findings are intriguing, some research using MMI scores has failed to reproduce the originally observed associations ( Minear et al., 2013 ; Ralph et al., 2013 , 2015 ). Indeed, some evidence suggests the opposite pattern of relationship – that high MMI scores correlate with better performance on certain attentionally demanding tasks. For instance, Lui and Wong (2012) created a task that required participants to integrate incoming information from multiple sensory modalities (vision and audition). Their findings revealed that individuals who reported heavier multitasking outperformed light multitaskers in their ability to integrate the information arriving from multiple modalities. Findings suggesting an attentional benefit associated with heavier media multitasking are also compatible with studies demonstrating positive and transferable impacts of training, through repetitive task practice, in divided attention tasks ( Dux et al., 2009 ; Karbach and Kray, 2009 ).

Perhaps because the Media Multiuse Questionnaire was the first questionnaire of its kind to be employed in a study published in a major scientific journal, the measure has been widely adopted as an assessment of media-related behavior, and as such, is the basis of many additional empirical studies. In just the few years since its conception, dozens of studies have used MMI scores to investigate the cognitive and psychological impacts of media multitasking (see Table ​ Table1 1 ).

The use of this questionnaire across laboratories and to explore different dimensions of functioning has provided the field some much needed grounding. The Media Multiuse Questionnaire does, however, have some limitations that might constrain the generalizability of these studies. One potential issue is that the MMI is calculated by submitting subject responses into a formula that applies the same weight to each of 132 potential forms of multitasking (the crossing of 12 different media-related behaviors with any of the 11 remaining behaviors). Thus, one’s multitasking score increases by the same amount regardless of the type of multitasking indicated, and regardless of the relative attentional demands of different media activities (or of combining certain activities with others). For instance, the questionnaire treats the tendency to “Play video games” and to “Listen to music” as equivalent, despite the fact that the former typically requires active attentional engagement and the latter is often a passive pursuit. Likewise, specifying a frequent tendency to “Play video games” while “Reading print media” (books) – a challenging pairing – increases one’s MMI score by the same magnitude as “Listening to music” while “Instant messaging” – a less challenging pairing (in general, this measure may give disproportionately high MMI scores to individuals who frequently listen to music). Relatedly, because the measure includes different listings for “Instant messaging” and “Mobile phone text messaging,” individuals who frequently engage in these activities will have disproportionately high scores because their score is doubly weighted by these now functionally equivalent activities (the consequence of an ever-changing technology landscape). Placing the same mathematical weight on all forms of multitasking included in this index likely muddies the outcomes, making it difficult to distinguish those media multitaskers who engage in the types of difficult pairings [like those used as the basis of training in studies showing beneficial effects of practice with divided attention; e.g., Dux et al. (2009) , Karbach and Kray (2009) ] from those who are just prone to distracting themselves with secondary sources of input (like music). The limited specificity of the MMI might also account for the recent observation that individuals who fall somewhere in the middle of the media multitasking spectrum may perform better on attentionally demanding tasks than either high or low media multitasking participants ( Cardoso-Leite et al., 2014 ).

While media multitasking appears, at least under certain circumstances, to be negatively correlated with the ability to task-switch and filter distractions, one form of media included on the questionnaire has been associated with improvements in multitasking: action video games. As Cardoso-Leite et al. (2015) note, it may seem paradoxical that media multitasking is related to poorer multitasking performance whereas the single task of playing a video game leads to improved multitasking performance. Nonetheless, positive associations between gaming and skills like selective attention, sustained attention, task-switching, and visual short-term memory have been demonstrated in numerous correlational and experimental studies (for a review, see Green and Bavelier, 2012 ). These associations appear to be specific to the genre known as “action video games” (e.g., first-person shooters), rather than strategy games or role-playing games. Action games require high cognitive and perceptual loads, divided visual processing, and feedback learning with a complex reward schedule, and seem to specifically improve pattern recognition and the metacognitive process of “learning-to-learn” ( Green and Bavelier, 2012 ). The specificity of this relationship highlights another limitation of the MMI: it does not distinguish between different types of video games. Of note, action video games are typically played on computers or gaming consoles, whereas many popular smartphone games (e.g., Candy Crush, Words with Friends) are strategy games that seem to be less likely to confer similar cognitive advantages.

Attention: Summary

The research reviewed above provides some limited empirical support for claims about the effect of smartphone technology on our attentional capacities. While there is clear evidence that engagement with smart devices can have an acute impact on ongoing cognitive tasks, the evidence on any long-term impacts of smartphone-related habits on attentional functioning is quite thin, and somewhat equivocal. Generally, the evidence does point to a negative relationship between smartphone usage and attention, but correlational and self-report data dominate the literature. Where more controlled assessment of attentional performance has been deployed, such as with media multitasking, the results are mixed, with some studies even yielding a positive relationship with the ability to filter distractions. The limitations of current methods used to measure media-related behavior and wide variation in the specific tasks used to assess attentional performance may account for some mixed results in the literature.

Mobile Technology Use, Memory, and Knowledge

Smartphones provide constant access to an endless and ever-improving database of collective knowledge. Having this access enables people to search for, locate, and learn seemingly any fact that they desire. Prior to the advent of the World Wide Web, the closest available approximation of this sort of resource was a multi-volume encyclopedia, the cost and limited portability of which precluded ubiquitous use. Internet search engines enable anyone on a connected device to have access to an unfathomably large amount of information, often at very low cost. Moreover, smartphone technology allows people to take this information wherever they wish, and access it within a matter of seconds.

Though it may seem as if constant access to a limitless database of knowledge should improve cognition, much has been written about how the rapidly changing landscape of technology is negatively affecting how we remember our own lives, the places we have been, and those with whom we have interacted (e.g., Kuhn, 2010 ; Humphreys and Liao, 2011 ; Pentzold and Sommer, 2011 ; Frith and Kalin, 2015 ; Özkul and Humphreys, 2015 ). However, as with attentional impact, the body of empirical evidence demonstrating tangible effects of mobile media devices on memory and knowledge is limited.

One topic that has been investigated is the oft-cited claim that modern technology is leading us to depend upon our devices to store information for us. In a highly influential and informative study, Sparrow et al. (2011) asked participants to type a series of newly learned trivia facts into a computer. Half of the participants were told that the computer would store their typed information for them and that they would be able to access it later, whereas the other half believed that the information would soon be erased. The individuals who believed they would maintain access to the typed information performed more poorly on a later recall task. Importantly, an explicit instruction to remember the facts vs. not being told to remember had no impact on participants’ rates of recall. This finding, dubbed by the authors as the “Google Effect,” and later referred to by other researchers as “digital amnesia” ( Kaspersky Lab, 2015 ) demonstrates that the expectation of having later access to information can make us less inclined to encode and store that information in long-term memory.

Sparrow et al. (2011) further argued that we are becoming symbiotic with our technology; remembering less actual information and instead committing to memory where such information can be found. To further investigate this theory, the researchers conducted an additional experiment using a design similar to that described above, but with three within-subject conditions. For one third of the questions, participants were simply told that the information they entered was saved. Another third of the questions resulted in the participants being told that the information was saved into one of six pre-determined folders (named FACTS, DATA, INFO, NAMES, ITEMS, and POINTS). The remaining third of the questions were followed by a prompt that informed the participants that the information they typed was immediately deleted. The results of this experiment indicated that participants were better able to recall the name of the folder in which the relevant information was located than the information itself. The authors use this finding to claim that, “the processes of human memory are adapting to the advent of new computing and communication technology” ( Sparrow et al., 2011 , p. 778).

A potential experimental confound that Sparrow et al. do not discuss is the amount of “information” represented by the trivia fact vs. the name of the folder. The authors provide an example fact, “The space shuttle Columbia disintegrated during re-entry over Texas in February 2003.” The complexity of the fact may make it more difficult to memorize than the name of the folder in which the information is stored (i.e., FACTS). Future research should attempt to create more balance between the trivia statements and the folder names.

Barr et al. (2015) recently reported findings from a further exploration of internet access via smartphones and knowledge representation. In keeping with the notion that humans are generally “cognitive misers” ( Kahneman, 2011 ), these authors posited that the tendency to rely on simple heuristics and mental shortcuts extends to the habitual use of internet search engines as a substitute for deep cognitive analysis. In their experiment, Barr et al. (2015) gave participants a series of cognitively demanding questions, including syllogisms, base-rate problems, and a “heuristics and biases” battery. They also assessed participants’ knowledge in different cognitive domains through administration of a numeracy test and a verbal intelligence test. Finally, participants were also asked to provide an estimation of how much time per day they spend on their smartphones overall, as well as an estimation of how much time they spend specifically using internet search engines on their smartphones. The results showed that individuals who reported being heavy users of smartphones also exhibited less analytical “cognitive styles” and poorer performance on the knowledge measures. Moreover, individuals who indicated that they spend a large amount of time using the search engine function on their smartphones scored most poorly on these cognitive measures. Of course, since these results are derived from self-reported data, it is conceivable that participants who highly weight their desire for knowledge may also inflate their memory for (and estimates of) the time they devote to using search engines. Further, given the correlational nature of the research, the results cannot resolve whether, as claimed, frequent search engine use can actually “supplant thinking,” or whether individuals who already have a weaker tendency to engage cognitive analytic strategies also tend to use search engines more frequently [see also Small et al. (2009) and Xavier et al. (2014) for somewhat conflicting findings in older adults].

Interpreted in a different light, Barr et al.’s (2015) results seem counter-intuitive. After all, the tendency to go out of one’s way to seek information and knowledge [e.g., Need for Cognition, ( Cacioppo et al., 1984 )] has been shown to be positively correlated with fluid intelligence ( Fleischhauer et al., 2010 ). Reinterpreted in this way, individuals with higher cognitive scores might have more semantic knowledge already accessible to them, and thus would not need to resort to using their smartphones as often. Moreover, it is possible that those with higher cognitive scores are able to conduct searches more efficiently. Accordingly, they might use their smartphone’s search engine functions just as frequently as those with low scores, but for a shorter duration each time.

Another recent study provides complementary empirical evidence regarding the potential impact of digital media on memories for personally experienced events ( Henkel, 2013 ). In this study, participants were given digital cameras and taken on a tour of an art museum. Though the research was concerned specifically with digital cameras, the fact that nearly all modern smartphones include a digital camera function makes it relevant to the present discussion. Throughout the tour, the participants were told to take pictures of specific objects, and were asked to observe other objects without taking a picture. One day later, the participants were tested on their ability to distinguish objects they had seen during the tour from brand new objects. The results showed that taking photographs diminished memory for observed objects. Specifically, the participants’ who used the camera during their tour showed a poorer ability to recognize objects as having been previously viewed. A further experiment presented in the same paper showed that this effect was mitigated by asking the participants to zoom in on specific features of the objects that they were viewing before taking the picture. Interestingly, zooming in on a specific area did not increase recall accuracy for details specific to that area vs. the work as a whole, but did improve overall memory for the object, suggesting that the improvement was due to a more rich interaction with the object. Additional empirical support for this phenomenon comes from Zauberman et al. (2015) who found that while visual memory is improved by taking photographs, auditory memory of photographed events is impaired. The practice of taking pictures and videos of trivial occurrences in one’s life (and uploading them to a social media site) is increasingly common due to the proliferation of smartphone ownership and the popularity of photo- and video-sharing social apps like Instagram and Snapchat. If taking pictures can lead to weaker encoding of representations in memory, then this is an important facet of the cognitive impact of ubiquitous smartphone usage. Recent qualitative research provides first-hand accounts that one’s interactions with smartphones and the ‘check-in’ capability of some social media apps as well as photos taken with one’s phone help establish a topographical memory that can both supplant and augment one’s memory of their surroundings and experiences ( Özkul and Humphreys, 2015 ).

Studies investigating the relation between digital photography and memory have assumed that photographs are stored or shared in a semi-permanent matter. Thus, while the act of taking photographs may change memory encoding during an event, the photographs provide an opportunity to review and recollect the experience at a later time. However, recent trends in social media use have prioritized ephemeral photo-sharing. For example, Snapchat – a tool rapidly rising in popularity, especially among youth ( Lenhart, 2015 ) – allows user to send and post pictures and videos that can only be viewed a limited number of times or for a finite period (Instagram recently debuted a similar feature). Users may therefore experience the same effects on memory in the moment, without the added opportunity to refer back to the photograph or video as an external source of information/memory. Little is yet known about the specific effects of ephemeral photo-sharing tools on memory for events (which may act on memory in a way that is akin to the soon-to-be-erased files in Sparrow et al., 2011 ).

Another common concern regarding the “offloading” of our semantic memory into a modern technological device regards the impact of GPS mapping systems on our ability to navigate the world. Crafting an accurate cognitive representation of our spatial surroundings is crucial for us to effectively and efficiently get from one place to another. It has been posited that constant reliance on GPS navigation systems, which are now integrated into smartphone devices, interferes with our natural tendency to develop cognitive spatial representations. Media headlines insist that these car technologies are “creating stupid drivers” ( Moskvitch, 2014 ) and there are many compelling instances in which a driver blindly followed an inaccurate GPS direction into peril ( Hansen, 2013 ). As GPS navigation devices pre-exist smartphone technology, so too does the related scientific literature.

In a study published a decade ago, researchers sought to identify the consequences of overreliance on GPS navigational devices ( Burnett and Lee, 2005 ). Specifically, the authors wanted to know whether use of GPS navigational devices impacted their participants’ tendency to create cognitive maps when maneuvering through a novel environment. To do this, Burnett and Lee recruited experienced drivers to navigate around a 3D digitally rendered virtual environment. The virtual environment resembled a medium-sized neighborhood, and included many buildings and other landmarks such as trees, signs, and people. The between-subjects design required half of the participants to study a map of the environment for as long as they wished before hitting the road in an attempt to reach their destination using the most direct route possible. Conversely, the other half of participants were allowed to study the map for only 20 s, and then commenced their journey, which was accompanied with turn-by-turn voice guidance to the destination. After the participants completed the route, their spatial knowledge of the environment was tested according to three facets of spatial representation: Landmark-, Route-, and Survey-level representations. Participants were presented with screen shots of scenes, including some from the virtual environment and some that were similar, but not actually on the route that the participants took. The participants were required to identify which screenshots they recognized as part of the route they took (Landmark) and the order in which they occurred (Route). To assess Survey knowledge of the spatial environment, participants were asked to sketch a map of their overall route as best they could on a blank sheet of paper, and to include as many landmarks as they could remember. The results from this study showed that the participants in the voice navigation group performed significantly worse in Landmark and Route knowledge of the environment. Further, those in the voice navigation group drew significantly simpler and more fragmented maps in the assessment of Survey knowledge.

Some recent research has focused on identifying ways in which the detriments of navigation devices on spatial memory can be mitigated. It has been shown, for example, that spatial knowledge can be improved by allowing users to request that their position be indicated at any given time during the navigation episode ( Parush et al., 2007 ). Further, spatial knowledge can be improved if users are forced to perform mental rotations of on-screen images, as opposed to observing automated rotations ( Boari et al., 2012 ). This knowledge can be applied by encouraging users to keep their navigation devices set such that North is always facing up, rather than moving around the compass as they turn.

Finally, research extending the Ophir et al. (2009) findings on media multitasking also implicates this behavior in memory functioning. Most recently, Uncapher et al. (2015) showed that frequent media multitaskers differed from light users with respect to their working memory capacity, and also exhibited diminished long-term memory functioning. In their study, frequency of media multitasking specifically predicted how participants encoded information, with higher rates of media multitasking leading to less precise representations of goal-relevant information and more task-irrelevant information filling the space. Further, the reduced precision of information in working memory observed in heavy media multitaskers was associated with diminished long-term memory performance, as measured by a surprise recognition test for tested items [with a significant association between heavy media multitasking and memory for target items in the earlier working memory task, as well as a trend level association for memory of distractor items; see also Frein et al. (2013) for related findings].

Memory and Knowledge: Summary

Research investigating the relationships between smartphone technology habits and one’s memory and knowledge capabilities is still scant, but available findings indicate that, as some have worried, smartphone-related habits can in some cases be detrimental to mnemonic functioning. Though there are some important limitations in the experimental designs that have been discussed, the work conducted to date does give us reason to be cautious about how we use new technologies. The available evidence suggests that when we turn to these devices, we generally learn and remember less from our experiences. While the research discussed in this section represents an important step toward investigating the impact of smartphone technology on memory, it is equally important to bear in mind that the sort of “memory externalization” that these articles focus on is by no means a new issue. The same concerns could, for instance, be made regarding a Rolodex. Invented in the 1950s, this ‘rolling index’ provided a system to organize one’s contacts into an easy to access alphabetized structure. It allowed its users to remember where an individual’s contact was located, rather than needing to memorize the full contact information. Determining whether externalizing cognitive processes via smartphone is necessarily worse than externalizing cognitive processes via older methods will be an important avenue for future research.

Mobile Technology Use, Delay of Gratification, and Reward Processing

In addition to their effects on memory and attention, smartphones and related media are often implicated as the cause of a perceived cultural shift toward a necessity for immediate gratification ( Alsop, 2014 ). Indeed, there is a common belief that the current generation of children and teenagers are less capable of waiting for rewards, due in part to the omnipresence of various types of multimedia in their lives ( Richtel, 2010b ). As with the previous sections, the empirical work exploring this claim is still in its nascent stages. In this section, we outline some studies that inform our understanding of the potential impacts that smartphones can have on individuals’ tendencies to choose smaller, more immediate, rewards over larger rewards after a delay, and then offer a summary on the status of the claim.

Some work in this realm has begun by exploring the motivations that drive individuals to engage with media in the first place. In one such study, Wang and Tchernev (2012) investigated media multitasking in terms of the Uses and Gratifications theory ( Katz et al., 1973 ). Based on this theory, “Needs” could be defined as “the combined product of psychological dispositions, sociological factors, and environmental conditions that motivate media consumption” and “Gratifications” as the “perceived fulfillment” of those needs, in this case as a result of media use or exposure (p. 495). In their experiment, Wang and Tchernev (2012) collected self-reported data over a period of 4 weeks. Participants were asked to submit three reports daily, in which they indicated the types of media that they had used in the time that had passed since the previous report, and whether they performed any of these activities simultaneously (i.e., multitasking). The participants were also asked to indicate the specific “motivation” (emotional, cognitive, social, or habitual) that drove them to engage in each media interaction, and the strength of that motivation on a 1–10 scale. The participants indicated the degree to which each “need” was satisfied on a 1–4 scale, and this data was aggregated into “gratification” measures used in data analysis. By comparing the various types and strengths of motivations and gratifications across time points, the experimenters were able to draw interesting conclusions regarding the short-term causes and effects of multimedia interaction. Specifically, participants most often reported that “cognitive” motivations drove their interactions with media devices. However, subjective reports indicated that the ensuing interaction with a media device rarely satisfied the cognitive needs. Instead, participants experienced an emotional gratification that they did not report pursuing in the first place. Ultimately, these emotional gratifications may be driving subsequent media interactions at an unconscious level [for related findings, see Zhang and Zhang (2012) ].

In a study performed in our own lab ( Wilmer and Chein, 2016 ), we used a measure of self-reported mobile technology usage in an attempt to mine the potential relationship with delay of gratification. We observed a significant negative correlation between participants’ mobile technology usage and their “indifference point” and discounting rate in a delay discounting paradigm. Specifically, individuals who were heavier users of mobile technology were also more apt to accept a smaller, more immediate reward than to wait for a more substantial but delayed reward. These findings fit with the popular conception that having constant access to these devices could generate a need for instant gratification. In our study we further observed that the correlation between technology habits and delay of gratification was mediated by individual differences in impulsivity, but not in reward/sensation seeking. This finding partially replicated earlier investigations of the relationship between media use and impulsivity ( Minear et al., 2013 ; Sanbonmatsu et al., 2013 ; Shih, 2013 ). Since the results from all of these studies are entirely correlational, they could simply reveal that people who naturally tend toward more immediate gratification and who give in to impulses more easily also tend to use their mobile devices more often (i.e., there may not be a causal relationship from media use to discounting behavior).

Still, habituating oneself to constant immediate gratification could have significant and lasting cognitive consequences. In one of the few truly experimental studies in the field, researchers sought to determine whether non-users of smartphones would exhibit a change in their reward processing capacity after being provided with a smartphone for the first time ( Hadar et al., 2015 ). The aim of the study was to investigate the cognitive, behavioral, and neural consequences of smartphone usage, with a specific emphasis on delay discounting. Participants were divided into three groups: heavy smartphone users, smartphone non-users, and a third group which were smartphone non-users who were given a smartphone for the first time (the latter two groups were assigned randomly). The heavy smartphone users showed higher scores for impulsivity and hyperactivity on a questionnaire that was administered at the beginning of the experiment. Even more interestingly, after a 3-month exposure to smartphones, the non-users who were given a smartphone were found to have become more immediacy oriented in the delay discounting measure, whereas non-users’ orientation did not change. The data from Hadar et al. (2015) suggest that heavy smartphone usage can causally reduce an individual’s capacity (or at least tendency) to delay gratification in favor of a greater reward in the future. These findings are strengthened by the study’s experimental design.

Evidence from neuroimaging research suggests that that neural circuitry implicated in reward processing also plays a role in activities performed on mobile phones, particularly social media. For example, Sherman et al. (2016) found that receiving many “Likes” on one’s social media photographs is related to increased activation in the brain’s reward circuitry, including areas in the dorsal and ventral striatum and ventral tegmental area. The ventral striatum has also been implicated in the experience of sharing information about oneself with peers, a popular activity on social media ( Tamir and Mitchell, 2012 ), and level of response in this brain region has been shown to correlate with level of social media use ( Meshi et al., 2013 ).

Delay of Gratification and Reward: Summary

As with the research highlighted in the previous sections of this paper, the data is still too sparse to support firm conclusions regarding the impacts of smartphone use on reward processing and delay of gratification. Lurid claims that smart devices are “rewiring our brains” ( Greenfield, 2013 ) into being addicted to instant gratification suffer from a lack of any longitudinal evidence, and still very limited empirical support of any kind. Future research could use neuroimaging techniques to investigate whether any “rewiring” is actually occurring, and some relevant work is currently being conducted. At present, neuroimaging research has been limited to cross-sectional studies mapping the neural correlates of engaging in popular activities on mobile phones. These studies cannot shed light on the ways that mobile phones may be leading to functional or structural changes in the brain. By conducting brain scans before and after a long-term intense exposure to electronic immediate gratification, neuroscientists could analyze whether any connectivity changes occurred.

Mobile Technology Use and Everyday Cognitive Functioning

Given the pattern of findings in attention, memory, and the ability to regulate reward-related processing in the context of delay of gratification, it follows that we might expect to see links to more generalized measures of cognitive functioning. One way in which such links have been studied is by exploring the relationship between technology habits and general academic performance. Studies on this front generally support the conclusion that poor academic performance (generally assessed by GPA) can be predicted by higher levels of smartphone use ( Beland and Murphy, 2014 ; Lepp et al., 2014 ), instant messaging ( Levine et al., 2007 ; Fox et al., 2009 ), social networking ( Kirschner and Karpinski, 2010 ; Junco, 2012b ; Karpinski et al., 2012 ; Paul et al., 2012 ), media multitasking ( Junco, 2012a ; Rosen et al., 2013 ; Sana et al., 2013 ), and general electronic media usage ( Jacobsen and Forste, 2011 ; Junco and Cotten, 2012 ).

Researchers have also directly investigated the relationship between mobile technology/media multitasking habits and executive functions that are thought to be essential to academic performance ( Abramson et al., 2009 ; Alloway and Alloway, 2012 ; Alzahabi and Becker, 2013 ; Lepp et al., 2014 ; Barr et al., 2015 ). In one relevant study ( Baumgartner et al., 2014 ), participants were required to complete a self-report questionnaire and computerized tasks that assessed executive functions in three subcategories: working memory, inhibition, and shifting. Participants who reported being high multitaskers, based on MMI score, also self-reported lower levels of “executive function in everyday life” on the questionnaire. The correlation was significant for all three subcategories of the executive functioning questionnaire. Though the results from the self-report measures were not corroborated by any of the performance-based measures of executive functioning used in that study, very recently published work conducted by Cain et al. (2016) does provide evidence for such links. These authors found that higher media-multitasking among a large adolescent sample was associated with poorer performance on one laboratory measure of executive function, the n-back working memory task, and also with lower scores on a standardized test of academic achievement in the classroom. Taken together, this body of work suggests that the degree to which one can exert executive control over behavior and maintain goal-related representations (in working memory) may explain individual differences in vulnerability to the “real life” consequences of mobile device habits.

Interestingly, there is also some evidence suggesting that one’s susceptibility to cognitive disruption from mobile technology use, and the consequent impacts on academic success, might depend on the individual’s existing cognitive skill set; especially their ability to exert self-regulatory control over behavior. Research indicates, for instance, that how closely an individual monitors and plans for interruptions, via executive control, mediates the relationship between multimedia interruptions and resultant stress ( Tams et al., 2015 ), and that differences in working memory capacity (which is closely linked to executive functioning) is a predictor of the speed of task resumption following an interruption ( Werner et al., 2011 ).

As a further point, it should be acknowledged that some of the cognitive and affective consequences of smartphone/technology habits may come from indirect impacts, such as through influences on sleep and mood. Quality of sleep has been shown to have a serious effect on cognitive performance ( Lim and Dinges, 2008 ), and considerable evidence implicates smartphone technology as a source of sleep disturbances ( Cain and Gradisar, 2010 for a review), with a compound effect on cognitive functioning and work engagement the following day ( Lanaj et al., 2014 ). An observation that predates the emergence of smartphone technology is that using electronic devices with a brightly lit screen immediately before bed, such as a television or a computer, can negatively impact one’s ability to fall asleep. Smartphones potentially exacerbate this problem because people frequently keep and charge smartphones at their bedside, often using them as an alarm clock. Based on a recent survey, over 70% of Americans follow this behavioral pattern ( Trends in Consumer Mobility Report, 2015 ). Moreover, in addition to the bright light, it has been proposed that specific activities, such as social interactions and games, occurring via one’s smartphone can lead to psychological arousal and stimulation that could further disrupt subsequent sleep ( Cain and Gradisar, 2010 ). Though most studies in this domain have had child and adolescent participants, recent research has affirmed that this effect can be seen in older adults as well ( Exelmans and Van den Bulck, 2016 ). Future research should investigate a direct relationship between habitual smartphone usage before bedtime and cognitive abilities. Furthermore, future research might attempt to identify if particular smartphone activities (e.g., gaming, passive or active social media use) are especially deleterious to sleep quality, and how notification settings may impact sleep disruption, and also consider how sleep-tracking apps (e.g., the recently introduced “Bedtime” feature on the iPhone operating system) might improve quantity or consistency of sleep.

Extending this work on sleep, Lemola et al. (2014) used self-report questionnaires to explore how sleep and smartphone habits might also impact mood; specifically depressive symptoms. They found that difficulty sleeping was a significant mediator in the relationship between electronic media use and depressive symptoms. While psychopathological symptoms are not the focus of this paper, it is noteworthy that depression is often comorbid with cognitive disorders ( American Psychiatric Association, 2013 ), and that sleep quality is inversely related with cognitive performance ( Lim and Dinges, 2008 ).

Like depression, anxiety is known to have significant negative effects on several aspects of cognitive functioning ( American Psychiatric Association, 2013 ). In early work linking anxiety symptoms, technology habits, and cognitive functioning, Mark et al. (2012) found that limiting individuals’ access to email reduced anxiety and improved later focus on work related tasks. A commonly repeated assertion regarding today’s digital world is that people feel a ‘need’ for access to their phones. Researchers have gone so far as to refer to this phenomenon as a “phantom limb” ( Turkle, 2011 ). Similarly, “phantom vibration syndrome” describes a commonly experienced phenomenon in which people perceive a vibration in their pocket, when no such vibration occurred ( Rosen, 2013 ), and even when their phone is not in their pocket (for a review, see Deb, 2014 ). In acknowledging the strength of individuals’ attachment to their smartphones, researchers have begun to investigate the degree to which separation from one’s smart device can cause symptoms of anxiety. In one study ( Cheever et al., 2014 ), participants were randomly assigned to one of two groups. One group kept their phones with them for the entirety of the study with the ringer silenced and vibration turned off, whereas the second group had their phones removed from them for the duration of the study. The participants then completed a series of three anxiety assessments at 20-min intervals, followed by a wireless media device usage questionnaire. The researchers posited that the group that had their phones removed from them would experience significantly more anxiety than those who were allowed to keep their phones with them. Although this main effect was not observed, the researchers found that the group of participants who did not have their phones with them scored higher on each successive anxiety test, showing that their anxiety increased as a function of time without their phones. Additionally, the study found that individuals who scored higher on the wireless media device usage questionnaire had higher rates of increased anxiety for the later tests, regardless of whether their phone was taken from them or with them but silenced. These findings led the researchers to conclude that one’s regular mobile device usage predicts the levels of anxiety that results from being separated from their device. However, it is also important to bear in mind that the directionality of the effect remains ambiguous, with research also suggesting that life-stress is predictive of mobile device usage, driven by the social support one can attain through using one’s device ( Chiu, 2014 ).

Clayton et al. (2015) also investigated the impact of brief separation from a mobile device, but additionally assessed the potential impacts on cognition. The researchers focused exclusively on iPhone users, based on the ease with which one can toggle the iPhone’s ringer. Upon arrival, participants were randomly assigned into one of two groups: one group completed a task that is sometimes used to measure sustained attention (a word-search task), first with their phones in their possession and then with their phones given to the experimenters, whereas these conditions were reversed in the second group. Physiological and self-report measures were used to track anxiety levels throughout the experiment. In this experiment, the researchers did more than simply separate the phone from its user; the phone was placed in an adjacent cubicle, and the experimenters placed a call to the phone so that it emitted a ring that the participants’ presumably recognized as their own. The results showed that participants’ anxiety levels were highest when they were separated from their ringing phones and lowest when their phones were in their possession. Moreover, the participants’ performance on the word-search puzzles was significantly poorer when they were separated from their ringing phone.

The data provided by such experiments offer evidence of the psychological sway our digital lives can hold over us. Yet, there is nothing to indicate whether the resultant anxiety is specific to separation from one’s smartphone, or whether the same effect might emerge when participants are separated from something else of subjective value, such as a wallet or personally cherished item. Moreover, the potential implications with respect to cognitive functioning are still limited in that a link between anxiety and cognition was established only via a word-search puzzle, a task that is somewhat idiosyncratic relative to tasks used more typically in cognitive research. The design also does not allow for a determination of whether the effect on word search performance was caused by the absence of the participants’ phones or simply by the distraction of the ring.

Smartphones (and related mobile technologies) have the potential to affect a wide range of cognitive domains, but empirical research on the cognitive impacts of smartphone technology is still quite limited. This is understandable, given that the relevant technology itself is still young and constantly evolving. However, with each passing year, smartphones become more omnipresent in our lives. Rather than applying to only a niche group of individuals, the research conducted in this domain will soon be relevant to the majority of the world’s population ( eMarketer, 2014 ). Therefore, it is crucial to understand how smartphone technology affects us so that we can take the steps necessary to mitigate the potential negative consequences.

Although the research concerning the potential cognitive impacts of smartphone technology is growing, the results remain contradictory and inconclusive. The at times contradictory findings suggest that not all smartphone use is created equal; certain apps, approaches to multitasking, or notification settings may moderate the relation between overall smartphone use and various cognitive skills. Despite the inconclusive nature of the literature, media headlines encourage a public perception that the findings are conclusive and that smartphones have a definite and negative impact on cognitive functioning. A common view, that smartphones are stifling our creativity by depriving our brains of downtime ( Richtel, 2010a ), even led to a radio challenge, in which thousands of people reduced their smartphone usage in an attempt to increase their creativity ( Zomorodi, 2015 ). However, there is no extant research to validate the basic concern that motivated the challenge. Investigating the cognitive impacts of filling the small breaks in our day with inputs from smartphone engagement is perhaps another endeavor worth pursuing, but not one that is yet represented in the peer reviewed literature.

As discussed earlier in our review, there are many limitations to the literature that forms the basis for this paper. Chief among these is that there is very little longitudinal evidence on the long-term consequences of frequent smartphone usage. Now is the time to begin gathering the data for such studies. A particularly important topic that requires longitudinal data is the effect of smartphone ownership on young children. Despite widely publicized recommendations ( AAP Council on Communications and Media, 2016a , b ), we know very little about the most appropriate age for a child to begin using a smartphone, and we know equally little about the consequences of using one too early in life. A longitudinal study with a large sample size should be developed in which children are assessed on a variety of cognitive (and affective) outcome measures at multiple time points. In a study such as this, data could also be gathered to ascertain the degree to which children with smartphones or other portable sources of immediate gratification, such as portable video game systems, are influenced by these devices. Analysis of group differences in rates of maturity of certain cognitive processes could also provide information about how smartphone technology can affect the brain during periods of heightened developmental plasticity. It is possible, but untested, that frequent smartphone usage could be less harmful to adults, whereas children may experience more negative consequences as a result of their increased neural plasticity.

If emerging research does suggest that there are serious consequences of smartphone usage, we need to investigate potential practical approaches that could mitigate these effects. Finally, the majority of the literature only speaks broadly about “smartphone usage.” Future research should distinguish between specific types of smartphone usage, each of which are likely to have differential effects on the user. In particular, it seems likely that social activities such as text messaging, email, and social media use will have different impacts than gaming or browsing the web, yet very little is known about the specific concerns related to these seemingly disparate patterns of use.

As smartphones have worked their way into the pockets of over 70% of American adults, and nearly 50% of adults worldwide, there is also a great opportunity to use them as a tool for research ( Poushter, 2016 ). Scientists have already begun to suggest that smartphones could present a more convenient and more naturalistic method of gathering empirical data for cognitive and social psychology experiments ( Raento et al., 2009 ; Dufau et al., 2011 ; Miller, 2012 ). Moreover, as smartphones become increasingly interlaced with our cognitive functioning, it will be important to continue to gather detailed usage metrics to understand how these interactions are affecting us, and how are lives are accordingly shaped.

The research outlined in this paper lays a foundation on which a seemingly endless number of “next steps” can be imagined. There is an immense opportunity for additional research to be performed with the aim of giving psychologists and the world-at-large a better understanding the short-term and long-term effects of smartphone technology.

Author Contributions

HW and JC conceived and developed the project. HW conducted primary literature review with additional input from LS, both working under the supervision and guidance of JC. HW wrote the initial draft manuscript. JC provided primary editorial feedback, and both JC and LS contributed additional written sections to the manuscript. All authors were involved in final preparation of the manuscript.

Conflict of Interest Statement

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Funding. LS contributions to this work were supported in part by an National Science Foundation SBE-IBSS postdoctoral research award.

• AAP Council on Communications and Media (2016a). Media and Young Minds. Pediatrics Vol. 138. Available at: http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/early/2016/10/19/peds.2016-2591 . [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• AAP Council on Communications and Media (2016b). Media Use in School-Aged Children and Adolescents Vol. 138. Available at: http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi . [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Abramson M. J., Benke G. P., Dimitriadis C., Inyang I. O., Sim M. R., Wolfe R. S., et al. (2009). Mobile telephone use is associated with changes in cognitive function in young adolescents. Bioelectromagnetics 30 678–686. 10.1002/bem.20534 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Alloway T. P., Alloway R. G. (2012). The impact of engagement with social networking sites (SNSs) on cognitive skills. Comput. Hum. Behav. 28 1748–1754. 10.1016/j.chb.2012.04.015 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Alsop R. (2014). Instant Gratification & Its Dark Side. Available at: http://www.bucknell.edu/communications/bucknell-magazine/instant-gratification-and-its-dark-side.html [accessed November 25, 2016]. [ Google Scholar ]
• Alzahabi R., Becker M. W. (2013). The association between media multitasking, task-switching, and dual-task performance. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 39 1485–1495. 10.1037/a0031208 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• American Psychiatric Association (2013). Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders 5th Edn. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association. 10.1176/appi.books.9780890425596 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Andrews S., Ellis D. A., Shaw H., Piwek L. (2015). Beyond self-report: tools to compare estimated and real-world smartphone use. PLoS ONE 10 : e0139004 10.1371/journal.pone.0139004 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Barr N., Pennycook G., Stolz J. A., Fugelsang J. A. (2015). The brain in your pocket: evidence that smartphones are used to supplant thinking. Comput. Hum. Behav. 48 473–480. 10.1016/j.chb.2015.02.029 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Baumgartner S. E., Lemmens J. S., Weeda W. D., Huizinga M. (2016). Measuring media multitasking: development of a short measure of media multitasking for adolescents. J. Media Psychol. 10.1027/1864-1105/a000167 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Baumgartner S. E., Weeda W. D., van der Heijden L. L., Huizinga M. (2014). The relationship between media multitasking and executive function in early adolescents. J. Early Adolesc. 34 1120–1144. 10.1177/0272431614523133 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Beland L., Murphy R. J. (2014). Ill Communication: Mobile Phones & Student Performance. London: London School of Economics and Political Science. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bianchi A., Phillips J. G. (2005). Psychological predictors of problem mobile phone use. Cyberpsychol. Behav. 8 39–51. 10.1089/cpb.2005.8.39 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Billieux J., Van Der Linden M., Rochat L. (2008). The role of impulsivity in actual and problematic use of the mobile phone. Appl. Cogn. Psychol. 22 1195–1210. 10.1002/acp.1429 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Boari D., Fraser M., Stanton Fraser D., Cater K. (2012). “Augmenting spatial skills with mobile devices,” in Proceedings of the ACM SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI2012): Mobile Computing and Interaction (New York, NY: Association for Computing Machinery; ) 1611–1620. 10.1145/2207676.2208284 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Brown G. (2014). The Effects of Values and the Presence of a Mobile Phone on Friendship Interactions. Masters thesis, Western Washington University; Bellingham, WA. [ Google Scholar ]
• Brumby D., Cox A., Back J. (2013). Recovering from an interruption: investigating speed-accuracy tradeoffs in task resumption strategy. J. Exp. Psychol. Appl. 19 95–107. 10.1037/a0032696 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Burnett G., Lee K. (2005). The effect of vehicle navigation systems on the formation of cognitive maps. Int. J. Psychol. 40 27–35. 10.1016/b978-008044379-9/50188-6 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Cacioppo J., Petty R., Kao C. (1984). The efficient assessment of need for cognition. J. Pers. Assess. 48 306–307. 10.1207/s15327752jpa4803 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Cades D. M., Davis D. A. B., Trafton J. G., Monk C. A. (2007). “Does the difficulty of an interruption affect our ability to resume?,” in Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 51st Annual Meeting Santa Monica, CA: 234–238. 10.1177/154193120705100419 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Cain M. S., Leonard J. A., Gabrieli J. D. E., Finn A. S. (2016). Media multitasking in adolescence. Psychon. Bull. Rev. 23 1932–1941. 10.3758/s13423-016-1036-3 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Cain M. S., Mitroff S. R. (2011). Distractor filtering in media multitaskers. Perception 40 1183–1192. 10.1068/p6939 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Cain N., Gradisar M. (2010). Electronic media use and sleep in school-aged children and adolescents: a review. Sleep Med. 11 735–742. 10.1016/j.sleep.2010.02.006 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Caird J. K., Johnston K. A., Willness C. R., Asbridge M., Steel P. (2014). A meta-analysis of the effects of texting on driving. Accid. Anal. Prev. 71 311–318. 10.1016/j.aap.2014.06.005 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Cardoso-Leite P., Green C. S., Bavelier D. (2014). On the impact of new technologies on multitasking. Dev. Rev. 35 98–112. 10.1016/j.dr.2014.12.001 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Cardoso-Leite P., Kludt R., Ma W. J. C., Shawn G., Daphne B. (2015). Technology consumption and cognitive control: contrasting action video game experience with media multitasking. Atten. Percept. Psychophys. 78 218–241. 10.3758/s13414-015-0988-0 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2011). Mobile Device Use While Driving- United States and Seven European Countries Vol. 62 Atlanta, GA: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [ Google Scholar ]
• Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2016). Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance–United States, 2015. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report Vol. 65 Atlanta, GA: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Cheever N. A., Rosen L. D., Carrier L. M., Chavez A. (2014). Out of sight is not out of mind: the impact of restricting wireless mobile device use on anxiety levels among low, moderate and high users. Comput. Hum. Behav. 37 290–297. 10.1016/j.chb.2014.05.002 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Chiu S. I. (2014). The relationship between life stress and smartphone addiction on taiwanese university student: a mediation model of learning self-Efficacy and social self-Efficacy. Comput. Hum. Behav. 34 49–57. 10.1016/j.chb.2014.01.024 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Clayton R. B., Leshner G., Almond A. (2015). The extended iSelf: the impact of iPhone separation on cognition, emotion, and physiology. J. Comput. Med. Commun. 20 119–135. 10.1111/jcc4.12109 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Csikszentmihalyi M., Abuhamdeh S., Nakamura J. (2014). Flow and the Foundations of Positive Psychology. Dordrecht: Springer; 227–238. 10.1007/978-94-017-9088-8 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Deb A. (2014). Phantom vibration and phantom ringing among mobile phone users: a systematic review of literature. Asia Pac. Psychiatry 7 231–239. 10.1111/appy.12164 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Dufau S., Duñabeitia J. A., Moret-Tatay C., McGonigal A., Peeters D., Alario F. X., et al. (2011). Smart phone, smart science: how the use of smartphones can revolutionize research in cognitive science. PLoS ONE 6 : e24974 10.1371/journal.pone.0024974 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Dux P. E., Tombu M. N., Harrison S., Rogers B. P., Tong F., Marois R. (2009). Training improves multitasking performance by increasing the speed of information processing in human prefrontal cortex. Neuron 63 127–138. 10.1016/j.neuron.2009.06.005 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Egan T. (2016). The Eight-Second Attention Span. New York City, NY: The New York Times. [ Google Scholar ]
• Ellison K. (2012). Are Smartphones Making Us Dumber?. Available at: http://www.forbes.com/sites/netapp/2012/09/12/is-an-digital-data-overload-shortening-our-attentions-spans-and-making-us-dumber/ [accessed April 16, 2015]. [ Google Scholar ]
• eMarketer (2014). 2 Billion Consumers Worldwide to Get Smart(phones) by 2016. Available at: http://www.emarketer.com/Article/2-Billion-Consumers-Worldwide-Smartphones-by-2016/1011694 [accessed April 16, 2015]. [ Google Scholar ]
• Exelmans L., Van den Bulck J. (2016). Bedtime mobile phone use and sleep in adults. Soc. Sci. Med. 148 93–101. 10.1016/j.socscimed.2015.11.037 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Fleischhauer M., Enge S., Brocke B., Ullrich J., Strobel A., Strobel A. (2010). Same or different? Clarifying the relationship of need for cognition to personality and intelligence. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 36 82–96. 10.1177/0146167209351886 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Fox A. B., Rosen J., Crawford M. (2009). Distractions, distractions: does instant messaging affect college students’ performance on a concurrent reading comprehension task? Cyberpsychol. Behav. 12 51–53. 10.1089/cpb.2008.0107 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Frein S. T., Jones S. L., Gerow J. E. (2013). When it comes to Facebook there may be more to bad memory than just multitasking. Comput. Hum. Behav. 29 2179–2182. 10.1016/j.chb.2013.04.031 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Frith J., Kalin J. (2015). Here, I used to be: mobile media and practices of place-based digital memory. Space Cult. 19 43–55. 10.1177/1206331215595730 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• George M. J., Odgers C. L. (2015). Seven fears and the science of how mobile technologies may be influencing adolescents in the digital age. Perspect. Psychol. Sci. 10 832–851. 10.1177/1745691615596788 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Green C. S., Bavelier D. (2012). Learning, attentional control, and action video games. Curr. Biol. 22 R197–R206. 10.1016/j.cub.2012.02.012 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Greenfield S. (2013). Screen Technologies. Available at: http://www.susangreenfield.com/science/screen-technologies/ [accessed April 16, 2015]. [ 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 Stimul. 8 318 10.1016/j.brs.2015.01.032 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hadlington L. J. (2015). Cognitive failures in daily life: exploring the link with Internet addiction and problematic mobile phone use. Comput. Hum. Behav. 51 75–81. 10.1016/j.chb.2015.04.036 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hansen L. (2013). 8 Drivers who Blindly Followed their GPS Into Disaster. Available at: http://theweek.com/articles/464674/8-drivers-who-blindly-followed-gps-into-disaster [accessed April 16, 2015]. [ Google Scholar ]
• Hartmann T., Krakowiak K. M., Tsay-Vogel M. (2014). How violent video games communicate violence: a literature review and content analysis of moral disengagement factors. Commun. Monogr. 7751 1–23. 10.1080/03637751.2014.922206 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Henkel L. A. (2013). Point-and-shoot memories: the influence of taking photos on memory for a museum tour. Psychol. Sci. 25 396–402. 10.1177/0956797613504438 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Humphreys L., Liao T. (2011). Mobile geotagging: reexamining our interactions with urban space. J. Comput. Mediat. Commun. 16 407–423. 10.1111/j.1083-6101.2011.01548.x [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Jacobsen W. C., Forste R. (2011). The wired generation: academic and social outcomes of electronic media use among university students. Cyberpsychol. Behav. Soc. Netw. 14 275–280. 10.1089/cyber.2010.0135 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Junco R. (2012a). In-class multitasking and academic performance. Comput. Hum. Behav. 28 2236–2243. 10.1016/j.chb.2012.06.031 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Junco R. (2012b). Too much face and not enough books: the relationship between multiple indices of Facebook use and academic performance. Comput. Hum. Behav. 28 187–198. 10.1016/j.chb.2011.08.026 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Junco R., Cotten S. R. (2012). No A 4 U: the relationship between multitasking and academic performance. Comput. Educ. 59 505–514. 10.1016/j.compedu.2011.12.023 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kahneman D. (2011). Thinking, Fast and Slow. Macmillan. Available at: https://books-google-com.libproxy.temple.edu/books?hl=en&lr=&id=SHvzzuCnuv8C&oi=fnd&pg=PP2&ots=NRqmNH-jJC&sig=aZUMjzdgcaWja5iIsY0kXJoRy7I#v=onepage&q&f=false . [ Google Scholar ]
• Karbach J., Kray J. (2009). How useful is executive control training? Age differences in near and far transfer of task-switching training. Dev. Sci. 12 978–990. 10.1111/j.1467-7687.2009.00846.x [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Karpinski A. C., Kirschner P. A., Ozer I., Mellott J. A., Ochwo P. (2012). An exploration of social networking site use, multitasking, and academic performance among United States and European university students. Comput. Hum. Behav. 29 1182–1192. 10.1016/j.chb.2012.10.011 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kaspersky Lab (2015). The Rise, and Impact of Digital Amnesia: Why we Need to Protect what we no Longer Remember. Moscow: Kaspersky Lab. [ Google Scholar ]
• Katz E., Blumler J. G., Gurevitch M. (1973). Uses and gratifications research. Public Opin. Q. 37 509–523. 10.1086/268109 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kirschner P. A., Karpinski A. C. (2010). Facebook ® and academic performance. Comput. Hum. Behav. 26 1237–1245. 10.1016/j.chb.2010.03.024 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kuhn A. (2010). Memory texts and memory work: performances of memory in and with visual media. Mem. Stud. 3 298–313. 10.1177/1750698010370034 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kwon M., Lee J. Y., Won W. Y., Park J. W., Min J. A., Hahn C., et al. (2013). Development and validation of a Smartphone Addiction Scale (SAS). PLoS ONE 8 : e56936 10.1371/journal.pone.0056936 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lanaj K., Johnson R. E., Barnes C. M. (2014). Beginning the workday yet already depleted? Consequences of late-night smartphone use and sleep. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 124 11–23. 10.1016/j.obhdp.2014.01.001 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lee J., Cho B., Kim Y., Noh J. (2015). Emerging Issues in Smart Learning. Berlin: Springer; 297–305. 10.1007/978-3-662-44188-6 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lee Y. K., Chang C. T., Lin Y., Cheng Z. H. (2014). The dark side of smartphone usage: psychological traits, compulsive behavior and technostress. Comput. Hum. Behav. 31 373–383. 10.1016/j.chb.2013.10.047 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Leiva L., Böhmer M., Gehring S., Krüger A. (2012). “Back to the app: the costs of mobile appication interruptions,” in Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services–Mobile HCI Vol. 12 San Francisco, CA: 291–294. 10.1145/2371574.2371617 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lemola S., Perkinson-Gloor N., Brand S., Dewald-Kaufmann J. F., Grob A. (2014). Adolescents’ electronic media use at night, sleep disturbance, and depressive symptoms in the smartphone age. J. Youth Adolesc. 44 405–418. 10.1007/s10964-014-0176-x [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lenhart A. (2015). Teens, Social Media and Technology Overview 2015: Smartphones Facilitate Shifts in Communication Landscape for Teens. Washington, DC: Pew Research Center; 1–47. 10.1016/j.chb.2015.08.026 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lepp A., Barkley J. E., Karpinski A. C. (2014). The relationship between cell phone use, academic performance, anxiety, and satisfaction with life in college students. Comput. Hum. Behav. 31 343–350. 10.1016/j.chb.2013.10.049 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Levine L. E., Waite B. M., Bowman L. L. (2007). Electronic media use, reading, and academic distractibility in college youth. Cyberpsychol. Behav. 10 560–566. 10.1089/cpb.2007.9990 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Levy E. C., Rafaeli S., Ariel Y. (2016). The effect of online interruptions on the quality of cognitive performance. Telemat. Inform. 33 1014–1021. 10.1016/j.tele.2016.03.003 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lim J., Dinges D. F. (2008). Sleep deprivation and vigilant attention. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 1129 305–322. 10.1196/annals.1417.002 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Loh K. K., Kanai R. (2015). How has the internet reshaped human cognition? Neuroscientist 22 506–520. 10.1177/1073858415595005 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lui K. F. H., Wong A. C.-N. (2012). Does media multitasking always hurt? A positive correlation between multitasking and multisensory integration. Psychon. Bull. Rev. 19 647–653. 10.3758/s13423-012-0245-7 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Mark G., Voida S., Cardello A. (2012). “A pace not dictated by electrons”: an empirical study of work without email,” in Proceedings of the 2012 ACM Annual Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - CHI Vol. 12 Austin, TX: 555 10.1145/2207676.2207754 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Melcher M. (2013). Mindfulness vs. Smartphones. Available at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-melcher/mindfulness-vs-smartphone_b_2856462.html [accessed April 16, 2015]. [ Google Scholar ]
• Meshi D., Morawetz C., Heekeren H. R. (2013). Nucleus accumbens response to gains in reputation for the self relative to gains for others predicts social media use. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 7 : 439 10.3389/fnhum.2013.00439 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Miller G. (2012). The smartphone psychology manifesto. Perspect. Psychol. Sci. 7 221–237. 10.1177/1745691612441215 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Mills K. L. (2016). Possible effects of internet use on cognitive development in adolescence. Med. Commun. 4 4 10.17645/mac.v4i3.516 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Minear M., Brasher F., McCurdy M., Lewis J., Younggren A. (2013). Working memory, fluid intelligence, and impulsiveness in heavy media multitaskers. Psychon. Bull. Rev. 20 1274–1281. 10.3758/s13423-013-0456-6 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Misra S., Cheng L., Genevie J., Yuan M. (2014). The iPhone effect: the quality of in-person social interactions in the presence of mobile devices. Environ. Behav. 48 275–298. 10.1177/0013916514539755 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Moisala M., Salmela V., Hietajärvi L., Salo E., Carlson S., Salonen O., et al. (2016). Media multitasking is associated with distractibility and increased prefrontal activity in adolescents and young adults. Neuroimage 134 113–121. 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2016.04.011 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Monk C. A. (2004). “The effect of frequent versus infrequent interruptions on primary task resumption,” in Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 48th Annual Meeting Santa Monica, CA: 295–299. 10.1177/154193120404800304 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Monk C. A., Trafton J. G., Boehm-Davis D. A. (2008). The effect of interruption duration and demand on resuming suspended goals. J. Exp. Psychol. Appl. 14 299–313. 10.1037/a0014402 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Monsell S. (2003). Task switching. Trends Cogn. Sci. 7 134–140. 10.1016/S1364-6613(03)00028-7 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Morin M. (2013). Is Your Smartphone Making you Fat and Lazy?. Los Angeles, CA: Los Angeles Times. [ Google Scholar ]
• Moskvitch K. (2014). BBC–Future–Is car Technology Creating Stupid Drivers?. Available at: http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20141119-is-tech-creating-stupid-drivers [accessed April 16, 2015]. [ Google Scholar ]
• Nikken P., Schols M. (2015). How and why parents guide the media use of young children. J. Child Fam. Stud. 24 3423–3435. 10.1007/s10826-015-0144-4 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ophir E., Nass C., Wagner A. D. (2009). Cognitive control in media multitaskers. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 106 15583–15587. 10.1073/pnas.0903620106 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Özkul D., Humphreys L. (2015). Record and remember: memory and meaning-making practices through mobile media. Mob. Med. Commun. 3 351–365. 10.1177/2050157914565846 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Parush A., Ahuvia S., Erev I. (2007). “Degradation in spatial knowledge acquisition when using automatic navigation systems,” in Spatial Information Theory eds Winter S., Duckham M., Kulik L., Kuipers B. (Berlin: Springer; ) 238–254. [ Google Scholar ]
• Paul J. A., Baker H. M., Cochran J. D. (2012). Effect of online social networking on student academic performance. Comput. Hum. Behav. 28 2117–2127. 10.1016/j.chb.2012.06.016 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Pentzold C., Sommer V. (2011). Digital Networked Media and Social Memory. Theoretical Foundations and Implications. Aurora: Revista de Arte, Mídia e Política; 72–85. [ Google Scholar ]
• Poushter J. (2016). Smartphone Ownership and Internet Usage Continues to Climb in Emerging Economies. Available at: http://www.pewglobal.org/2016/02/22/smartphone-ownership-and-internet-usage-continues-to-climb-in-emerging-economies/ . [ Google Scholar ]
• Raento M., Oulasvirta A., Eagle N. (2009). Smartphones: an emerging tool for social scientists. Sociol. Methods Res. 37 426–454. 10.1177/0049124108330005 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ralph B. C. W., Thomson D. R., Cheyne J. A., Smilek D. (2013). Media multitasking and failures of attention in everyday life. Psychol. Res. 78 661–669. 10.1007/s00426-013-0523-7 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ralph B. C. W., Thomson D. R., Seli P., Carriere J. S. A., Smilek D. (2015). Media multitasking and behavioral measures of sustained attention. Atten. Percept. Psychophys. 77 390–401. 10.3758/s13414-014-0771-7 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Richtel M. (2010a). Digital Devices Deprive Brain of Needed Downtime. Available at: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/25/technology/25brain.html [accessed April 16, 2015]. [ Google Scholar ]
• Richtel M. (2010b). Growing Up Digital, Wired for Distraction. Available at: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/21/technology/21brain.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0 [accessed April 16, 2015]. [ Google Scholar ]
• Rideout V. J., Foehr U. G., Roberts D. F., Kimberly M., Deepa G., Board E., et al. (2010). Generation M2: Media in the Lives of 8- to 18-Year-Olds. Menlo Park, CA: Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation. [ Google Scholar ]
• Roberts D. F., Foehr U. G., Rideout V. J. (2005). Generation M: Media in the Lives of 8-18 Year-Olds. Menlo Park, CA: Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation. [ Google Scholar ]
• Rosen L. D. (2013). Phantom Pocket Vibration Syndrome. Available at: https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/rewired-the-psychology-technology/201305/phantom-pocket-vibration-syndrome [accessed April 16, 2015]. [ Google Scholar ]
• Rosen L. D., Mark Carrier L., Cheever N. A. (2013). Facebook and texting made me do it: media-induced task-switching while studying. Comput. Hum. Behav. 29 948–958. 10.1016/j.chb.2012.12.001 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Sana F., Weston T., Cepeda N. J. (2013). Laptop multitasking hinders classroom learning for both users and nearby peers. Comput. Educ. 62 24–31. 10.1016/j.compedu.2012.10.003 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Sanbonmatsu D. M., Strayer D. L., Medeiros-Ward N., Watson J. M. (2013). Who multi-tasks and why? multi-tasking ability, perceived multi-tasking ability, impulsivity, and sensation seeking. PLoS ONE 8 : e54402 10.1371/journal.pone.0054402 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Shenhav A., Cohen J. D., Botvinick M. M. (2016). Dorsal anterior cingulate cortex and the value of control. Nat. Neurosci. 19 1286–1291. 10.1038/nn.4382 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Sherman L. E., Payton A. A., Hernandez L. M., Greenfield P. M., Dapretto M. (2016). The power of the like in adolescence: effects of peer influence on neural and behavioral responses to social media. Psychol. Sci. 27 1027–1035. 10.1177/0956797616645673 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Shih S. I. (2013). A null relationship between media multitasking and well-being. PLoS ONE 8 : e64508 10.1371/journal.pone.0064508 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Small G. W., Moody T. D., Siddarth P., Bookheimer S. Y. (2009). Your brain on google: patterns of cerebral activation during internet searching. Am. J. Geriatr. Psychiatry 17 116–126. 10.1097/JGP.0b013e3181953a02 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Sparrow B., Liu J., Wegner D. M. (2011). Google effects on memory: cognitive consequences of having information at our fingertips. Science 333 776–778. 10.1126/science.1207745 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Stothart C., Mitchum A., Yehnert C. (2015). The attentional cost of receiving a cell phone notification. J. Exp. Psychol. 41 893–897. 10.1037/xhp0000100 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Tamir D. I., Mitchell J. P. (2012). Disclosing information about the self is intrinsically rewarding. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 109 8038–8043. 10.1073/pnas.1202129109 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Tams S., Thatcher J., Grover V., Pak R. (2015). Selective attention as a protagonist in contemporary workplace stress: implications for the interruption age. Anxiety Stress Coping 28 663–686. 10.1080/10615806.2015.1011141 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Thornton B., Faires A., Robbins M., Rollins E. (2014). The mere presence of a cell phone may be distracting implications for attention and task performance. Soc. Psychol. 45 479–488. 10.1027/1864-9335/a000216 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Trends in Consumer Mobility Report (2015). Available at. http://newsroom.bankofamerica.com/files/doc_library/additional/2015_BAC_Trends_in_Consumer_Mobility_Report.pdf [accessed April 27, 2016]. [ Google Scholar ]
• Turkle S. (2011). Alone Together: Why We Expect More from Technology and Less from Each Other. New York City, NY: Basic Books. [ Google Scholar ]
• Uhls Y. T., Michikyan M., Morris J., Garcia D., Small G. W., Zgourou E., et al. (2014). Five days at outdoor education camp without screens improves preteen skills with nonverbal emotion cues. Comput. Hum. Behav. 39 387–392. 10.1016/j.chb.2014.05.036 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Uncapher M. R. K., Thieu M., Wagner A. D. (2015). Media multitasking and memory: differences in working memory and long-term memory. Psychon. Bull. Rev. 23 483–490. 10.3758/s13423-015-0907-3 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Visser S. N., Danielson M. L., Bitsko R. H., Holbrook J. R., Kogan M. D., Ghandour R. M., et al. (2014). Trends in the parent-report of health care provider-diagnosed and medicated attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: United States, 2003-2011. J. Am. Acad. Child Adolesc. Psychiatry 53 34–46.e2. 10.1016/j.jaac.2013.09.001 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Wang Z., Tchernev J. M. (2012). The “Myth” of media multitasking: reciprocal dynamics of media multitasking, Personal Needs, and Gratifications. J. Commun. 62 493–513. 10.1111/j.1460-2466.2012.01641.x [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Werner N. E., Cades D. M., Boehm-Davis D. A., Chang J., Khan H., Thi G. (2011). “What makes us resilient to interruptions? understanding the role of individual differences in resumption,” in Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting Vol. 55 Thousand Oaks, CA: 296–300. 10.1177/1071181311551062 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Wilmer H. H., Chein J. M. (2016). Mobile technology habits: patterns of association among device usage, intertemporal preference, impulse control, and reward sensitivity. Psychon. Bull. Rev. 23 1607–1614. 10.3758/s13423-016-1011-z [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Xavier A. J., D’Orsi E., de Oliveira C. M., Orrell M., Demakakos P., Biddulph J. P., et al. (2014). English longitudinal study of aging: can Internet/E-mail use reduce cognitive decline? J. Gerontol. A Biol. Sci. Med. Sci. 69 1117–1121. 10.1093/gerona/glu105 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Yap J. Y., Lim S. W. H. (2013). Media multitasking predicts unitary versus splitting visual focal attention. J. Cogn. Psychol. 25 889–902. 10.1080/20445911.2013.835315 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Zauberman G., Silverman J., Diehl K., Barasch A. (2015). Photographic memory: the effects of photo-taking on memory for auditory and visual information. NA Adv. Consum. Res. 43 218–223. [ Google Scholar ]
• Zhang W., Zhang L. (2012). Explicating multitasking with computers: gratifications and situations. Comput. Hum. Behav. 28 1883–1891. 10.1016/j.chb.2012.05.006 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Zomorodi M. (2015). New Tech City: Bored and Brilliant by the Numbers - WNYC. Available at: http://www.wnyc.org/story/bored-and-brilliant-challenge-tracker/ [accessed April 16, 2015]. [ Google Scholar ]
• Zubko O., Gould R. L., Gay H. C., Cox H. J., Coulson M. C., Howard R. J. (2016). Effects of electromagnetic fields emitted by GSM phones on working memory: a meta-analysis. Int. J. Geriatr. Psychiatry 32 125–135. 10.1002/gps.4581 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]

How smartphones are affecting our lives?

Elchin Hatami

Smartphones have developed in the last three decades that make communication faster and easier than before. Because of the possibilities and features, expansionary effects can be seen in the growth and development of societies worldwide by using smartphones. In contrast, the significant negative impact of using smartphones is an addiction. Therefore, getting more habit for using those devices can lead to severe depression, anxiety, and loneliness in individuals. Despite the adverse effects of smartphones on people’s lives, they have positively impacted different aspects of human society across the globe. It is a fact; smartphone technology makes people’s lives easier and has brought many benefits for billions of people. Smartphones are small, and everybody can carry it in the pocket. People are now using smartphones for their payments, financial transactions, navigating, calling, face to face communication, texting, emailing, and scheduling their routines. Besides other factors, using smartphones for performing daily tasks save can save a lot of time and helps people to reach their goals faster and easier. Additionally, smartphones have become an entertainment device among people. Nowadays, people use wireless technology, especially smartphones, to watch movies, tv shows, and listen to music. In fact, smartphones have made life happier. As a result, People save their money and time by using smartphones; also, those devices have increased the quality of life in most societies. Moreover, smartphones have had positive effects on economic growth and development in many countries. Most of the companies, manufacturers, and business centers use different kind of applications to communicate together. Indeed, Smartphones have facilitated communication between companies and have promoted their profits by accelerating investment. Also, smartphones generate fast connection and impact workers’ productivity positively. In general, smartphones reduce the cost of production by delivering fast data transfer to businesses and consumers. Along with other factors, smartphones provide services and applications to access information and facilitate coordination and increase opportunities that lead to gaining higher income. Smartphones contribute to economic growth as business between companies in different countries despite the limitations of geographical location. Because of the fast data transfer and providing more accessible online communication, smartphones have a crucial role in economic growth and development on the individuals, countries, and global level. Despite the benefits, excessive smartphone use may cause addiction among individuals, which might negatively impact human well-being. Furthermore, smartphone addiction can lead to depression, stress, anxiety, and lack of social interaction in different people. Besides, extreme use of the smartphone can waste time. For instance, most of the smartphone owners spend many hours on social media and playing different games. Consequently, there are negative relationships between psychological health and smartphone overuse, and also an addiction for smartphones causes to waste of time that is important for success in people’s lives. In conclusion, smartphone usage has changed the world rapidly and make it more developed and progressive. Smartphones have become more beneficial to communities and have created a more comfortable life for people worldwide. Although extreme use of the smartphone can be harmful to human psychological health and negatively affect people’s time management, because of those devices’ primary role in people’s routines, without that technology, life can be more difficult and slower. As a result, the growth and development of communities throughout the world depends and will depend on developing mobile technology and smart communication devices.

Essay on Mobile Phone for Students and Children

500+ words essay on mobile phone.

Essay on Mobile Phone: Mobile Phone is often also called “cellular phone”. It is a device mainly used for a voice call. Presently technological advancements have made our life easy. Today, with the help of a mobile phone we can easily talk or video chat with anyone across the globe by just moving our fingers. Today mobile phones are available in various shapes and sizes, having different technical specifications and are used for a number of purposes like – voice calling, video chatting, text messaging or SMS, multimedia messaging, internet browsing, email, video games, and photography. Hence it is called a ‘Smart Phone’. Like every device, the mobile phone also has its pros and cons which we shall discuss now.

Advantages of Mobile Phone

1) Keeps us connected

Now we can be connected to our friends, relatives at any time we want through many apps. Now we can talk video chat with whoever we want, by just operating your mobile phone or smartphone. Apart from this mobile also keeps us updated about the whole world.

2) Day to Day Communicating

Today mobiles phone has made our life so easy for daily life activities. Today, one can assess the live traffic situation on mobile phone and take appropriate decisions to reach on time. Along with it the weather updates, booking a cab and many more.

3) Entertainment for All

With the improvement of mobile technology, the whole entertainment world is now under one roof. Whenever we get bored with routine work or during the breaks, we can listen to music, watch movies, our favorite shows or just watch the video of one’s favorite song.

Get the huge list of more than 500 Essay Topics and Ideas

4) Managing Office Work

These days mobiles are used for many types of official work From meeting schedules, sending and receiving documents, giving presentations, alarms, job applications, etc. Mobile phones have become an essential device for every working people

5) Mobile Banking

Nowadays mobiles are even used as a wallet for making payments. Money could be transferred almost instantly to friends, relatives or others by using mobile baking in the smartphone. Also, one can easily access his/her account details and know past transactions. So it saves a lot of time and also hassle-free.

Disadvantages of Mobile Phones

1)  Wasting Time

Now day’s people have become addicted to mobiles. Even when we don’t need to mobile we surf the net, play games making a real addict. As mobile phones became smarter, people became dumber.

2) Making Us Non- communicable

Wide usage of mobiles has resulted in less meet and talk more. Now people don’t meet physically rather chat or comment on social media.

3) Loss of Privacy

It is a major concern now of losing one’s privacy because of much mobile usage. Today anyone could easily access the information like where you live, your friends and family, what is your occupation, where is your house, etc; by just easily browsing through your social media account.

4) Money Wastage

As the usefulness of mobiles has increased so their costing. Today people are spending a lot amount of money on buying smartphones, which could rather be spent on more useful things like education, or other useful things in our life.

A mobile phone could both be positive and negative; depending on how a user uses it. As mobiles have become a part of our life so we should use it in a proper way, carefully for our better hassle-free life rather using it improperly and making it a virus in life.

Customize your course in 30 seconds

Which class are you in.

• Travelling Essay
• Picnic Essay
• Our Country Essay
• My Parents Essay
• Essay on Favourite Personality
• Essay on Memorable Day of My Life
• Essay on Knowledge is Power
• Essay on Gurpurab
• Essay on My Favourite Season
• Essay on Types of Sports

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

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

Download the App

Student Essays

8 Complete Essays on Smartphone – Importance, Benefits, Disadvantages

Smartphones are very useful in our life in various ways. The life in modern days, in fact, depend upon the use of smartphones. The following Essay on smartphones talks about origin, types and importance of smartphones in life. Additionally, how smartphones are useful with varying advantages and misuses of smartphones in Life

Essay on Smartphones; Uses, advantages, and disadvantages:

The Smartphone is a wonderful addition into our lives. It has become a necessity for many people. Its main function is to make our lives easier and more convenient. We can use it as a phone, camera, music player, alarm clock, and many other things. It can also help us stay connected with our friends and family members.

Importance of Smartphones in our Life

A smartphone is a mobile phone that offers more advanced computing abilities and connectivity than a regular mobile phone. A smartphone typically has a touch screen interface, internet access, and an operating system capable of running downloaded applications.

  >>> Read Also : “Paragraph On Online Shopping”

The first smartphone was the Simon Personal Communicator, which was created in 1992. It combined features like a cell phone, pager, fax machine, and address book into one device. However, it was not until the 2000s that smartphones became truly popular.

One of the main reasons why smartphones are so popular is because they allow us to be connected to the internet at all times. This means we can stay up-to-date with what is happening in the world, check our email, and social media accounts, and even do online shopping.

Smartphones also allow us to stay connected with our friends and family members. We can call, text, or Facetime them whenever we want.

Smartphone use by Students:

Smartphones can be very beneficial for students. They can use them to look up information quickly, take notes in class, and stay organized. However, there are also some downsides to using a smartphone in school. For example, if a student is constantly on their phone, they might not be paying attention to the lecture and miss important information.

Some schools have banned the use of phones in class, while others have embraced them and even created apps that can be used for educational purposes. It is up to each individual school to decide what is best for their students.

There are some disadvantages to using smartphones too much. For example, if we are always looking at our phones, we might miss out on what is happening around us. We might also become addicted to our phones and spend too much time on them. This can lead to problems like sleep deprivation and anxiety.

>> Related Post:  ” Essay on Freedom of Speech ”

Overall, smartphones have many uses and advantages that make our lives more convenient. However, we should be aware of the potential disadvantages so that we can use them in a healthy way.

Short Essay on Smartphone:

Smartphones have become an integral part of our lives today. They have revolutionized the way we communicate, work and entertain ourselves. A smartphone is a handheld device that combines the features of a phone, computer, camera, and many other useful applications. It runs on an operating system that allows it to perform various tasks and access the internet.

Smartphones have many advantages. The most obvious one is communication. With just a few taps, we can easily call or message our loved ones anywhere in the world. Smartphones have made it possible for us to stay connected with people at all times, whether it’s through social media, video calls or instant messaging apps.

Apart from communication, smartphones also serve as a mini-computer. We can perform various tasks such as checking emails, browsing the web, making presentations and even working on documents. All these functions help us to stay productive and efficient in our daily lives.

Entertainment is another major aspect of smartphones. With access to various apps, we can listen to music, play games, watch movies and shows, and stay updated with the latest news. Smartphones also have built-in cameras that allow us to capture memories on-the-go.

However, smartphones also have their downsides. The constant use of smartphones can lead to addiction and affect our social interactions. They also expose us to cybercrimes and other online dangers. Hence, it is important to use them in moderation and be aware of the risks involved.

In conclusion, smartphones have become an essential gadget in today’s world. They have made our lives easier and more convenient. However, we must use them responsibly and balance their usage with other activities to maintain a healthy lifestyle.

Essay on Mobile Phone 250 Words:

Mobile phones have become an integral part of our daily lives. From texting and calling to keeping track of our schedules and accessing the internet, mobile phones have revolutionized the way we communicate and stay connected with the world.

It is hard to imagine a day without a phone in today’s fast-paced world. In this essay, we will discuss the impact of mobile phones on our lives and society.

Convenience

One of the biggest advantages of mobile phones is the convenience they offer. With a phone in our pocket, we can easily call or text someone at any time. We no longer have to rely on landline telephones, which were not only expensive but also limited to one location.

Mobile phones have made it easier for us to stay connected with our loved ones, whether they are in the same city or across the globe. Moreover, with features like email and messaging apps, staying in touch has become more affordable and convenient.

Productivity

Mobile phones have also increased our productivity. With a smartphone in hand, we have access to the internet anytime and anywhere. This means that we can work on the go, respond to urgent emails, and keep track of important tasks even when we are not at our desks.

Mobile phones have made it possible for us to be constantly connected with our work or business, allowing us to be more efficient and productive.

Mobile phones have also played a crucial role in revolutionizing the education sector. With internet access on our phones, we can easily search for information and learn new things on the go. Many educational apps have been developed to make learning more interactive and engaging, which has greatly benefited students of all ages.

Moreover, mobile phones are now used as a tool for distance education, making it easier for people to pursue their studies while balancing other commitments.

Social Impact

While there are many benefits of mobile phones, it is important to acknowledge the social impact they have had on our lives. With easy access to social media platforms, people tend to spend more time on their phones than interacting with others in person.

This has resulted in a decline in face-to-face communication and has affected personal relationships adversely. The constant use of mobile phones has also led to issues like addiction, cyberbullying, and privacy concerns.

In conclusion, it is evident that mobile phones have greatly impacted our lives in many ways. While they have made communication easier and increased productivity, we must also be aware of the negative effects they may have on our social interactions and well-being.

It is important to find a balance and use this technology responsibly to make the most out of its benefits while minimizing any potential harm

Essay about Smartphone Addiction:

Smartphone addiction has become a common problem in today’s society. With the advancement of technology, smartphones have become an integral part of our daily lives. We use them for communication, entertainment, and even as a tool for work.

However, this constant presence of smartphones has led to an increase in addiction among individuals. In this essay, we will explore the causes and consequences of smartphone addiction.

One of the main causes of smartphone addiction is the need for constant stimulation. We have become accustomed to receiving instant gratification from our smartphones in the form of notifications, likes, and messages.

This constant flow of information and entertainment can be addictive, making it difficult for individuals to detach themselves from their devices. As a result, individuals spend excessive amounts of time on their smartphones, leading to neglecting other important aspects of their lives such as relationships and responsibilities.

Another factor that contributes to smartphone addiction is the fear of missing out (FOMO). Social media platforms have created a culture where individuals feel the need to constantly check for updates and stay connected with others. This fear of being left out can lead to addictive behavior, causing individuals to constantly be on their phones even when it is not necessary. Moreover, the endless scrolling and comparing oneself with others on social media can have negative effects on one’s self-esteem and mental health.

The consequences of smartphone addiction can be detrimental. It affects our physical and mental well-being as we spend long hours hunched over our screens, leading to posture problems and eye strain.

Moreover, excessive use of smartphones has been linked to sleep disturbances, anxiety, depression, and even decreased productivity. Additionally, smartphone addiction can also lead to financial issues as individuals may overspend on in-app purchases or data plans.

In conclusion, smartphone addiction is a growing concern in today’s society with various causes and consequences. It is important for individuals to recognize their usage patterns and take necessary steps to limit their screen time.

Setting boundaries and finding alternative forms of leisure can help combat the negative effects of smartphone addiction. It is crucial to find a balance and not let our smartphones control our lives. So, we should use it as a tool for convenience rather than letting it consume us completely.

Argumentative Essay about Smartphone Addiction:

Smartphones have become an integral part of our daily lives. With their ever-increasing features and capabilities, it’s no surprise that people have become increasingly dependent on them. However, this dependence can turn into an addiction – a condition that is becoming more prevalent in today’s society.

Smartphone addiction is a growing concern and it’s important to understand its causes, consequences, and solutions.

One major cause of smartphone addiction is the need for constant connectivity. Smartphones have made it incredibly easy to stay connected with others at all times through social media platforms, messaging apps and emails.

This constant connectivity has blurred the boundaries between work and personal life, making it difficult for individuals to disconnect from their devices. As a result, people feel anxious and restless when they are unable to check their phones. This leads to a cycle of constantly checking for notifications and messages, causing addiction.

The consequences of smartphone addiction are numerous. The excessive use of smartphones can lead to physical health problems such as eye strain, neck and back pain, and disrupted sleep patterns.

Additionally, constant scrolling through social media feeds can cause feelings of inadequacy and low self-esteem as individuals compare their lives to the seemingly perfect lives portrayed on social media.

Moreover, smartphone addiction can also negatively impact personal relationships as individuals become more engrossed in their virtual world than the real world.

To combat smartphone addiction, individuals need to take proactive measures such as limiting screen time, practicing mindfulness and setting boundaries with their devices. It’s important for people to be aware of their smartphone usage patterns and make a conscious effort to disconnect from their phones during certain times of the day.

Furthermore, finding alternative activities that can provide a sense of fulfillment and relaxation, such as reading or exercising, can help reduce dependence on smartphones.

Overall, it’s essential for individuals to recognize the signs of smartphone addiction and take steps to maintain a healthy balance between technology and their daily lives.

In conclusion, while smartphones have undoubtedly improved our lives in many ways, we must also acknowledge the potential damage they can cause if not used in moderation. By understanding the causes, consequences and solutions of smartphone addiction, we can make informed decisions on how to use technology in a responsible and healthy manner.

Disadvantages of Smartphone Essay:

There are several disadvantages of using smartphones that we should be aware of. In this section, we will discuss some of the most common and concerning drawbacks associated with smartphone usage.

Firstly, one of the biggest problems with smartphones is addiction. With constant access to social media, games, and other forms of entertainment, it is easy to become glued to our phones all day long. This can lead to a decrease in productivity and overall well-being. Many people also experience anxiety and stress if they are separated from their smartphones for an extended period of time.

Another major disadvantage is the impact on our social interactions. With the rise of smartphones, face-to-face communication has decreased significantly. People often spend more time on their phones than engaging in conversations with those around them. This can lead to a decline in interpersonal skills and meaningful relationships.

Moreover, the excessive use of smartphones has also been linked to various health issues. Constantly staring at a screen can strain our eyes and cause headaches. The blue light emitted from phones can disrupt our sleep patterns, leading to fatigue and other related problems.

The constant use of smartphones can also contribute to sedentary behavior, leading to a more inactive lifestyle and potential health issues such as obesity.

Lastly, the constant need for upgrading to the latest smartphone models can also be a financial burden. Smartphones are expensive devices and constantly buying new ones can put a strain on our budgets. This pressure to keep up with the latest technology can also lead to feelings of inadequacy or inferiority if we cannot afford the newest models.

In conclusion, while smartphones offer numerous benefits and convenience, it is important to be aware of their disadvantages as well. It is essential to find a balance in our smartphone usage and not let them take over our lives completely. Limiting screen time, engaging in face-to-face interactions, and taking breaks from technology can help mitigate these drawbacks and promote a healthier relationship with our smartphones.

Smartphones in School Essay:

Smartphones have become a ubiquitous part of modern society, and their impact can be seen in all areas of our lives. This includes the education system, where smartphones have started to make their way into classrooms.

While some see this as a positive development, others argue that smartphones should not be allowed in schools. In this essay, we will discuss the advantages and disadvantages of allowing smartphones in schools.

On one hand, smartphones can be a great educational tool. Students have access to a vast amount of information at their fingertips, which allows them to conduct research quickly and efficiently. This can enhance their learning experience and help them stay up-to-date with current events.

Furthermore, smartphones can also come equipped with various educational apps that can make learning more engaging and interactive. These apps can be tailored to fit the needs of individual students, making learning more personalized.

However, there are also valid concerns about allowing smartphones in schools. One major concern is that smartphones can be a distraction for students. With access to social media and other forms of entertainment, students may find it difficult to focus on their studies. This distraction can have a negative impact on their academic performance and overall productivity.

Moreover, smartphones can also pose a security risk if not monitored properly. Students may use them to cheat on exams or engage in cyberbullying. This can create a negative and unsafe learning environment for students.

In conclusion, the use of smartphones in schools is a controversial topic with valid arguments on both sides. While smartphones can be beneficial in enhancing the learning experience, their potential to distract students and cause security issues cannot be ignored.

It is important for schools to carefully consider their policies regarding smartphone usage and find a balance between utilizing them for educational purposes while also monitoring their usage to avoid any negative consequences.

Evolution of Smartphone Essay:

The evolution of smartphones has been a remarkable journey, with each new generation bringing about incredible advancements in technology. From its humble beginnings as a simple communication device to the powerful pocket-sized computer it is today, the smartphone has transformed the way we live our lives.

The first smartphones were introduced in the early 1990s, but it wasn’t until the release of the iPhone in 2007 that they truly became mainstream. The iPhone revolutionized the industry with its touch screen interface and sleek design, setting a new standard for smartphones. Other companies quickly followed suit, introducing their own versions of touch screen phones and competing to offer the latest features and technologies.

Since then, smartphones have continued to evolve at a rapid pace. The introduction of 3G and 4G networks allowed for faster internet speeds, making it easier to access information on the go. Smartphones also began incorporating features such as GPS navigation, high-quality cameras, and voice assistants. This led to a surge in popularity and an increase in the number of smartphone users worldwide.

Today, smartphones have become an essential part of our daily lives. They are no longer just communication devices, but also serve as our personal assistants, entertainment sources, and even payment methods.

With the constant advancements in technology, it’s exciting to think about where smartphones will take us in the future. From foldable screens to 5G networks and beyond, the possibilities are endless. One thing is for sure: the evolution of smartphones is far from over. It will continue to shape our world and change the way we live for years to come.

So, let’s embrace this technological innovation and see where it takes us next. So, let’s continue to stay curious and open to the endless possibilities that smartphones offer. Who knows what the future holds? Let’s find out together.

What is a smartphone essay?

A smartphone essay is a written piece that discusses the features, significance, and impact of smartphones in today’s society. It typically covers their history, technology, applications, and their role in communication, information access, and entertainment.

What is a smartphone introduction?

A smartphone introduction is the opening section of a document or presentation that provides an overview of smartphones. It often outlines the basic functions and importance of these devices in modern life.

Why are smartphones important?

Smartphones are essential because they serve as multifunctional devices that connect people, provide access to information, and offer a wide range of applications. They enhance communication, productivity, and entertainment, making them integral to daily life.

How do you describe a smartphone?

A smartphone is a handheld electronic device that combines the functions of a mobile phone with those of a computer. It typically features a touchscreen interface, internet connectivity, various apps, and the ability to perform tasks such as calling, texting, web browsing, email, and multimedia playback.

Leave a Comment Cancel reply

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

Home — Essay Samples — Information Science and Technology — Smartphone — Smartphone addiction in our life

Smartphone Addiction in Our Life

• Categories: Smartphone

About this sample

Words: 1384 |

Published: Oct 31, 2018

Words: 1384 | Pages: 3 | 7 min read

Cite this Essay

Let us write you an essay from scratch

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Get high-quality help

Dr Jacklynne

Verified writer

• Expert in: Information Science and Technology

+ 120 experts online

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Related Essays

2 pages / 938 words

3 pages / 1161 words

1 pages / 533 words

2 pages / 812 words

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers.

121 writers online

Still can’t find what you need?

Browse our vast selection of original essay samples, each expertly formatted and styled

Have you ever wondered why your parents hesitated to get you a phone at a young age? What impact do smartphones have on the lives of middle and high school students? In the modern era, technological devices like smartphones play [...]

In recent years, the pervasive use of smartphones among young people has sparked a debate about their potential negative effects on a generation's well-being and development. Some argue that smartphones have had detrimental [...]

As a college student, it is essential to recognize the impact of screen time on adolescents in today's technological world. While it is important to acknowledge the benefits of technology in education and entertainment, it is [...]

When it comes to smartphones, two brands that have dominated the market for years are Apple's iPhone and Samsung's Galaxy series. Both companies have loyal followings and offer high-quality devices with cutting-edge technology. [...]

Since its invention, smartphones have become indispensable to many. These handheld gadgets serve as a portable personal computer that allows users to make calls and texts, browse the web, and even download applications. The [...]

Do you think smoking kills? How about the negative impact of smartphones? Or are we being controlled by technology unknowingly? In the previous decade, technological development boomed in the area of telecommunications, [...]

Related Topics

By clicking “Send”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement . We will occasionally send you account related emails.

Where do you want us to send this sample?

By clicking “Continue”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy.

Be careful. This essay is not unique

This essay was donated by a student and is likely to have been used and submitted before

Download this Sample

Free samples may contain mistakes and not unique parts

Sorry, we could not paraphrase this essay. Our professional writers can rewrite it and get you a unique paper.

Please check your inbox.

We can write you a custom essay that will follow your exact instructions and meet the deadlines. Let's fix your grades together!

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free

share this!

May 16, 2024

This article has been reviewed according to Science X's editorial process and policies . Editors have highlighted the following attributes while ensuring the content's credibility:

fact-checked

trusted source

written by researcher(s)

Have smartphones killed the art of conversation?

by David Le Breton, The Conversation

Once upon a time, human relationships unfolded without smartphones. The reality may be hard to recall, so profoundly have these devices transformed the way we relate to the world and others in fifteen years or so.

As an anthropologist interested in modernity, I am particularly preoccupied by the impact of these devices on our conversations. In my book, " The End of the Conversation? Words in a Spectral Society " (French original: "La fin de la conversation ? La parole dans une société spectrale"), I investigate the pernicious effects of this technology on our social fabric, and make a point of distinguishing conversation from communication.

Communication is not conversation

When I'm communicating, my relationship with another is usually mediated via a screen. Communication calls to mind notions of distance, physical absence, and by extension, frazzled attention. The age of communication induces feelings that everything is going too fast and we have no more time to ourselves. The next notification, message or call is always only a moment away, keeping us in a state of restless alertness.

Conversations, on the other hand, are often free. One chats while enjoying a stroll or meeting a new person, sharing words like one breaks bread. While communication does away with the body, conversation calls for mutual presence, attention to the other person's face , their facial expressions and their gaze. Conversation is happy to accommodate silence, pauses and each person's rhythm.

This is in contrast to communication, where any cut-off warrants a knee-jerk reaction: "We've been cut off", "Are you there?" "I can't hear you", "I'll call you back". This isn't an issue when conversing, because the other person's face has never disappeared and it's possible to be silent together in friendship, in complicity, to express a doubt or a thought. Silence in the course of a conversation allows us to breathe, while in the field of communication we would label it with words such as "cut off" or "breakdown."

A few months ago in Taipei, Taiwan, I was at a popular restaurant when a dozen people from the same family sat down at a table nearby. The youngest were two or three years old, while the oldest were in their 60s. Having barely glanced at the menu before ordering, their eyes rapidly proceeded to attach to their mobile phones. Barely uttering a word, they ate with their smartphones in hand. The only exception was the occasional tension between two of the children, who must have been four or five years old. They stayed for a good hour, exchanging little more than a few sentences, without really looking at each other.

The scene could have taken place in Strasbourg, Rome or New York, in any city in the world. Today it is commonplace. You only have to walk into a café or restaurant at random to see the same situation. The old family or friendly encounters are gradually disappearing, replaced by these new manners where we are together but separated from each other by screens, with the occasional smattering of words exchanged before returning to the tranquility of our laptop. What's the point of bothering with others, since a world of entertainment is immediately accessible, where we no longer have to make the effort to nurture relationships? Conversation becomes obsolete, useless and tedious, whereas the screen is a beautiful escape that doesn't disappoint and that occupies time pleasantly.

Cities populated by zombies

The massive disappearance of conversation, even with oneself, is reflected in the fact that cities are now deserted, where you meet no one, and the pavements are full of zombies walking around hypnotized by their smartphones. Eyes downcast, they see nothing of what's happening around them. If you're trying to find your way, don't ask for help, there's no one around. Some are wearing earphones, talking to themselves, and displaying an ostentatious indifference.

Sometimes, communication is imposed in the public space. Those who dare not protest or go elsewhere find themselves invaded by the words of someone who has come to sit on their bench or near their table to start a conversation aloud. Another increasingly common practice is to watch a video without earphones or to put the loudspeaker on to hear the other person's voice better.

Another common form of incivility that has become commonplace is talking to someone who can't stop pulling their smartphone out of their pocket every thirty seconds, in fear of missing out on a notification. Teenagers are particularly susceptible to the fear of missing out (FOMO) fever, but not only, and this frantic quest for the smartphone in your pocket, unless it's always in your hand. Even when placed on a table next to you, experience shows that the smartphone exerts a magnetism that is difficult to counter , with people regularly looking at it with a kind of longing.

For these users, relationships at a distance, without a body, are less unpredictable and frustrating as they demand only the surface of the self. They give rise to relationships that are in line with desire and based on personal decision alone, with no fear of spillover, because then all you have to do is interrupt the discussion on the pretext of a network problem and cut off communication. Face-to-face interactions are more uncertain, more likely to hurt or disappoint. But the more we communicate, the less we meet, and the more conversation disappears from everyday life.

A growing sense of isolation

Accelerated by COVID lockdowns, the digital society does not have the same dimension as concrete sociability, with people in mutual presence who talk and listen to each other. It fragments the social bond, destroying old links in favor of the abstract and often anonymous ones of social networks.

Paradoxically, some people see it as a source of connection at a time when individual isolation has never been so acute . Never has the mal de vivre of teenagers and the elderly reached such a level. Frequent use of multiple social networks or the ostentation of one's private life on a social network creates neither intimacy nor links in real life. The hundred "friends" on social networks are no match for one or two friends in everyday life.

The digital society occupies time and provides a way of getting away from everything that annoys us in our daily lives, but it doesn't give us a reason to live. Of course, some people find a connection through their isolation, but isn't isolation also a consequence of the fact that we no longer meet in real life?

New forms of expression are emerging that are now a matter of course for many of our contemporaries, and not just for the digital natives . Globally, connection is taking over from conversation, which has become an anachronism, but not without a major impact on the quality of the social bond, and potentially on the functioning of our democracies .

Provided by The Conversation

Explore further

Feedback to editors

Secrets of sargassum: Scientists advance knowledge of seaweed causing chaos in the Caribbean and West Africa

8 hours ago

Climate change is moving tree populations away from the soil fungi that sustain them

Personalized phage therapy heals resistant wounds in Siamese cat

10 hours ago

Research comes to the rescue to make firefighters' clothing safer

The Earth's changing, irregular magnetic field is causing headaches for polar navigation

New method for modeling free-ranging animal populations finds macaque numbers smaller than expected

Study shows relatively low number of superspreaders responsible for large portion of misinformation on Twitter

Recent and extensive volcanism discovered on Venus

12 hours ago

New research shows the Kīlauea volcano erupted like a stomp-rocket in 2018

Warmer wetter climate predicted to bring societal and ecological impact to the Tibetan Plateau

Relevant physicsforums posts, cover songs versus the original track, which ones are better.

4 hours ago

For WW2 buffs!

11 hours ago

Music to Lift Your Soul: 4 Genres & Honorable Mention

18 hours ago

Metal, Rock, Instrumental Rock and Fusion

May 20, 2024

Today's Fusion Music: T Square, Cassiopeia, Rei & Kanade Sato

May 19, 2024

Bach, Bach, and more Bach please

May 18, 2024

More from Art, Music, History, and Linguistics

Related Stories

How families glued to separate devices can connect again

Mar 8, 2024

Just one quality conversation with a friend boosts daily well-being, study shows

Feb 2, 2023

The dying art of conversation – has technology killed our ability to talk face-to-face?

Mar 29, 2019

We can all help to improve communication for people with disabilities

Aug 28, 2018

How to improve your communication with someone with a speech impairment

Nov 1, 2023

Why people use their smartphones at cafés

Jan 4, 2021

Recommended for you

Cultural and linguistic networks of central African hunter–gatherers have ancient origin, study finds

13 hours ago

Stress bragging may make you seem less competent, less likable at work

May 23, 2024

Study suggests less conformity leads to more innovation

Study suggests YouTubers cheer people up more than casual friends

Gender gaps remain for many women scientists, study finds

Let us know if there is a problem with our content.

Use this form if you have come across a typo, inaccuracy or would like to send an edit request for the content on this page. For general inquiries, please use our contact form . For general feedback, use the public comments section below (please adhere to guidelines ).

Please select the most appropriate category to facilitate processing of your request

Thank you for taking time to provide your feedback to the editors.

Your feedback is important to us. However, we do not guarantee individual replies due to the high volume of messages.

E-mail the story

Your email address is used only to let the recipient know who sent the email. Neither your address nor the recipient's address will be used for any other purpose. The information you enter will appear in your e-mail message and is not retained by Phys.org in any form.

Newsletter sign up

Get weekly and/or daily updates delivered to your inbox. You can unsubscribe at any time and we'll never share your details to third parties.

More information Privacy policy

Donate and enjoy an ad-free experience

We keep our content available to everyone. Consider supporting Science X's mission by getting a premium account.

E-mail newsletter

Jitterbug Phone Plans for Seniors 2024

L ively offers two affordable, accessible phones designed specifically for older adults. Both feature hearing aid compatibility, simple menus, a speakerphone, voice-to-text functionality, a long battery life, and add-on health and safety features.

If you’re looking for a basic phone that’s easy to use right out of the box, Lively is a great option. And both Lively phones made our list of the best cell phones for seniors in 2024 , so we know you’ll be in good hands. Below, we’ll break down everything you need to know about Lively’s two phones and plan options so that you can make an informed choice.

Navigating the Jitterbug Flip2

Lively at a Glance

• Senior-friendly cell phones
• Affordable starting monthly rates
• Optional medical alert features
• U.S.-based call center
• Partnered with Lyft for transportation services
• Keep your existing phone number
• No long-term contracts
• No cancellation fees

The Fast Facts: Lively’s Senior Phone Plans

All three Lively plans come with unlimited talk and text. The top-tier plans have a range of health and safety features. If you go with the Jitterbug Smart4, you’ll also need to add a data package to your chosen plan for an additional monthly fee.

*Price includes a $5 monthly Paperless Billing discount but excludes taxes and fees.

A Closer Look at Lively’s Plans and Pricing

Below, we’ll take a closer look at Lively’s plans.

Unlimited Talk and Text

All three Lively phone plans offer unlimited talk and text. That means you won’t have to worry about running out of minutes or racking up a bill every time your grandchildren text you! It’s excellent for older adults who enjoy texting their friends, grandchildren, and other loved ones. What differentiates the three plans are the various health and safety features available (more on those below). If you’re not interested in extra features, we’d recommend going with the Basic plan for $19.99 per month.

Seniors who opt for the Jitterbug Smart4 — Lively’s “simplest smartphone ever” — must choose a data plan to go with their talk and text plan. Data plans let you use the internet when you’re away from home or not connected to Wi-Fi. How much data you need each month depends on your habits. Lively lets you pay just for what you need with four options to choose from. You can choose from 1 GB, 5 GB, or unlimited data plans.

If you enjoy watching videos, using Google Maps while you’re driving, checking email, or surfing the web while you’re out and about, we’d recommend the 5 GB plan, which costs $10 per month or unlimited data for $30 per month. Or, if you don’t use the internet much, the 1 GB plan, which costs $5 per month, may be your best bet.

If you choose a limited data plan, know that if you ever go over your data allowance, it costs $0.10 per megabyte. Thankfully, this isn’t as steep as other cellular providers.

Health and Safety Features

Lively’s Urgent Response button is clearly displayed on the home and lock screen.

The optional health and safety features offer peace of mind to older adults who require additional assistance and want their cell phone to double as a medical alert device . Below is a breakdown of each feature.

Here’s a breakdown of each service offered:

• Urgent Response : A big red button on your phone connects you to highly-trained agents who are available 24/7 should you need any help.
• Lively Rides: An operator can schedule a Lyft ride for you.
• Nurse On-Call: Call and speak to a live nurse or board-certified doctor any time without an appointment. They can order prescriptions for common medications and answer your medical questions.
• Lively Link : This is an app that keeps friends and family in the loop if your battery is running low or you call Urgent Response.
• Ask Lively: A friendly personal operator is available 24/7 to help you find addresses or phone numbers, provide directions, and more.

If you want to access these health and safety features but aren’t in the market for a new phone, check out the Lively mobile app. You can purchase a package and access your health and safety features through the Lively app on an iPhone or Apple Watch. Just keep in mind, if you go this route, your Health & Safety Package will cost an extra $5 per month.

Lively also offers a discount on new Apple Watches. If you sign a one-year contract for the Premium Health & Safety Package, you can receive up to $100 off a new Apple Watch at Best Buy.

Lively is now available for Alexa devices. You can ask Alexa to call for help to be connected with an emergency operator. The operator will have access to your personal profile containing your conditions, medications, allergies, and more, starting at just $24.99 a month.

How to Get the Best Deal With Lively

Lively already offers great rates on phone plans for older adults, but if you’re hoping to save a few extra bucks, we have some tips for you! For starters, always check the Lively website and call customer service before purchasing a Lively phone or plan. Lively has various discounts throughout the year. Sometimes it’s a percentage off the phone’s price, a credit to your account, or a free gift, such as a car charger. Right now, the discounted Jitterbug Smart4 includes a free case and screen protector!

The Best Lively Cell Phones for Seniors

Lively simplifies their phones. They even make it easy to choose by only providing two options: The Jitterbug Flip2 and the Jitterbug Smart4. Both phones are compatible with Lively’s three phone plans. This is excellent if you want to keep things simple. However, if you’re looking for a wider selection, we’d recommend checking out other carriers we’ve reviewed, like T-Mobile that offer more options.

Current Deal: Lively is offering unlimited data for only $20 a month when you purchase a Jitterbug Smart4.

Jitterbug Flip2

Unboxing the Jitterbug Flip2

The first Jitterbug phone for seniors on our list, the Jitterbug Flip2, costs $79.99, making it very affordable, especially compared to smartphones. There are a few less expensive senior-friendly flip phones on the market like Consumer Cellular’s affordable options ; however, Lively’s medical alert capabilities are much more extensive.

A flip phone, like this one, is a great option if you want to keep things simple. You can accept calls by opening the phone; end calls by closing it. Great for older adults, the Jitterbug Flip2 offers a large screen, powerful speaker, flashlight, and built-in magnifier for reading. Plus, you can use your voice to navigate your phone , send texts, and make calls thanks to built-in Amazon Alexa functionality. What a great perk for those with dexterity or vision difficulties!

Of course, we think the most impressive feature is the Jitterbug Flip2’s Urgent Response button. Press it at any time to receive immediate assistance from an IAED certified agent. Urgent Response is available with Lively’s Preferred and Premium packages.

In addition to senior-friendly cell phones, Lively sells wearable medical alert systems. Visit our latest Lively medical alert review to learn more.

Jitterbug Smart4

My grandma trying out the Jitterbug Smart4

From the outside, the Jitterbug Smart4 looks like any ordinary smartphone. It features a 6.75-inch screen (bigger than the previous model’s 6.22-inch screen), triple rear cameras (13 MP/2 MP/2 MP), a front camera, and Google’s voice assistant. However, the key difference is that it was made for the 61 percent of adults age 65+ who use a smartphone. 2

Senior-friendly features include an Urgent Response button, M3/T4 rating for hearing aid compatibility, a simple list-based menu for easy navigation, and a powerful speaker. The phone also boasts up to 37 hours of talk time, which is 15 hours more than the previous model, the Jitterbug Smart3. Great for on-the-go seniors, the Smart4 also includes GPS capabilities. This will come in handy if you need directions or roadside assistance and are unsure of your location. It’s also useful if you’re prone to becoming disoriented. You can even share your location with friends and family if they download the Lively app.

While the Smart4 is excellent for older adults, I did find that the phone was a bit laggy. During my testing, there were times when I had to press a button several times before the phone would respond. Additionally, if you’re looking for stellar camera quality, you may want to look elsewhere, as I found the Smart4’s camera to be so-so. Still, if you’re looking for an easy-to-use smartphone, the Smart4 is an excellent option.

FYI: Keep in mind that Lively often runs sales throughout the year and around holidays like Mother’s Day or Memorial Day . Check their website to stay posted on upcoming sales.

The Jitterbug Smart4 costs $119.99, plus a $35 activation fee. You’ll also need to add a talk, text, and data plan, with options ranging from $19.99 for the Basic plan plus 1 GB of data for $5 monthly to $79.99 per month for the premium plan with unlimited talk, text, and data. We certainly think it’s worth the price seeing, as it’s on our list of best smartphones for seniors .

Still struggling to choose a phone? Visit our cell phone buyers guide to learn more about how to make the decision that’s right for you.

How Does Lively Compare to Other Phone Carriers?

Lively sets itself apart from other providers by offering medical alert features with their cell phones. Not even Consumer Cellular, another senior-specific provider, offers these features. However, that integration means you must purchase a Lively device to use a Lively phone plan. If you’d like similar features to Lively but want to bring your own device, consider Snapfon’s plans instead. For more information, you can visit our Jitterbug and Snapfon comparison guide .

Lively is powered by America’s largest and most dependable wireless network: Verizon. They also use 100 percent U.S.-based customer service agents. Price-wise, Lively is similar to the competition. A fully unlimited talk, text, and data plan from Lively starts at $49.99 per month. Fellow senior-friendly carrier Consumer Cellular charges $50 for the same package. Consumer Cellular does have Lively beat with its $69 flip phone, but again, it lacks the advanced health and safety features that Lively is known for.

Final Thoughts on Pricing and Value for Lively

The Jitterbug Flip2 and Jitterbug Smart4 are great phones for older adults that deliver excellent value. Compared to other options on the market, the phones and plans are both very affordable. Plus, your Lively phone doubles as a medical alert device when you choose the Preferred or Premium package, saving you the hassle of buying a second device. Overall, a phone and plan from Lively are worth considering if you‘re looking for a simple device that will help you stay connected and safe.

Visit our latest Jitterbug phone review to learn about our hands-on experience with this provider.

T-Mobile is raising prices on older plans: Here's what we know

T-Mobile customers holding on to their legacy plans can expect to see higher bills come June.

"For the first time in nearly a decade, in response to rising costs and inflation, we’re making small adjustments to some of our oldest rate plan prices," explained the T-Mobile website . "Beginning June 5, the rate of your voice plan will increase by $5.00/line per month."

T-Mobile declined to specify what specific plans are included in the pricing change.

The website claimed that the provider still offers the "best value in wireless" even with the adjustments, saying its customers save "an average of approximately 20%" versus some competitors, for comparable services.

Customers were advised that services, benefits and promotional pricing will remain the same and the additional charges will automatically be added to bills after June 15.

More ways to save: Visit USA TODAY's coupons page for deals from thousands of vendors

"T-Mobile is committed to offering the best value in postpaid wireless with low prices and a differentiated, best-in-class 5G network – and we have no intention of ever changing that," T-Mobile said in a statement to USA TODAY on Thursday. "The majority of our customers are not included but the fraction who are heard from us yesterday."

Landlines going extinct: Phone companies want to eliminate traditional landlines. What's at stake and who loses?

What T-Mobile plans are impacted by a price hike?

The price hike applies to older plans, though T-Mobile has declined to confirm which are impacted. Customers have largely pieced the information together by comparing notes online, reporting what plans they have and what dollar amount increases they were told to expect.

As compiled by The Mobile Report, not all customers are reporting $5 increases. Some said their notifications told them to expect a $2 increase, depending on the plan.

Users have reported increases for the following:

• T-Mobile ONE plans
• Simple Choice plans
• Magenta, Magenta Max, Magenta 55 Plus and Magenta Amplified plans

As reported by CNET and The Mobile Report , an internal memo sent to employees specified that more recent Go5G plans will not see price increases, nor will any customers who have the T-Mobile Price Lock guarantee or free lines, reported CNET.

Users with other account types have likewise said they were informed of a planned price increase, including business account holders, as well as smartwatch and Beyond the Smartphone (BTS) lines used for other smart devices such as tablets and hotspots.

Last year, T-Mobile received backlash for plans to migrate users with older services over to more expensive, newer ones. Multiple outlets reported that customers with One, Simple Choice and Magenta/Magenta 55 Plus plans would be moved over to newer versions, an initiative that was quickly squashed after its details were leaked.

T-Mobile CEO Mike Sievert later said it was meant to be a small-scale test, not "a broad national thing," but the company decided against running even a limited test after overwhelmingly negative customer feedback.