The association between adolescent well-being and digital technology use
Cited in 2 Likelier entries (2 risks, 0 decisions).
Used in 2 entries
For each citing entry, the verbatim excerpt and Likelier's calculation notes (how the source's number was converted to the lifetime-probability framing) are shown below. Click through to read the full claim ledger.
-
- Statistic
Specification-curve analysis across three large datasets (N > 355,000 adolescents) found that all digital technology use — including TV, gaming, smartphones, and social media — was negatively associated with well-being at r = −0.035 to −0.04, explaining at most 0.4% of the variance; the effect was smaller than that of wearing glasses or eating potatoes
“"The negative effect of technology use on adolescent well-being is small — explaining at most 0.4% of the variation in well-being."”
Calculation notes
Orben & Przybylski 2019 is the most rigorous large-scale analysis of the association between digital technology use (broadly defined: TV, gaming, smartphones, social media) and adolescent well-being. The specification-curve approach tested all defensible analytic choices across three datasets (Understanding Society, YRBS, MCS). The headline finding — r ≈ −0.04 for all technology use combined — is statistically significant given the sample size but practically negligible. Critically, this study measures total digital technology use, not just social media, making it the primary anchor for this entry's broader "screen time" framing. The outcome is a continuous well-being scale, not a binary harm threshold, so no per-teen probability of serious harm can be derived. This source is the primary basis for the no_reliable_estimate designation.
Independence note: Uses UK Understanding Society, YRBS, and MCS datasets. Fully independent of the Hale & Guan sleep review and the Paulus et al. neuroscience review.
Source date: 2019-01-14 · Accessed: 2026-04-26
-
- Statistic
Across three large-scale datasets (total N > 350,000), the association between digital technology use and adolescent well-being was negative but small: r = −0.035 for social media use specifically, explaining about 0.4% of the variance in well-being — less than the negative association with wearing glasses or eating potatoes
“"The negative effect of technology use on adolescent well-being is small — explaining at most 0.4% of the variation in well-being."”
Calculation notes
Orben & Przybylski 2019 is the most-cited methodological counterweight to the crisis narrative. The specification-curve analysis across all defensible analytic choices produces effect sizes that are statistically significant (large N) but tiny in practical terms. r = −0.035 for social media use means the association explains roughly 0.12% of the variance in well-being. This is not zero, but it is far too small to convert into a per-user probability of "serious psychological harm" — the outcome variable is a continuous well-being scale, not a binary harm threshold. This source is the primary basis for the no_reliable_estimate designation: the effect is real but not meaningfully translatable into individual risk.
Independence note: Fully independent of the Surgeon General's Advisory and the Facebook internal research. Uses UK Understanding Society, YRBS, and MCS datasets.
Source date: 2019-01-14 · Accessed: 2026-04-18
Also cited in these entries
Teen social media
What are the odds of serious psychological harm to a teenager from social media use?