'Feeds, Feelings, and Focus: Cognitive and Mental Health Correlates of Short-Form Video Use'

The Science™ with yet more evidence of social media making people ravingly mad and cognitively poorer

So far, our enquiries into the consequences of social media (ab)use have focused on the most obvious issues, their impact on reproduction. See, e.g.,

The Unbearable Sadness of Online Dating

The Science™ Blames (drum roll) Social Media Use for Plummeting Birth Rates

Now, the Science™ published a ‘meta-review’ of the broader impact of social media (ab)use on the cognition and mental health, and it’s very well worth our time.

Thus, we’ll talk about the paper by Nguyen, L., Walters, J., Paul, S., Monreal Ijurco, S., Rainey, G. E., Parekh, N., Blair, G., & Darrah, M. (2025), ‘Feeds, feelings, and focus: A systematic review and meta-analysis examining the cognitive and mental health correlates of short-form video use’, Psychological Bulletin, vol. 151 (no. 9), pp. 1125–1146; https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000498

The paper is available in full (via so-called ‘Open Access’), hence my additions to the excerpts are the emphases added plus the [snark].

Here’s the abstract of Nguyen et al.’s meta review:

The resurgence of short-form videos (SFVs), popularized by TikTok and Douyin, has transformed social media platforms, with features like Instagram Reels and YouTube Shorts fostering their widespread adoption. Although initially geared toward entertainment, SFVs are increasingly used in education, political campaigns, advertising, and consumerism, yet their design, characterized by endless scrolling interfaces, has raised concerns about addiction and negative health implications. Given the recent surge of studies on SFV apps, a comprehensive synthesis is needed to clarify how SFV use relates to different health indicators. This systematic review and meta-analytic investigation comprised data from 98,299 participants across 71 studies. Increased SFV use was associated with poorer cognition (moderate mean effect size, r = −.34), with attention (r = −.38) and inhibitory control (r = −.41) yielding the strongest associations. Similarly, increased SFV use was associated with poorer mental health (weak mean effect size, r = −.21), with stress (r = −.34) and anxiety (r = −.33) showing the strongest associations. [line break added]

These findings were consistent across youth and adult samples and across different SFV platforms. Relatively few studies examined cognitive domains beyond attention and inhibitory control (e.g., memory, reasoning), highlighting critical directions for future research. Interestingly, SFV use was not associated with body image or self-esteem, which may reflect the diverse content and creators featured on these platforms. Further research is therefore needed to clarify how different types of content exposure may shape these associations. Overall, these findings highlight the importance of understanding the broader health implications of SFV use, given its pervasive role in daily life and potential to impact health, behavior, and well-being. By synthesizing current evidence, this study provides a critical foundation for future research to explore understudied health domains (e.g., cognitive health, physical health) and offers insights to guide public discourse and the development of research-informed approaches for promoting more balanced engagement with SFVs.

Public Significance Statement

Short-form video platforms such as TikTok, Instagram Reels, and YouTube Shorts are now a major part of daily life for many people. Our synthesis of 71 studies revealed that greater engagement with these platforms is associated with poorer cognitive and mental health in both youths and adults. For some health domains (such as body image and self-esteem), these associations may depend on the type of content encountered, highlighting the need for further research to inform public health strategies and platform design.

Basically, a bit of self-discipline and restraint as regards SFVs will set you apart from competitors due to better cognition and less anxiety.

Let that sink in for a moment.

And with these notions serving as hors d’œuvre, let’s check out some of the particulars of Nguyen et al., shall we?

SFVs and Cognition

Several studies have highlighted the negative association between heavy SFV use and cognition, particularly attention. Research indicates that higher SFV consumption is linked to poorer attention across both young and older populations (Chao et al., 2023; Q. Huang et al., 2021). This association has also been observed at a neural level, with heavy SFV users exhibiting reduced electrophysiological (P300) activity during attention tasks compared to regular SFV users (Walla & Zheng, 2024) [that latter part is perhaps even worse than the overall impact as it’s a biological response to SFV usage].

SFV consumption and its potential influence on attentional processing can be understood through the lens of Groves and Thompson’s (1970) dual theory of habituation and sensitization. According to this framework, repeated exposure to highly stimulating, fast-paced content may contribute to habituation, in which users become desensitized to slower, more effortful cognitive tasks such as reading, problem solving, or deep learning. This process may gradually reduce cognitive endurance and weaken the brain’s ability to sustain attention on a single task. Simultaneously, SFV platforms may [sic] promote sensitization by providing immediate, algorithmically curated rewards, potentially reinforcing impulsive engagement patterns and encouraging habitual seeking of instant gratification (Soror et al., 2022). The ability to swipe to new content could support a pattern of rapid disengagement from stimuli that do not provide immediate novelty or excitement. In line with this theoretical framework, frequent SFV use may diminish attentional control and reduce the capacity for sustained cognitive engagement, as cognitive processing becomes increasingly oriented toward brief, high-reward interactions rather than extended, goal-directed tasks.

This habituation and sensitization effect has been hypothesized to extend to other cognitive functions and tasks requiring attention processing, including inhibitory control (Y. Chen et al., 2023; Fu et al., 2024), memory (Sha & Dong, 2021; Xia et al., 2023), and reasoning (Q. Jiang & Ma, 2024), but some studies have reported mixed findings pertaining to SFV use and cognitive performance (e.g., Lin et al., 2024; Xu et al., 2023). For instance, Lin et al. (2024) found that although higher SFV consumption correlated with poorer sustained attention in a cross-sectional study, their long-term experiment showed no significant change following SFV use, contributing to mixed findings on its cognitive correlates. Furthermore, it is also unclear whether SFV use is consistently related to other cognitive processes (e.g., fluid intelligence, processing speed, visuospatial ability). Thus, a comprehensive synthesis is warranted to gain a clearer understanding of which cognitive processes SFV use may be associated with and to identify areas requiring further research.

We learn two things: humans do stuff by habit that provides stimulating gratification, and humans are prone to get habituated into doing these things.

In other words, we’re talking about adaptation and the pathway to (ab)use of any kind of habitual behaviour: think—Pavlov’s Dog.

There is, literally, nothing new here, hence we’ll move on to ‘mental health’.

SFVs and Mental Health

SFV use has also been associated with negative mental health indicators, particularly increased symptoms of depression, anxiety, stress, and loneliness (e.g., Galanis, Katsiroumpa, Katsiroumpa, et al., 2024). The highly engaging, algorithm-driven nature of SFV platforms is thought to encourage excessive use by stimulating the brain’s dopaminergic reward system, which may reinforce habitual engagement through instant gratification and unpredictable content rewards (Y. Chen et al., 2023; Goldon, 2024). The continuous cycle of swiping and receiving new, emotionally stimulating content has been proposed to trigger dopamine release, creating a reinforcement loop that contributes to patterns of habitual use and greater emotional reliance on digital interactions. This habitual engagement may be associated with heightened stress and anxiety, as some users report difficulties disengaging and regulating their emotions in offline settings (Peng et al., 2022). Additionally, the immersive and infinite-scrolling nature of SFVs has been linked to increased social isolation by replacing real-world interactions with passive digital engagement, exacerbating feelings of loneliness (Goldon, 2024). Such reliance on online interactions has also been correlated with lower life satisfaction (Chung, 2022; Zuo et al., 2024). These associations between SFV use and mental health have been reported across youths, young adults, and middle-aged adults (Gentzler et al., 2023; Q. Huang et al., 2021; D. Zhang, Yang, & Guan, 2024), though some studies have reported no association between SFV use and mental health indices (e.g., X. Zhang et al., 2019). Thus, further quantitative synthesis of the existing research is required to better understand the nature and consistency of these associations.

In addition to mood-related mental health correlates, studies have reported negative associations between SFV use and sleep quality. In particular, the consumption of SFVs in the hours before bedtime has been linked to disrupted sleep quality due to the blue light emitting from electronic devices, which may inhibit the production of melatonin and serotonin—key hormones involved in regulating circadian rhythms (Gomes & Preto, 2015) [the same is also true for LED lighting]. Disruption of the body’s sleep–wake cycle has been associated with poorer sleep quality, which may also be linked to changes in mood (Y. Li et al., 2025; Newton & Poluan, 2022). Some studies, however, have reported no association between SFV use and sleep quality (e.g., Y. Ye et al., 2024). This inconsistency highlights the need for a meta-analysis to synthesize existing research, account for methodological differences, and determine the overall strength of the relationship between SFV use and sleep quality [there’s no need to do so, we’ve known this since the 1970s: grifters of all academies, unite].

Mixed findings have also been reported for self-esteem and body image. Some studies report positive associations between SFV use and self/body esteem (Asad et al., 2022; Hendrikse & Limniou, 2024), whereas others report negative associations (Alshaikhi et al., 2023; Ibn Auf et al., 2023). Frequent exposure to curated, appearance-focused content may reinforce unrealistic beauty standards and social comparison (Ariana et al., 2024; Harriger et al., 2023), but SFV platforms also promote body positivity and diverse representation, which may enhance self-acceptance and empowerment (Dhadly et al., 2023). Additionally, active participation in content creation may either support self-esteem through creative expression and social validation, or it may relate to self-consciousness and reliance on external approval (Haug et al., 2024; Marengo et al., 2021). Thus, although some studies link SFV use to lower self-esteem and body dissatisfaction, others report positive associations with self-perception and identity exploration, highlighting the need for further examination of how SFV use relates to self-esteem [at some point, we have to talk about inappropriate content, such as grooming of non-LGBTQ+ individuals by members of the alphabet soup community™].

So, here we are: are you surprised yet?

Given the equivocal evidence on SFV use and mental health, the present review aimed to clarify patterns within the existing evidence base and explore factors that may account for variability in findings. This study synthesizes empirical evidence to test potential moderating factors that may shape the direction and strength of associations between SFV engagement and mental health indicators, providing a clearer understanding of the conditions under which such associations are most likely to emerge.

And with that said, let’s consider some of the results™:

The majority of studies included in this review were conducted in Asia (74%), followed by North America (11%) and Europe (11%), with few being conducted in Africa (3%) and Central America (1%). Most studies were correlational (87%) rather than group comparison studies (13%) [ah, epimetheus, haven’t we been told ad nauseam during the Covid shitshow that correlation ≠ causation? Of course, so—buyer beware].

In total, 98,299 participants were represented across all studies in this review. The average sample size across studies was 1,384 participants (SD = 2,968, range = 29–20,107). Most studies focused on adults (73%), with fewer studies focusing on youths (27%). Across studies, samples were predominantly female (average 60% female) with an average age of 22.80 years (SD = 10.25).

That all means, first and foremost, that these results™ indicate trouble ahead as soon as these (predominantly female) study populations make it into the labour force. The impact will be particularly disastrous in countries that (all but) mandate Equality™ between the sexes in the workplace, i.e., the West. If you dislike my reading here, consider, e.g., nuclear engineers selected according to the Gospel of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion; if you haven’t begun praying yet, there’s perhaps no better point in time.

Some limitations are also noted:

More studies were rated as having high methodological quality (59%) than low (41%). The most common unmet criteria involved sample representativeness (e.g., no clear description or comparison to target population, unequal gender distribution) and risk of nonresponse bias (e.g., high rates of nonresponse, missing/unclear description or consideration of noncontacts/refusals). More than half the studies (48%) [sic, lol] controlled for confounding variables, most commonly age and gender. Approximately 10% of studies controlled for some form of general social media use (e.g., Facebook/Instagram use, number of social media platforms used, time spent on social media).

From the discussion section:

Despite the rapid growth of SFV apps and integrated SFV features on social media platforms, the associations between SFV use and different health indices remain poorly understood. Although individual studies have examined links between SFV engagement and various health indicators, no prior synthesis has systematically evaluated these associations across multiple health domains, platforms, and age groups. The present systematic review and meta-analytic investigation addresses this gap by analyzing data from 70 studies, representing one of the most comprehensive syntheses in this area to date. Potential moderators (age group, SFV measurement, and SFV type) were also examined to provide a clearer understanding of these associations. Although the findings suggest potential links between SFV engagement and both cognitive and mental health, they should be interpreted cautiously given the predominance of cross-sectional designs across the included studies [i.e., the underlying studies™ are of rather poor quality, as explained above]. Nevertheless, the consistency and pattern of results may offer useful direction for future research and practice [I call BS, this ‘consistency and patterns of results’ is a huge warning sign]. In particular, the findings may help guide the design of future longitudinal and experimental investigations, inform more responsible platform features (e.g., content diversity, usage nudges), and support digital literacy initiatives that encourage more reflective and intentional engagement with SFV content…

Cognitive Correlates of SFV Engagement

Our meta-analysis revealed a moderate, negative mean effect size based on 14 studies, indicating that higher SFV engagement was associated with poorer cognition. Specifically, SFV use showed moderate associations with poorer attention and inhibitory control; weak associations with poorer language, memory, and working memory; and no association with reasoning abilities. Notably, attention and inhibitory control were the most frequently studied cognitive domains, which may have contributed to greater statistical power in detecting true effect sizes.

I’ll stop here—and offer you my bottom lines as to main take-away here.

Bottom Lines

If you are able to muster the discipline to stay away from SFV, you’re in the cognitive upper class.

In other words: self-restraint is the new definitive advantage in regards to whatever you’re doing.

If you’re a parent, it is advisable to refrain from handing out smart™ devices, esp. social media-enabling phones, to your underage children.

Here’s a few more lines from Nguyen et al. to drive this home:

Overall, this meta-analysis revealed a consistent pattern linking higher SFV use with poorer cognitive performance, particularly in attentional control and inhibitory processes. These associations may reflect cognitive strain or emerging disruptions in cognitive endurance and attentional regulation among heavier SFV users. Given the central role of attention and executive functioning in academic, occupational, and daily goal-directed tasks (Diamond, 2013), these patterns may indicate broader difficulties in sustaining mental effort over time. Tasks requiring prolonged concentration (e.g., reading comprehension, complex problem solving) may be more difficult to sustain, especially as SFV platforms reinforce brief, high-reward interactions through rapid feedback and algorithmic content delivery.

Here’s a useful link to alternatives to smart™ phones for children (and adults, apparently): https://www.smartphonefreechildhood.org/resource/the-good-tech-gift-guide.

And don’t just take my word for this—here’s Hugh Grant making essentially the same points:

It’s been very, very depressing watching Big Tech kidnap their lives, and to see children really finding it very, very difficult to get properly interested in anything that isn’t a screen.

It’s a daily choice (grind), don’t fuck up your life or that of your children.