The Industry That Gave Us Doom Scrolling Wants To Save Us From It – Experts Discuss Whether That’s Possible

The research linking screen use to measurable neurological effects has reached a point where the debate has shifted from whether there is a problem to whether anything can solve it.

A meta-analysis of 71 studies covering more than 98,000 participants found that heavy, compulsive short-form video consumption was consistently linked to poorer attention span, reduced inhibitory control and weaker working memory.

A 2025 randomised controlled trial found that blocking mobile internet for two weeks produced improvements in sustained attention comparable with reversing roughly a decade of age-related cognitive decline. Multiple systematic reviews of digital technology use link frequent smartphone and screen use to later sleep onset, shorter duration, more nighttime disruption and associated mood effects, including elevated anxiety and depressive symptoms in adults.

The irony in this situation is glaring. The platforms and devices driving the behaviour are, in many cases, also funding and publishing the studies documenting its effects, and now proposing the solutions.

According to a 2023 review cited in research published by the National Library of Medicine, only around 30% of mobile-use-reduction apps, including Apple’s Screen Time and tools like Forest, showed measurable reductions in phone use, with most effects modest and short-lived without sustained user engagement. The strongest evidence-based interventions identified in OECD analysis are behavioural and structural, things like device-free periods, school-level limits and friction-by-design, rather than software nudges.

That tension drives the current debate. HealthTech founders are building AI-powered wellness tools and usage monitors with a deep belief that technology can help. Clinicians and psychologists watching the downstream effects in their patients are considerably less convinced.

The Commercial Tension

The opposition to tech-led solutions stems from combined scientific and structural issues.

Critics and clinicians, argue that the business models optimising for time-on-device via infinite scroll, autoplay and personalised recommendation engines are now selling digital wellness layers that make minimal changes to the underlying reward architecture. A timer from a company whose revenue depends on session length is a conflict dressed up as a wellness feature.

The case for technology-assisted solutions is more operational. AI-powered apps and wearables that analyse sleep, heart rate and activity patterns can detect early warning signs of stress and sedentary risk, and push targeted interventions before a habit becomes entrenched. The argument from the product side is that the question of whether technology can help is separate from whether the current commercial incentives are well-aligned, and that the former deserves an answer independent of the latter.

We asked a group of clinicians, psychologists, HealthTech founders and product leaders to weigh in.

Our Experts

• Asya Paloni, Chief Product Officer, Welltory
• Dr Nidhi Gupta, Founder, Phreedom Foundation
• Dr Michael S. Valdez, Medical Director, Detox California
• Dr Jacquelyn Flood, PsyD, Clinical Director, Emora Health
• Kristie Tse, CEO and Psychotherapist, Uncover Mental Health Counseling

Asya Paloni, Chief Product Officer, Welltory

“People will not put their phones down because of biology, not discipline. The body is not built to handle constant, high-frequency stimulation that modern devices deliver, so treating screen time as a problem that can be fixed by willpower misses the point. This is why technology has to be part of the solution.

“The same industry that amplified the problem is now trying to mitigate it, and obviously that comes with commercial incentives. Wellness tools, AI features, and usage monitors are all products packaged, sold, and optimised for revenue. That’s something I don’t love, but it’s the reality. We should focus more on whether these tools are actually helping us shift our relationship with technology.

“The majority of current solutions focus on restrictions like limits, timers, and blocking. They’re useful but not enough. A solution that will make a real difference needs to make an impact that’s visible. It should show, in real time, how our actions like scrolling, working, and resting are affecting stress, energy, and attention and turn that into something that people can act on. The goal is not to disconnect, but to make the relationship with technology conscious.”

Dr Nidhi Gupta, Founder, Phreedom Foundation

“Simply put, tech overuse will not be solved by more tech. We have built an entire system of devices, apps, and AI platforms that run nearly every aspect of our lives. Now we are turning to the same system to help us escape it. That is ironic.

“We are not addicted to the devices and platforms. We are conditioned by the content and the constant stimulation and dopamine hits that it delivers. What actually works is simplicity, yet it is harder to practise. We need to reduce dependency at the source. That means removing unnecessary apps, especially those built for consumption rather than utility. It means redefining what is a ‘need’ versus a ‘want’ on our devices. Social media, gaming, shopping, and entertainment. Most of these fall into the want category.

“AI-powered monitoring can create awareness. But awareness without behaviour change does not move the needle. If part of your brain is still occupied in resisting the urge to check your phone, the system has not changed. And the outcome will be no different.

“Both. There is a real and growing awareness that excessive screen time is a public health issue. We see it in families, schools, and workplaces. Attention, sleep, mental health. These are very real concerns now. At the same time, there is a clear pattern in how the tech industry responds. First, a problem is created or amplified. Then, a solution is packaged and sold back to the same user. More apps promising calm and focus will not solve a problem created by too many apps. That is like trying to fix noise by adding more sound.

“We do not need more tech to beat tech. We need fewer notifications, clearer boundaries, and a redefinition of availability. The real solution is not more tools, but using the ones we already have efficiently, or in some cases, choosing not to use them at all.”

Dr Michael S. Valdez, Medical Director, Detox California

“Excessive screen use follows many of the same brain pathways we see in substance use. The reward system, largely driven by dopamine, reinforces behaviours that provide quick, predictable stimulation. Over time, the brain starts to favour short bursts of input over sustained focus.

“Digital wellness tools can help, but they are not a complete solution. In many cases, they actually rely on the same device that is driving the behaviour. That creates a conflict. We commonly see patients override limits or ignore alerts once the habit is established. Tools can support awareness, but they do not treat the underlying compulsion.

“From a clinical standpoint, lasting change usually requires some degree of separation from the stimulus. That may mean scheduled device-free periods, removing high-trigger apps, or creating physical boundaries like keeping devices out of the bedroom. These are simple interventions, but they directly reduce the brain’s exposure to constant reward cues. If screen use begins to interfere with sleep, mood, or daily functioning, it is worth seeking support from a licensed professional.”

Dr Jacquelyn Flood, PsyD, Clinical Director, Emora Health

“Tech alone cannot undo what tech caused. Screen time dashboards and AI nudges treat the symptom, not the system that built the habit. They can lower the temperature, but they don’t restore the developmental windows kids miss while scrolling, especially around language, sleep, and self-regulation.

“Most digital wellness tooling lives inside the same engagement economy it claims to fix. A timer from a company whose revenue depends on session length is a conflict of interest in a soft wrapper.

“Tools designed against the engagement model rather than alongside it would actually help: defaults that favour friction, transparency about what kept a child on screen and why, and integration with a real clinician or caregiver instead of a closed loop with the algorithm. Very little on the market meets that bar today.”

Kristie Tse, CEO and Psychotherapist, Uncover Mental Health Counseling

“Screen time is unavoidable in today’s world. I believe the key lies in balance, not elimination. Technology isn’t inherently harmful; the problem arises when it starts replacing real-world interactions or self-regulating behaviours. To offset its effects, I often recommend proactive practices like committing to daily mindfulness exercises, spending intentional time in nature, and creating screen-free zones at home. Simple, deliberate actions make a substantial difference in protecting our emotional wellbeing while still coexisting with technology.

“Excessive screen time is an issue I see impacting mental health across all age groups. Any meaningful solution must go beyond restrictions or timers and address the underlying patterns driving overuse. Screen habits are often rooted in avoidance: avoiding discomfort, boredom, or difficult emotions. What we need are tools that foster self-awareness and mindful decision-making, encouraging individuals to ask themselves, ‘What am I seeking on this screen right now?’ Coupling this with intentional offline alternatives, like meaningful social connections, hobbies, or time in nature, can help create a healthier balance.”

For any questions, comments or features, please contact us directly.