The kids are alright: Why to stop worrying about ‘brain rot’ and start a conversation

Good news: it may have been voted Word of the Year, but there’s no compelling evidence to support the idea that screen time and mobile phone use is causing ‘brain rot’ in young people, according to neuroscientist, Dr. Dean Burnett. He spoke to us about why he thinks the term is unhelpful, inaccurate and what research really reveals about the impact of technology on teenagers. 

Brain rot – The supposed deterioration of a person’s mental or intellectual state, especially viewed as the result of overconsumption of material (now particularly online content) considered to be trivial or unchallenging.

– Oxford University Press

Why do you think the term ‘brain rot’ has taken off? 

It’s evocative, isn’t it? It’s novel, fun and a very handy label for a widespread suspicion. It’s not surprising people are worried: there’s a backlash every time a technological advance impacts society. It happened with cars, the printing press, TV, video games. Concerns are understandably more heightened with smartphones and social media as they’ve visibly changed daily life. But as a neuroscientist, I baulk at the term ‘brain rot’. It’s a condemnation. It’s loaded and it overshoots, suggesting actual physical, irreparable damage is being done to the brain.

If someone uses AI or ChatGPT for homework or university essays, their ability to apply their thinking to solve issues will decline because they’re not using it as much. But their brain isn’t damaged forever. It just takes a bit of practice and tech abstinence to bring that ability back. The brain is very flexible. Let’s not forget neuroplasticity – the brain’s capability to make neural connections throughout our life. 

“I baulk at the term ‘brain rot’… suggesting actual physical, irreparable damage.”

Why does the vilification of technology concern you? 

Discussion around tech and young people tends to focus on the negatives, topics like brain rot or the lone teenagers in their rooms being influenced by the manosphere, for instance. But there are massive positives to technology which I would argue often outweigh the negatives.

Sometimes access to the online world is a real lifeline. I worry that calls for a ban on smartphones for teenagers will put disadvantaged young people at risk. It’s throwing them under the bus in order to protect more privileged children who could mostly be kept safe with digital education. 

Tech brings joy as well and it helps young people socialise with their friends online yes but also to organise to get together to, for instance, play football and get out of the house. All that gets forgotten because of our natural fear of new tech.

“Sometimes access to the online world is a real lifeline.”

Is screen time reducing people’s intelligence? 

There are many ways to measure intelligence. Some people think reciting long poems by rote is the benchmark because that’s how they learnt at school. Obviously, the world’s changed. Is memory as important when we have so much information at our fingertips? 

Maybe young people are cleverer. They are bombarded with information every waking moment, jumping from screen to screen, tab to tab, so they’re technically much better at processing multiple different streams of information. Some would say this is more intellectually impressive than reading a book. Just because something is on a screen, it doesn’t mean it’s not stimulating or enriching. 

If you look into the Flynn Effect, there is some evidence that IQ levels are falling. But there are many factors that could be affecting this – not just technology but also the natural environment and test-taking ability, and the fact that older people are staying smarter for longer, because of improvements in health etc.

The problem with any argument today is that if you go online you’ll be able to find evidence to confirm your prejudices, suspicions, fears. I think that is one of the biggest dangers of the internet. If you went to the pub 20 years ago and said the world was flat, you’d be laughed out. Now you can go online and find people to vehemently back you up.

“If you went to the pub 20 years ago and said the world was flat, you’d be laughed out. Now you can go online and find people to vehemently back you up.”

What research do you rate in this area? 

Smartphones are a relatively new phenomenon so the reality is, we don’t know their long term impact. We’re still in, at most, the medium term. The data you tend to see backing up theories about screen time is often from the 80s and 90s when screens were TVs and computer games. The research didn’t include smartphones or even the screens and billboards that are everywhere when you walk down the street now. People talk about capping screen time, but how far can we really go without it? 

There are some interesting studies about how digital use affects our memories in the short term. For instance, look into the ‘photo-taking impairment effect’. A group of people went to a museum. Half took photos of displays with a digital camera, half didn’t. This second group had better recall at the end. 

That’s not all that shocking if you think about the brain. Firstly, the photographers were having to focus on two things – the exhibits and the camera. And secondly, real life, in-person experiences are more dense with sensory information. That is why face-to-face communication outranks online communication on the neurological level.

There are evidence based and practical reads out there though. Of course, I’d mention my own work – Why Your Parents Are Hung-Up on Your Phone and What To Do About It. I also recommend Unlocked: The Real Science of Screen Time (and how to spend it better) by Pete Etchells, and Professor Sarah-Jayne Blakemore’s Inventing Ourselves: the secret life of the teenage brain.

How would you like discussions around the impact of technology on teenagers to be reframed? 

Nostalgia about the childhood of the 80s is understandable, but that’s not life anymore. We’re in a digital world and you can’t put that genie back in the bottle. Childhood is taking place through the internet now and there are very valid concerns about that but when you focus just on those, you’re missing at least half the picture. 

Smartphones in themselves are not good or bad: they just are. Rather than stamp on the router, create a discussion. 

“Rather than stamp on the router, create a discussion.”

Get in touch with Mindlab to talk about how to set up effective research into how our brain works in the digital world.