Banning The Symptom: Boon or Bane?

As Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh move to push restrictions on youth social media use, the policies raise a deeper question- are we addressing the right problem? Initiatives and regulations to curb social media use by young adults have taken over the globe.

Following in Australia’s footsteps, several countries including the United Kingdom, France, and India have initiated plans and enforced regulations to moderate social media consumption especially for the teenagers. These restrictions do not come suddenly; in fact, they are the result of mounting worry and concern that has amplified tenfold in the past few years since social media boomed.

Positioned as initiatives to prevent screen addiction, regulate access to unfiltered content, and protect the mental health of impressionable teens, the policies cover up the actual core of the problem- the design and environment of social media platforms.

The Problem
Countless hours spent doom scrolling, not realising when the night turns to dawn is not just a generational habit or overuse of easily available platforms. Rather, it’s a sign of the success of a platform which has been designed to exploit human psychological vulnerabilities. The engineering of the platforms is done in a way to hook the user onto it, impairing attention, emotional regulation, and nurturing dependence. The rise of ‘brain rot’ content and preferences begs the question if attention is actually declining or just changing. The increase in sources of stimulation and the constant cognitive stimulation offered by changing digital platforms trains the brain away from sustained attention.

There is increased evidence to support the belief that the current generation has reduced attention spans and decreased ability to engage in deep focus. As neuroplasticity and related concepts dictate, the brain adapts to what an individual repeatedly is exposed to and the behavioral patterns that they repeatedly engage in.

Hence, the issue isn’t that Gen Z is cognitively worse due to the digital consumption that they engage in; rather, the issue is that the engineered platforms are leading to changing narratives and attention patterns. So, when policy responses are aimed at simply making access harder and reducing usage, they turn redundant and misdirected.

Another significant factor that must be considered if policies intend to fix the problem from the root is the increased reliance on social media and social substitution that digital platforms offer. Phones, with or without social media platforms, increase cognitive load. There is continuous partial attention dedicated to devices at all times, partially due to anticipatory stress of incoming notifications or messages, or partially due to the lack of awareness and drawing of psychological boundaries.

This low grade stress is chronic, and is maintained by the underlying psychological mechanisms that keep young adults hooked onto technology and devices, including providing an illusion of control. Furthermore, in a world where perceived loneliness is prevalent, having an online presence offers a semblance of connection to the world out there. Interacting with individuals online, from across the globe and across the road, allows for ties to be built. These ties, albeit weak, are replacing deeper relationships, displacing meaningful connections and presenting brief interactions as viable replacements to deep connections which are much harder to find now.

Psychological Reality
Policymakers and stakeholders often use words such as addiction to describe the screen dependent behaviour that kids exhibit, often comparing screen use to substance use. However, one component that goes unnoticed is the fact that this screen dependent behavior is engineered. The algorithms and functioning of digital platforms is reliant on psychological mechanisms including intermittent reinforcement. Unpredictable rewards are far more powerful that constant reinforcements because they follow the same principle as seen in gambling. When interesting content appears irregularly, the brain keeps searching for the next reward, creating a loop that sustains engagement.

This triggers dopamine driven feedback loops wherein the loop gets triggered by the possibility of a reward, not a reward itself, every time there is a refresh or notification. Reward prediction errors, which are when the outcomes are even better than expected, leads to increased dopamine spikes. Over time, the brain becomes attuned to these spikes, adjusting and searching more strongly until the set expectations are met. These mechanisms together create a behavioural reinforcement system which makes disengagement psychologically difficult.

In addition to individual factors, as digital interactions increase, identity begins to be tied to external validation metrics. Social approval signals in the form of likes, shares, and comments become more significant.

The inconsistency in these digital signals trigger the same mechanisms as intermittent reinforcements; when one post receives fewer signals than the other, the individual becomes preoccupied in an attempt to post something else which receives more social approval. In this attempt to become more externally validated, people also choose to upload more curated, idealised lives, leading to distorted norms and social comparison.

There is an increased pressure to live or behave a certain way digitally and more perceived inadequacy when compared to others. The unrealistic standards become a new baseline, leading to increased interest to continuously monitor and engage with platforms to determine how to present themselves in a more socially acceptable manner.

The repeated behaviours become automatic, with the actions and reward loop roping individuals into engaging in set behaviours non consciously. This may impact young adults more so than adults as they are more likely in the age of forming their identity through exploration. By engaging too much with digital platforms, they are prematurely pushed into creating an identity and performing in a manner which may not be who they truly are.

Next Steps
A social media ban or creating systems to enhance parental surveillance of digital platforms are commonly proposed by policymakers and stakeholders. However, bans ignore the underlying system design which keeps users hooked, and risks pushing the behaviour underground, potentially leading to riskier use and methods of gaining access to digital platforms. Surveillance risks damaging trust and autonomy, impacting relationships that are rather delicate.

Further, surveillance may also interfere with identity development; adolescents are often at the age where they demand more autonomy and privacy, and when they do not get these factors, they tend to act out or engage in riskier behaviour as an attempt to get the same.

The proposed policies target the symptoms, not the systems. The core of the problem at hand is not the ‘addiction’ or strength of the individuals, rather, it is about an engineered social and digital environment that works by capturing and holding attention by targeting psychological vulnerabilities. In order to bring about an actual change at the root level, there is a need to go from increasing ‘discipline’ when it comes to screen time to holding platforms accountable and enforcing ethical designs.

Authors: Muskan Shah, FLAME Alumna and Prof. Moitrayee Das, Faculty of Psychology, FLAME University.