select search filters
briefings
roundups & rapid reactions
Fiona fox's blog
Scientists comment on new Government policies announced that include social media curfews and turning off addictive features for 16 and 17 year-olds.
(on the government commissioned pilot) Prof Alan Woodward, Professor of Cybersecurity, University of Surrey, said:
“This pilot should be read as a feasibility study, not a test of whether curfews improve teenage wellbeing. It was qualitative. Interviews were with around 300 volunteer families before and after a month of restrictions, but with no control group, no objective measures of sleep or wellbeing, and it has not been peer reviewed. Families who volunteer for a restriction trial are those most motivated to cut back, and people asked whether a government intervention helped tend to say yes. None of that makes the research bad; it means it answers a different question. It tells us families can live with these restrictions and found curfews the most workable: genuinely useful for policy design. It cannot tell us the restrictions caused better sleep or concentration, and reports of benefit after one month may partly reflect novelty in any case. It is notable that the pilot tested a 9pm–7am curfew, while the policy is a midnight–6am default that teenagers can switch off , so the evidence and the policy are related, but not the same thing.”
(on the government commissioned pilot) Prof Pete Etchells, Professor of Psychology and Science Communication at Bath Spa University, said:
“It’s great to see that research is being done to try and understand the impacts and practicalities of restricting digital tech for young people. I think we need to be careful in not running away with the meaning of the findings here – this is a small study that is one part of the puzzle in trying to understand how children and parents will navigate technology restrictions in a practical way. Its purpose isn’t to give us definitive answers about what will work and how; rather to provide more contextual information about how such restrictions might land with parents and young people.
“One of the strongest messages that comes out of it for me is the need to bring children and young people more into the conversation about tech restrictions. We need to be more ambitious in talking about what they get out of their tech use, what they’re worried about, and where they want support. If we do more of that, we can figure out how to maximise the benefits of being online for them, while mitigating against the risks that so many of us worry about.”
Dr Junade Ali, Fellow at the Institution of Engineering and Technology said:
“We support measures that improve children’s safety and wellbeing online, and we welcome efforts to encourage healthier digital habits among young people.
“Policy must be led by evidence, not assumption. Without robust evaluation of what works in practice, there is a risk of addressing symptoms rather than causes and unintentionally shifting young people towards less regulated spaces online.
“In its simplest form, implementing the policies is easy for social media vendors. However, privacy-preserving technology and the extent of anti-evasion measures can increase technological complexity significantly. While implementing measures such as social media curfews is relatively straightforward from a technical perspective, there is currently limited evidence on their long-term effectiveness. There is an ongoing randomised control trial by the University of Cambridge into limiting daily social media use, but the results are not yet available. As such, it is too soon to say whether curfews will improve adolescent mental health, although it remains critical that known risks to children and young people online are addressed directly.”
“Features such as overnight defaults and limits on autoplay and infinite scrolling may help reduce excessive use and support better sleep, focus and wellbeing. However, these measures should form part of a broader package of interventions, rather than being viewed as a standalone solution.
“Online safety and digital skills development are separate but closely related issues. As young people grow up in an increasingly digital world, they need opportunities to develop the critical skills required to navigate technology safely and confidently, including understanding privacy, recognising misinformation and AI-generated content, and managing their digital footprint.
Press release on new policies: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new-social-media-curfews-and-crackdown-on-addictive-features-to-better-protect-16-and-17-year-olds-online
Pilot research: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/social-media-restriction-pilots-qualitative-research-with-13-to-17-year-olds-in-the-uk
Declared interests
Prof Alan Woodward: “I have no conflict of interest in making my statement”
Prof Pete Etchells: Member of the DSIT Expert Panel for Growing Up in the Online World; Member of the Australian eSafety Commissioner’s Social Media Minimum Age Evaluation Academic Advisory Group; Member of the Department for Education’s 5–16 Screen Use Expert Advisory Group; Member of the DCMS College of Experts; Author of Unlocked: The Real Science of Screen Time (and how to spend it better); Author of Lost in a Good Game: Why We Play Games and What They Can Do For Us
Dr Junade Ali: No conflicts to declare.