Digital Generation and Screen Time: ‘Digital Cretan Factory’ is the title of the latest book by Michel desmurget, director of research at the French National Institute of Health and a French neuroscientist, in which he sheds light, with solid data, on how digital devices are adversely affecting the mental development of children and young people.

In an interview with BBC, he said, “No excuse justifies what we are doing to our children. We are putting their future and development at risk.” The evidence is clear: IQ (intelligence quotient) tests have been indicating for some time that new generations are less intelligent than previous generations.

Michael Desmerget has compiled an extensive scientific publication collection and has worked at renowned research centers in the United States such as the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) and the University of California. His book has become a bestseller in France. In this article, we are sharing with you excerpts from his interview.

Question: Are Today’s Youth the First Generation with Lower IQs Than Their Parents?

Michel Desmurget: Yes. IQ is measured by a standardized test. However, it is not a static (unchangeable) test and is often revised. For example, my parents did not take the same test as me, but a group of people may be given an older version of the test.

And during this time, researchers in many parts of the world observed that IQ had increased from generation to generation. This phenomenon has been named the ‘Flinn Effect’ after the American psychologist who described it. But recently, this trend has begun to change in many countries.

It is true that IQ is strongly influenced by factors such as the health care system, the school system, nutrition, etc. But if we consider countries where socio-economic factors have been fairly stable for decades, the ‘Flinn effect’ begins to diminish. This trend of decreasing IQ is seen in countries such as Norway, Denmark, Finland, the Netherlands, France, etc.

Question: Why is IQ decreasing?

Michel Desmurget: Unfortunately, it is not yet possible to determine all the causes, for example pollution (especially the effect of pesticides) or screens. What we know for sure is that even if other factors besides screen time are causing IQ decline, the most significant effect on their IQ will still be screen time.

Several studies have found that IQ and cognitive development decrease when television or video game use increases. The basics of our intelligence are affected: language, attention, memory, etc. are all affected, and ultimately, children’s performance in schools and colleges is not the same as before.

Question: And How Do Digital Devices Lead to This?

Michel Desmurget: The reasons are also clearly identified: a decrease in family cohesion and time spent together, which is essential for language and emotional development. In addition, a decrease in time devoted to other activities (homework, music, art, reading, etc.), sleep disturbances, which affect attention, learning and emotions.

Under-encouraging intellectual activities that prevent the brain from fully developing. And an overly sedentary lifestyle that affects the maturation of the brain in addition to the development of the body.

Question: What Damage Do Screens Cause to the Nervous System?

Michel Desmurget: The brain is not a static organ. Its properties change based on our experiences. The environment we live in, the challenges we face, all affect the structure and functioning of the brain.

Time spent in front of screens for entertainment purposes has been shown to cause delays in parts of the brain related to language and attention. It is also important to mention here that not all activities help in the effective development of the brain.

Question: What Does This Mean?

Michel Desmurget: School, intellectual activities, studying, music, art, sports activities… all of these are much more important for the structure and development of the brain than watching a screen.
But the brain can’t always function the same, its abilities are affected over time. The brain can be compared to clay.

At first it is moist and easy to sculpt, but over time it dries out and becomes very difficult to mold or shape into anything. The problem with screens is that they alter the development of our children’s brains and weaken them.

Question: Are All Types of Screens Equally Harmful?

Michel Desmurget: We’re not saying that there’s anything wrong with the ‘digital revolution’ and that it needs to be stopped. I myself spend most of my day with digital tools. And when my daughter started school, I started teaching her how to use some office software and how to find information on the Internet.

Should students learn basic computer skills and tools? Absolutely. Can digital technology be helpful to teachers? If it is made part of a structured educational plan and if the use of a particular software is effectively promoting knowledge acquisition, it can certainly be helpful.

However, when a screen is placed in the hands of a child or teenager, the most distracting entertainment use almost always prevails. In terms of entertainment, television (films, series, clips, etc.) comes first, then video games (mostly action and violent) and finally social media, popular among young people.

Question: How Long Do Kids and Teens Spend on Screens Daily?

Michel Desmurget: On average, 2-year-olds spend about three hours a day, 8-year-olds about five hours, and teenagers more than seven hours. This means that before the age of 18, our children will have spent the equivalent of 30 years of school in front of screens, or the equivalent of a full-time worker working 16 years. This is crazy and irresponsible.

Question: How Much Time Should Children Spend In Front Of A Screen?

Michel Desmurget: It’s important to include children in this discussion. They need to be told that screens damage the brain, disrupt sleep, interfere with language development, impair academic performance, affect attention, and increase the risk of obesity, among other things.

Some research shows that it’s easier for children and teens to follow screen rules when they’re openly discussed with them. From there, the general idea is simple: minimal screen time is best at any age. In addition to this general rule, specific instructions can be provided depending on the child’s age: before the age of six, the ideal is to have no screens (which does not mean that you cannot watch cartoons with your children from time to time).

The sooner you expose them to screens, the greater the risk of negative effects and later excessive use. From the age of six, if screen time is accounted for and children’s sleep is not compromised, a child can be allowed half an hour to an hour of screen time. Other related rules: no screens in the morning before school, no screens at night before bed or when you are with other people, and above all, no screens in the bedroom.

But when we as parents are constantly connected to smartphones or gaming consoles, it’s hard to tell children that screens are a problem.

You Can Also Read:

Kids and Screen Time: Empowering a Digital Generation

Can Tiktok Manipulate Your Mind? The Chinese Apps Hidden Agenda

Question: Why Don’t Many Parents Recognize the Risks of Screens?

Michel Desmurget: Because the information given to parents is biased. The mainstream media is full of unfounded claims, false propaganda, and misinformation. The gap between media content and scientific reality is often disturbing. I’m not saying that the media is dishonest: I’m just saying that it’s not easy to separate the wheat from the chaff, even for honest and knowledgeable journalists.

But this is not surprising. The digital industry generates billions of dollars in profits every year, and children and adolescents are obviously a very profitable source. And it is easy for companies worth billions of dollars to find a few satisfied scientists for advertising campaigns.

Recently, a psychologist (who is considered an expert on video games) explained in various media outlets that these games have positive effects, so they should not be stigmatized, and that not playing them could even be detrimental to children’s future. He also said that the most violent games can have therapeutic actions and enable players to cool down.

The problem is that none of the journalists who interviewed this ‘expert’ mentioned that the video game expert works for the same industry. And this is just one example of many described in my book. This is nothing new: it has happened in the past with tobacco, global warming, pesticides, sugar, etc. But I think there is room for hope. It becomes harder and harder to deny reality as time goes by.

Question: Research Shows Video Games Can Improve Academic Performance

Michel Desmurget: Honestly, it’s ridiculous. This idea is a true example of propaganda. It’s based on isolated studies with flawed data that are published in secondary journals. In an interesting experimental study, children who were performing well in school were given game consoles. Over the course of four months, they spent more time playing games and less time doing homework. During that time, their grades dropped by about five percent (which is a lot in just four months).

In another study, children had to learn a list of words. After an hour, some of them were able to play a car racing game. Two hours later, they went to sleep. The next morning, the children who had not played the game remembered about 80 percent of the lesson, while the others remembered only 50 percent. This shows that games interfere with sleep and memory.

Question: How Will Today’s Digital Generation Look as Adults?

Michel Desmurget: I often hear that people in today’s digital age think differently. The idea is that although they lack linguistic, attention, and knowledge, they are very good at ‘other things.’ What is meant by other things here is now a problem.

Several studies have shown that, contrary to popular belief, this generation is not as computer-savvy as it seems. A European Union report explains that the lack of digital skills among children is a major obstacle to the adoption of educational technology in schools. Other research also shows that digital generations are not very fast at processing and understanding the vast amount of information available on the internet.

So what’s left? They’re just very fast at using basic digital apps, buying products online, and downloading music and movies. To me, these children resemble the children mentioned by Aldous Huxley in his famous novel ‘Brave New World’: distracted by silly entertainment, deprived of language, unable to contemplate the world, but happy with their lot.

Question: Are Some Countries Beginning to Regulate Screen Time?

Michel Desmurget: Yes, especially in Asia. Taiwan, for example, has declared excessive screen use a form of child abuse and has passed a law that imposes heavy fines for parents who show any digital apps to children under 24 months.

In China, authorities have taken strict measures to regulate the use of video games by minors: children and teenagers are no longer allowed to play at night (between 10 pm and 8 am) or for more than 90 minutes per day during the week (180 minutes on weekends and school holidays).

Question: Should We Have Laws to Protect Children from Screens?

Michel Desmurget: I don’t like restrictions and I don’t want anyone telling me how to raise my daughter. However, it has become clear that parents can only make free choices for their children when it comes to education if the information provided to them is honest and detailed.

I think an information campaign with clear guidelines on the effects of screen use would be a good start. No screens for children up to the age of six and no more than 30-60 minutes of screen time a day should be allowed.

Question: What Can We Expect If the Digital Revolution Continues Without Rules?

Michael Desmergt: Increasing social inequality and a division between the ‘digitally’ protected children and the progressive children of our society, like the ‘alphas’ of Huxley’s book, those who will master all the necessary tools to think and reflect on the world through culture and language, and on the other hand the majority of children who have acquired limited cognitive and cultural tools who are unable to understand the world and function as civilized citizens.

Alphas will go to expensive private schools with ‘real’ teachers. Gammas will go to virtual public schools with limited human support where they will be taught a fake language like (George) Orwell’s ‘New Speak’ (published in 1984) and will learn basic skills like those of middle or lower level technicians (economic projections suggest that these types of people will be doing most of the jobs).

It would be a sad world in which, as sociologist Neil Postman has said, they would enjoy themselves until they died. A world in which, through constant access to entertainment, they would learn to love their slavery. Sorry, I’m not very optimistic.

Maybe (and I hope) I’m wrong… but ‘no excuse justifies what we are doing to our children, we are putting their future and development at risk.’