What the research says
If you spend two hours a day scrolling short-form videos, here’s how that time adds up.
2 hours per day
2.5 days per month
1 month per year
Greater engagement is linked to poorer cognition
Nguyen and colleagues’ 2025 review included 71 studies and 98,299 participants; 70 studies entered its meta-analysis. The pooled cognition result came from 14 studies: greater short-form video engagement was associated with poorer cognition (r = −0.34; 95% confidence interval −0.42 to −0.26). [1]
The review also found an association between greater engagement and poorer mental health (r = −0.21; 95% confidence interval −0.25 to −0.17). These are associations, not percentages of ability lost or proof of causation. [1]
Problematic use is linked to worse mental-health outcomes
Tang and colleagues’ 2026 meta-analysis covered 58 studies involving 96,676 participants. It reported associations between short-form video use and adverse outcomes including depression, anxiety, stress, loneliness, and boredom. Associations were generally more consistent for problematic-use measures than for time or frequency alone. [2]
The findings concern relationships between use and symptoms. The review extracted baseline correlations even from longitudinal and intervention studies, so it does not establish that viewing caused those symptoms. [2]
A short-video interruption disrupted memory for intentions
Chiossi and colleagues’ 2023 experiment involved 60 participants completing a prospective-memory task: remembering to carry out a previously planned action. A 10-minute interruption involved TikTok, Twitter, YouTube, or rest. Afterward, the TikTok group’s prospective-memory accuracy was significantly worse than the other groups’. [3]
This was an immediate effect on a specific task. It does not establish permanent memory loss or isolate video length from every other difference between the platforms.
A note on the evidence
This page focuses on adverse findings, not the full balance of research. Most evidence in the large review is correlational, and findings vary. For example, Lin and colleagues’ field experiment reported no significant change on most sustained-attention tests after changing viewing duration. [1] [4] The cited research does not establish permanent damage or measure ScrollFix’s benefits.
Sources
Selected by ScrollFix, which has a commercial interest in reducing unwanted scrolling. Sources 1 and 3 were checked in full-text copies; sources 2 and 4 were checked against abstracts and bibliographic records. This is not a systematic review or an independent reanalysis.
- Nguyen, L., et al. (2025). Feeds, feelings, and focus: A systematic review and meta-analysis examining the cognitive and mental health correlates of short-form video use. Psychological Bulletin, 151(9), 1125–1146.
- Tang, D., Zhang, X., Gou, P., Feng, J., Hu, R., & Sum, K.-W. R. (2026). Association between short-form video use and mental health: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 28, e82503.
- Chiossi, F., Haliburton, L., Ou, C., Butz, A., & Schmidt, A. (2023). Short-Form Videos Degrade Our Capacity to Retain Intentions: Effect of Context Switching On Prospective Memory. Proceedings of CHI ’23.
- Lin, B.-H., Chung, Y.-J., Cheng, H.-Y., Yen, Y.-T., Li, C.-C., & Cherng, F.-Y. (2024). Understanding the Effects of Short-Form Videos on Sustained Attention. CHI ’24 Extended Abstracts, Article 352.