Short-form video, cognitive and mental health outcomes: a systematic review
Arouch S, Edgcumbe D, Pezaro S, Maravic Da Silva K
BMJ public health · 2 citas
Cómo se estudió
- Diseño
- Revisión sistemática (clasificado por nuestro filtro de IA)
- Estudiado en
- Personas
- Resultado principal
- Marcadores de salud y funcionamiento
Quién lo pagó
- Financiación
- Financiación independiente
- Universidad u hospital
- Coventry University
Según 1 financiador declarado y la declaración de financiación del texto completo.
Publicación
- Publicado
- 2026-07-01 · BMJ Public Health · vol. 4 · número 3 · pág. e004086
- Editorial
- BMJ
- Citado
- 0 citas · más que el 57% de estudios similares · 0.0× el promedio de su campo
- Referencias
- 30 trabajos
- Acceso
- Acceso abierto (publicación gratuita) · CC-BY-NC
- Áreas de investigación
- Impact of Technology on Adolescents · Digital Media and Philosophy · Media and Digital Communication
- Palabras clave
- short-form video, TikTok, Instagram Reels, YouTube Shorts, Generation Z, young adults, attention, executive function, memory, emotion regulation, critical thinking, social media addiction, anxiety, depressive symptoms, self-regulation, boredom proneness, metacognitive training, infinite scrolling
4 autores
- sara arouch🇬🇧Coventry University
- Dan Edgcumbe🇬🇧Coventry University
- Sally Pezaro🇬🇧Coventry University
- Ksenija Maravic da Silva🇬🇧Coventry University
Resumen
El texto original del estudio, en el idioma en que se publicó.
Introduction
Short-form video (SFV) platforms, such as TikTok, Instagram Reels and YouTube Shorts, dominate online engagement among Generation Z. Their rapid, algorithm-driven and emotionally salient design raises concerns about potential associations with cognitive functioning and mental health. To our knowledge, no systematic review has synthesised evidence jointly on both cognitive and mental health outcomes in Generation Z young adults.
Methods
We conducted a systematic review in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 and Cochrane guidance (PROSPERO CRD420251148976). Eight databases (2014-2024) were searched, including PsycINFO, PubMed, Scopus and CINAHL. Eligible studies examined associations between SFV use and cognitive mechanisms (attention, executive function, memory, emotional regulation, critical thinking) as well as mental health outcomes in adults aged 18-29. Findings were synthesised narratively by grouping studies according to the primary outcome domains and identifying recurring patterns, consistencies and differences across the included studies.
Results
From 519 101 records, 17 studies met the inclusion criteria. Preliminary evidence indicated associations between heavier SFV use and attentional fragmentation, markers of lower executive control and emotional dysregulation. Problematic or compulsive use was associated with anxiety and depressive symptoms, though findings were heterogeneous and often specific to platforms. Some experimental studies reported short-term improvements in mood or associated factors including poor self-regulation, proneness to boredom and escapist motives. These relationships may be bidirectional, with pre-existing attentional or psychological vulnerabilities contributing to more frequent or problematic SFV use. The use of cross-sectional designs, reliance on self-report and inconsistent outcome definitions limited the overall quality of evidence.
Conclusions
SFV use may be associated with markers of lower cognitive control and greater emotional regulation difficulties in young adults, alongside anxiety and compulsive engagement. Potential strategies could combine user-focused approaches (eg, self-regulation and metacognitive training) with design-level interventions (eg, pacing cues and friction against infinite scrolling). Longitudinal and experimental studies are needed to clarify causality and directionality.
Resumen vía Europe PMC. Los derechos de autor siguen siendo de los autores o la editorial (CC BY-NC).
Confianza de la comunidad
Cargando…
¿Cuánto confías en los hallazgos de este estudio?
Comentarios
¿Algo está mal aquí?
Señala este estudio si su información, etiquetas o financiación parecen incorrectas. Un editor revisa cada señalamiento.
Información educativa sobre investigación publicada. No es consejo médico ni una recomendación para empezar o dejar nada.